Background Image
Previous Page  18 / 186 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 18 / 186 Next Page
Page Background

Urban Transport in the OIC Megacities

8

Table 2: Megacities examined in this report

Urban

Agglomeration

Country or area

Population(thousands)

Rank

Average

annual rate

of change

(percent)

2010-2015

1990

2014

2030

1990

2014

2030

Al-Qahirah (Cairo)

Egypt

9892

18419

24502

11

10

8

2.1

Dhaka

Bangladesh

6621

16982

27374

24

11

6

3.6

Karachi

Pakistan

7147

16126

24838

22

12

7

3.3

Istanbul

Turkey

6552

13954

16694

25

15

20

2.2

Lagos

Nigeria

4764

12614

24239

33

19

9

3.9

Jakarta

Indonesia

8175

10176

13812

17

28

25

1.4

Tehran

Iran

6365

8353

9990

26

40

42

0.9

Source: United Nations, 2014

2.4.

Overview of OIC Megacities Transