| Table 1 : Migrants to Calcutta City, 1921-1991 (4b) |
This had a tremendous impact upon urbanization in the state in general and Kolkata in particular. (5) Table 1a shows highest increase in urban population percentage in the 1950s, after the Republic of India¡¯s independence and the Partition in 1947. It also shows the second-highest decadal growth rate of 41.4% from 1941 to 1951. Table 1b shows the second-greatest increase in the number of urban agglomeration/towns from 1941 to 1951. But considering that the decade from 1971 to 1981, which shows the highest decadal growth in both urban population and the number of urban agglomerations, had a natural increase rate of approximately 20% while the decade from 1941 to 1951 had only about 12% (5a), the latter decade's second place in ranking is a surprising result; most likely from rural-urban migrations. The Partition of India have clearly stimulated urbanization by ushering millions of refugees away from their homes and into new settlements in cities.
| Table: 1a India: Urban Population 1901 - 2001 (5b) |
| Urban population (million) | Percentage of Urban to total population | Decadal growth rate (percent) |
| 1901 | 29.9 | 10.8 | - |
| 1911 | 25.9 | 10.3 | 0.4 |
| 1921 | 28.1 | 11.2 | 18.3 |
| 1931 | 33.5 | 12.0 | 19.1 |
| 1941 | 44.2 | 13.9 | 32.0 |
| 1951 | 62.4 | 17.3 | 41.4 |
| 1961 | 78.9 | 18.0 | 26.4 |
| 1971 | 109.1 | 19.9 | 38.2 |
| 1981 | 159.5 | 23.3 | 46.1 |
| 1991 | 217.6 | 25.7 | 36.4 |
Overall, India under British rule experienced urbanization which could have been quicker. When the British left and the Republic of India was born, social unrest caused by the Partition begot millions of refugees who mostly settled in urban areas. This influx of population into cities, the absence of British rule that had hampered urbanization to a certain degree, and the modern technologies the British had brought in still remaining after colonial rule, all combined together to result in an explosive urbanization. Although the Partition did not have significant effects on the industrialization of the Republic of India, it was clearly an accentuating factor in bringing people into urban areas.
| Table 1b: India's Increase in Number of Urban Agglomeration/Town (5c) |
| Census Year | Number of Urban Agglomeration/Towns | Increase in Number |
| 1901 | 1827 | n/a |
| 1911 | 1825 | -2 |
| 1921 | 1949 | 127 |
| 1931 | 2072 | 123 |
| 1941 | 2250 | 178 |
| 1951 | 2843 | 593 |
| 1961 | 2363 | -480 |
| 1971 | 2590 | 227 |
| 1981 | 3378 | 788 |
| 1991 | 3768 | 390 |
III. Indonesia
III.1 Pre-independence Urbanization
Colonial rule was a significant period for urbanization in Indonesia. Many of the largest cities such as Bandung, Jakarta, Semarang, and Surabaya were developed considerably under the Dutch rule. However, flourishing plantation under Dutch rule led to the (sometimes forced) employment of many Indonesians in rural areas, inevitably slowing down urbanization process that could have been faster. Consequently, urbanization in Dutch Indonesia, though continued throughout the entire colonial period, was hindered from reaching its full potential speed. Table 2 shows explosive increase in Jakarta starting from 1950 just after independence in 1949, hinting that colonial rule might have been preventing urbanization in Indonesia from reaching its maximum potential.
| Table 2: Urban Population of Jakarta from 1890 to 1970 (6) |
| Year | Population of Jakarta (in thousands) |
| 1890 | 105 |
| 1900 | 116 |
| 1910 | 139 |
| 1920 | 254 |
| 1930 | 437 |
| 1940 | not shown |
| 1950 | 1861 |
| 1960 | 2907 |
| 1970 | 4576 |
III.2 Effect of Rebellions
The post-independence period of Indonesia was plagued by severe poverty, economy in rubbles, low education, authoritarian traditions, and rebels to the new government. The challenges to authority include Darul Islam, declaration of an independent Republic of South Maluku, and rebellions in Sumatra and Sulawesi between 1955 and 1961. These rebels possibly triggered and or intensified by the new, naive Indonesian government, were significant contributors to urbanization. Urban migration in Indonesia, especially to the national capital of Jakarta, started in the 1950s and the 1960s after unrest broke out in parts of the country. (7) Since 1950 Jakarta attracted people from all parts of Indonesian islands: the census of 1961 showed that only 51% of the city¡¯s population was actually born in Jakarta. Jakarta officials tried to control the migration by closing the city to new migrants but many just ignored the laws and kept pouring into the city (8) in search of safe shelters and jobs that their rebellion-ruined hometowns no longer offered. Plantation farms that previously provided work for people in the rural areas were destroyed and abandoned in some places, leaving their workers not much choice but to migrate into the cities for jobs. The Darul Islam attacks were especially influential in causing such devastating situations and created a large influx of refugees into cities from Tasikmalay, Garut, and the southern parts of the Kabupaten Bandung which were the heartlands of the rebellion. (9). Table 2a shows highest increase in population of Jakarta, which attracted the majority of refugees, in the decade from 1950 to 1960 (the flourishing period of Darul Islam Rebellion) and several years afterward.
| Table 2a: Population of Jakarta from 1950 to 1980 (9a) |
| Year | Population of Jakarta (in thousands) | Growth Rate (in percentage) |
| 1950 | 1861 | n/a |
| 1960 | 2907 | 56.2 |
| 1964 | 3429 | 15.3 |
| 1970 | 4576 | 33.4 |
| 1980 | 6503 | 42.1 |
IV. South Korea
IV.1 Post-colonial Urbanization
The history of modern cities in Korea started in Japanese colonial rule. The percentage of urban population during Joseon (country that dominated the Korean peninsula from 1392 to 1901) is estimated to have been only 3 - 5%, but the rate climbed up to 14% by 1945. (10) However, this urbanization was not natural but planned carefully by the Japanese government to make cities easier to keep under colonial rule. Under Japanese rule, urbanization was attempted to be controlled; some cities¡¯ growth potential was artificially hampered while others received concentrated attention. Seoul was one of the former; homes of migrants from rural areas were destroyed, with some migrants forced to move out of Seoul; more residents were forced to move out during World War II. On the other hand, from 1910 to 1920 port cities were developed for better exploitation of the Korean peninsula; in the 1930s industrial cities were constructed in the north to produce weapons. Table 3 shows that Seoul¡¯s average population increase was always below average increase in other urban areas, indicating that Seoul¡¯s potential for further growth was hindered. In 1936, Seoul was expanded by annexing 22 new 'ri's, a Korean unit of administrative territory, one of which is roughly equal to one village. If the population increase from this expansion is not considered, the increase rate of Seoul from 1935 to 1940 is estimated to be 6.58% (11)
| Table 3: Average Population Fluctuation Rate During Japanese Colonial Rule in Korea ('Fluctuation' means increase) (12) |
| Year | Seoul | Urban Areas | Rural Farmlands | National |
| 1915-1920 | 0.69 | 3.32 | 0.43 | 0.52 |
| 1920-1925 | 6.49 | 7.29 | 0.91 | 1.14 |
| 1925-1930 | 2.84 | 6.96 | 1.25 | 1.53 |
| 1930-1935 | 2.41 | 6.18 | 1.40 | 1.69 |
| 1935-1940 | 16.07 | 11.90 | 0.20 | 1.22 |
| 1940-1944 | 1.39 | 4.90 | 1.14 | 1.60 |
| 1914-1944 | 4.98 | 6.79 | 0.88 | 1.27 |
During colonial rule, rural-urban migration was frequent due to extreme exploitation of rural farmlands by the Japanese; exhausted and troubled farmers left their hometown for a more peaceful living. However, the cities were also plagued by the Japanese¡¯s plundering, motivating many people to migrate abroad to places like Sakhalin and Manchuria. (13) As a result, more people migrated abroad rather than into Korean cities, slowing down the process of urbanization that could have seen better growth rates; the number of domestic rural-urban migrants from 1910 to 1940 was only 870,000 while those who migrated abroad numbered 3,200,000. (14)
Conclusively, although urbanization did proceed during Japanese rule, post-colonial urbanization in Korea was hindered from reaching its full potential growth. The Japanese tried to control urbanization according to their convenience, quickly developing some cities while forcing others to grow below their maximum potential growth rate. In addition, exploitation by the Japanese strongly motivated people to move out of the country altogether, likely contributing to slowing down the urbanization process.
IV.2 Urbanization from 1945 to 1949, before the Korean War
With liberation from colonial rule South Korea's cities saw rapid growth in population primarily from returning people who had migrated abroad due to harsh plundering by the Japanese. From liberation in 1945 to May of 1949 1.69 million people poured in from foreign lands and North Korea, 71.5% from the former and 28.5% from the latter. Many settled in cities, reasons being that farms ruined by Japanese exploitation could not sustain a large number of people and relief for the poor was mainly provided in cities. (15)
IV.3 Effect of the Korean War
One of the bloodiest wars in the history of mankind, the Korean War turned the whole Korean peninsula into rubble; approximately 1,900,000 Koreans were dead or wounded. Cities were bombed into ashes; nearly 29% of the buildings in Seoul were damaged to a certain degree or completely destroyed. However, despite such terrible consequences, the Korean War was a considerable contributing factor to the urbanization of South Korea. The influence of the war on urbanization can be divided into two main points: movement of population and destruction of Japanese buildings from the colonial period.
IV.3.1 Population Movement
At first the Korean War seemed to be a counter-urbanizing factor, forcing people to flee from the northern cities of South Korea which were closely exposed to attack from North Korea. These people kept moving down to the Southern part of the peninsula during the war, failing to stay together or live together as residents of cities they once were. However, the war accelerated urban growth by attracting more rural-urban migrants than before the war. Returning refugees who had lived in cities before the war were joined by refugees who had previously lived in rural areas. The war had destroyed the homes of many people, resulting in a population shuffling - people from the North, people from the South, people from rural areas, people from urban areas all jumbled and looked for new homes. The dislocation caused by the Korean War accounted for the rapid increase in urban population during the early 1950s. (15a) Hundreds of thousands of refugees, many from North Korea, streamed into the cities; during the post-Korean War period, rural people left their ancestral villages in search of greater economic and educational opportunities in the cities. (15b) The uprooting effects of the Korean War and the influx of refugees accelerated urbanization process during the 1950s, which saw urban share of the total population rise from 18.4% in 1950 to 24.5% in 1955 and to 28.0% in 1960. (16) Comparison of these data are well represented in table 3a, which shows the greatest increase in urban population rate from 1950 to 1955: the years during and right after the Korean War. Of the newly added population to urban areas from 1949 to 1955, 81.2% were people migrating from domestic rural areas. (17)
| Table 3a: Korea and South Korea¡¯s Increase in Percentage of Urban to Total Population (17a) |
| Year | Percentage of Urban to Total Population | Increase in Percentage |
| 1940 (North & South Korea) | 11.6 | n/a |
| 1945 (South Korea) | 14.5 | 2.9 |
| 1950 (South Korea) | 18.4 | 3.9 |
| 1955 (South Korea) | 24.5 | 6.1 |
| 1960 (South Korea) | 28.0 | 3.5 |
IV.3.2 Destruction of Japanese Buildings from the Colonial Period
The bombings on South Korean cities during the War destroyed much of the Japanese buildings remaining in urban areas from colonial rule. When the Allies planned air attacks on cities occupied by North Korea, an agreement was made beforehand between South Korean officials and the Allies¡¯ military leaders that bombings on traditional Korean structures will be restricted. (18) Table 4 shows that in Seoul, destructed buildings were mainly concentrated in Jung-gu and Yongsan-gu which were colonial centers of the city, primarily inhabited by the Japanese. On the other hand, districts such as Dongdaemun-gu, Seongbuk-gu, and Jongno-gu, where traditional Korean buildings and new housing for Koreans were located, experienced much milder attacks: the destruction rate for buildings in Dongdaemun-gu, Seongbuk-gu, and Jongno-gu were only 7.5%, 9.5%, and 15.3% respectively.
|
| Table 4 : Damage on Seoul's Buildings During Korean War (19) |
This selective bombing opened the door for Korea¡¯s independent city planning. The center of Seoul, moved to the South of Cheonggyecheon Stream (Jung-gu and Yongsan-gu) by the Japanese, was returned to the North of Cheonggyecheon Stream, especially the Gwanghwamun region (Jongno-gu), which was traditionally the heart of Seoul and the country itself for many years before colonization.
|
| Image 1 : Map of Seoul (20) |
Plans for new constructions previously hampered by existing buildings from colonial period no longer had to be reluctant. Although many of these efforts were not carried out properly due to lack of finances, it was nevertheless a fact that ruined Japanese buildings from the war had created a helpful environment for reconstructing cities into more accommodating milieus for Koreans. The favorable change in the cities was welcomed by many Koreans, which worked as a strong pulling factor for quicker urbanization.
V. Compare and Contrast Analysis of Three Countries
Although Indonesia, India, and South Korea all experienced social unrest after independence, the level of each violence differed greatly; and thus, the rate of urbanization.
Indonesia¡¯s situation was the most mild of the three countries. The Darul Islam rebellion was estimated to have caused the death of only 20,000 people; and it affected only limited areas in West Java, South Sulawesi, and Aceh regions. Reflecting this relatively softer violence is Jakarta's (located in West Java) growth of 56.2% (20a) in the decade the Darul Islam rebellion flourished: 1950 to 1960. Other cities, even those located near rebellions or riots took thirty years to accomplish the level of urbanization Korean cities achieved in ten years after the Korean War; Banda-Aceh of Aceh region, also a major location of Darul Islam rebellions, saw 128% growth from 1930 to 1961; Palembang, site of rebellions from 1951 to 1961 experienced 175% growth from 1930 to 1961. (20b)
The magnitude of India¡¯s social violence ranks second among the three countries of study. The partition of India is estimated to have killed from half a million to one million people. (21) Reflecting the influx of refugees into urban areas from this event is population increase in Kolkata, of which the highest decadal growth of populationfrom 1901 to 2001 was observed during 1941 to 1951 at 69.3% - the decade the Partition of India occurred. But because the effects of the partition were concentrated in Punjab and Bengal and did not affect the whole country as much as the Korean War, urban growth of cities farther down south showed less and less increase. Delhi experienced 104% increase from 1941 on 1951. Chennai, further south, experienced 82% growth from 1951 to 1961 and only 22% in the next decade.
South Korea experienced the most devastating violence in the form of a national war, resulting in an estimated 1,898,480 people killed or injured. Severe damage of homes and families across the entire nation ushered people to gather together at urban areas for protection and government relief, strongly contributing to urbanization. In the decade after Korean War, Seoul¡¯s population saw 69% growth; Daegu 116%; Gwangju 126%; and Pusan 146%. (22) These data show that the further away the city is from North Korea, the higher its population growth rate was - which only makes sense because cities closer to North Korea experienced more severe damages by the war, pushing people down south as well as being less appealing to migrants than southern cities in better shape.
These data not only support the general hypothesis of social unrest's contribution to urbanization but goes on to show how the magnitudes of social violence affect each city¡¯s urban growth. The more violent and wider a social unrest¡¯s scope is, the greater its contribution to urbanization is: resulting in more number of refugees fleeing to find shelter in the cities.
VI. Census Data as a Source to Document Population Shift Caused by Political Change
One unfortunate characteristic of the data in this paper was that they couldn't convey the entire impact of the information. Because most statistics were recorded by decades, it was difficult to get the population statistics at the very moment of social violence or right after, during which the movement of refugees would have been at its greatest and thus enable better perception of the impact on urbanization. Also in the case of migrant data on Calcutta (table 1), it does not show the exodus and influx of refugees but just the difference between the two under one category of 'migrant population.' The true impact of the Partition of India on refugee movement is thus mitigated.
Lastly, in table 1b (India's Increase in Number of Urban Agglomeration/Town), the number looks as if there was a sudden decrease of urban areas in the decade from 1951 to 1961. But taking into consideration that urban population did not decrease but continue to increase in that decade, and that refugees usually form shantitowns around cities which were probably counted as an urban agglomerations (thus the increase from 1941 to 1951) but which disappeared as their inhabitants gradually came to afford living in proper houses, it is logical to infer that the shantitowns were absorbed into larger cities - causing a drop in total number of urban areas but nevertheless contributing to urbanization.
VI. Conclusion
Social unrest such as warfare, rebellions, and riots are easy to be considered as an anti-urbanization factor. However, they can sometimes achieve just the opposite: accelerate urbanization. Hampered urbanization speed during colonial rule, new and naive governments that contribute to the outbreak of social turmoil after independence - these special circumstances create a condition in which social violence easily occurs; consequently triggering explosive urbanization by begetting refugees who tend to seek new homes in urban areas. With any impediment by the colonial governments all gone with independence, but the modern technologies introduced under colonial administrations still remaining, the situation had been perfect for attracting refugees who had lost their homes during social unrest after independence into modern cities.
Deeper analysis of this phenomenon also shows that there is a positive correlation between the magnitude of social unrest and its contribution to urbanization. The increasing degree of violence in order from Indonesia, India, to South Korea matches each country¡¯s urbanization rate which is also increasing in the same order. And it is the logical conclusion - the more damage is done to homes of more people, the more refugees there will be, fleeing to cities for better protection and shelter or sometimes flocking together to create new urban areas. But one can assume that there is a limit to the maximum amount of violence leading to urbanization; if the damage is severe enough to completely destroy an entire nation, there won¡¯t be so much domestic urbanization as massive escapade into neighboring countries. Perhaps in that case, the surrounding countries could experience significant urbanization. Further study would be needed to elaborate on this theory.
The three countries in this paper all experienced hindrance in natural urban growth (cities prevented from reaching their maximum potential growth) during colonial rule. They also experienced violent social unrests after independence. However, it was that very turmoil that served as a great opportunity for a faster, greater urbanization in the newborn countries. The degree of the contribution is debatable, but statistics and data make the clear that contribution definitely exists. Such social unrest could be a strong counter-urbanizing factor should it occur during peaceful times, but the situation of falling colonial rule and independence had turned the unfortunate event into an auspicious opportunity.
VII. Notes
(1) Thadani 2003
(2) Pfeiffer 2007
(3) Metcalf & Metcalf 2002 p.218
(4) ibid. p.219
(4a) formerly known as Calcutta
(4b) Chapter 1 City Assessment: Analysis of the Existing Situation, Kolkata CDP: I-29; Lakh = 100,000
(5) Konar 2009
(5a) statistical data from K.S. James, 2011. Natural increase rate for India from 1971 to 1981 is recorded as 41.7% in Datta 2006
(5b) Dhirendra 2003
(5c) Datta, 2006 p.4. Increase in number was calculated by the author of this paper.
(6) Mitchell 2003 p.40
(7) Rukmana
(8) ibid.
(9) Bruinessen 1988
(9a) Data in table was collected from following sources: Jan Lahmeyer's historical statistics on Indonesia¡¯s urban regions and Mitchell 2003 p.40. Growth rate was calculated by the author of this paper.
(10) jung1128, 2007
(11) Jang 2002 p.159
(12)
,
Regarding the term ¡®fluctuation.¡¯ The source used ¡®fluctuation¡¯ to title this data but because the scholar journal using this source constantly refers to the fluctuation as an increase, and because other journals mentioning Seoul's population during Japanese rule agree that it increased, fluctuation should mean increase. Also, other data from the same original source using the term 'fluctuation' had negative numbers, which could mean decrease; further supporting that positive numbers should mean increase. (13) Jang 2002 p.159
(14) ibid.
(15) ibid. p.163
(15a) Mongabay, 1990
(15b) ibid.
(16) Repetto 1981 p.52
(17) Hong 1979
(18) Kim 1984
(19)
p.166
The original table contained an error in the first datum of the Destruction Rate column; the table in this paper has been corrected and modified by the author of this paper. (20) Original Image is from Wikipedia; the image in this paper has been modified by the author of this paper to highlight relevant locations.
(20a) Growth percentage was calculated using figures from Mitchell 2003 p.40
(20b) Growth percentage was calculated using figures from Jan Lahmeyer¡¯s historical statistics on Indonesia¡¯s urban regions.
(21) Asghar Ali, eNotes
(22) Growth percentage was calculated using figures from Jan Lahmeyer's historical statistics on South Korea's urban regions.
Bibliography Note : websites quoted below were visited in Marchg to October 2011.
All Wikipedia articles cited below are from the English version, except noted.
1. Vincent A. Smith, edited by Percival Spear, The Oxford History of India Fourth Edition, 1919, Oxford University Press
2. Barbara D. Metcalf & Thomas R. Metcalf, A Concise History of India, 2002, Cambridge University Press
3. Viswambhar Nath & Surinder K. Aggarwal, Urbanization, urban development, and metropolitan cities in India, Concept Publishing Company, 2007
4. Dhirendra Nath Konar, Nature of Urbanization in West Bengal in The Post-independence Period, 2009, Economic Affairs: Vol-54 No. 3 & 4
5. Martin van Bruinessen, "'Duit, jodoh, dukun': Observations on cultural change among poor migrants to Bandung", Masyarakat Indonesia jilid XV (1988), pp.35-65 http://let.uu.nl/~martin.vanbruinessen/personal/publications/Duit_jodoh_dukun.htm
6. Wicaksono Sarosa, Urbanization and Sustainability: Case Studies of Good Practice, chapter 7 Indonesia, 2006, Asian Development Bank
7. Cybriwsky, Roman and Ford, Larry R. (2001). City profile: Jakarta. Cities 18(3): 199-210. Ernst, John P. (2004). A paper presented to the 2004 TRB Annual Meetings
8. R. B. Bhagat, Urbanisation in India: A Demographic Reappraisal, Department of Geography, Maharshi Dayanand University, India
9. Pranati Datta, Urbanisation in India, Population Studies Unit, Indian Statistical Institute
10. Robert W. Hefner, Globalization, Governance, and the Crisis of Indonesian Islam, Boston University
11. Tim Lankester, Asian Drama: The Pursuit of Modernization in India and Indonesia vol. XXXV, no. III , 2004, Asian Affairs
12. Government of Delhi, Economic Survey of Delhi 2005-2006, http://www.delhi.gov.in/wps/wcm/connect/DoIT_Planning/planning/economic+survey+of+dehli/economic+survey+of+delhi+2005+-+2006
13. Elmar Pfeiffer, India - Urbanization , 2007, http://www.stalys.de/data/inurbani.htm
14. Elmar Pfeiffer, India - Urban Morphology, 2009 http://www.stalys.de/data/inurbamorph.htm
15. Wikipedia, Partition of India http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_partition
16. Wikipedia, History of Indonesia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Indonesia
17.
18.
19. Wikipedia, Darul Islam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darul_Islam_(Indonesia)
20. Robert C. Repetto, Harvard University, Council on East Asian Studies, Economic Development, Population Policy, and Demographic Transition in the Republic of Korea, 1981, Harvard University Asia Center
21.
22
23.
24. Wikipedia, Demographics of South Korea http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_South_Korea
25. Federal Research Division of the U.S. Library of Congress, Urbanization, South Korea, Country Studies, http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-12271.html
26. Dorling Kindersley, Indonesia - Chronology, The Financial Times World Desk Reference http://dev.prenhall.com/divisions/hss/worldreference/ID/chronology.html
27. Deden Rukmana, Urbanization and Suburbanization in Jakarta, Indonesia's Urban Studies Blog http://indonesiaurbanstudies.blogspot.com/2007/03/urbanization-and-suburbanization-in.html
28. Country Studies by Federal Research Division of the U.S. Library of Congress, Urbanization, Indonesia, http://countrystudies.us/indonesia/33.htm
29.
30. Shishir Thadani, Problems of Indian Agriculture, 2003, India Resource http://india_resource.tripod.com/indianagriculture.html
31.
32.
http://sglib.mapo.go.kr/guji/jiri_view.asp?method=view&re_url=/guji/jiri_list.asp&table_name=hyangto&val_01=6833. Brian R. Mitchell, International Historical Statistics: Africa, Asia, & Oceania 1750-2000, Palgrave Macmillan, 2003
34. Kumar Dhirendra, Environmental Management Systems ? An Exemplary for Urban Local Bodies, 2003 http://www.gotessays.com/essays/1694/index.php
35. Wikipedia, Map of Seoul http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_Seoul_districts_de.png
36. Sadanand Dhume, In the Shadow of Swords: On the Trail of Terrorism from Afghanistan to Australia, 2006, http://www.sadananddhume.com/?p=68
37. Asghar Ali, India, Modern, eNotes, http://www.enotes.com/india-modern-reference/india-modern
38. Jan Lahmeyer, Indonesia - historical demographical data of the urban centers, http://www.populstat.info/Asia/indonest.htm
39. Jan Lahmeyer, India - historical demographical data of the urban centers, http://www.populstat.info/Asia/indiat.htm
40. Jan Lahmeyer, South Korea - historical demographical data of the urban centers, http://www.populstat.info/Asia/skorea.htm
41. Wikipedia, Liberal democracy period in Indonesia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_democracy_period_in_Indonesia
42. Chapter 1 City Assessment: Analysis of the Existing Situation, Kolkata CDP, http://jnnurmwestbengal.gov.in/HTM/CDP/Kolkata_CDP/CH-I1-17.pdf
43. Kolkata - An Outline, http://tcpomud.gov.in/Divisions/IEP/Urban%20Land%20Price%20Scenario-%20Kolkata/chapter%20II%20Kol.doc
44. K.S. James, India¡¯s Demographic Change: Opportunities and Challenges, Science Magazine Vol. 333, July 2011 http://www.sciencemag.org/content/333/6042/576.figures-only
45. Mongabay, South Korea-Urbanization, 1990, http://www.mongabay.com/history/south_korea/south_korea-urbanization.html
Back to WHKMLA Main Index . WHKMLA, Students' Papers Main Page . WHKMLA, Students' Papers, 14th Wave Index Page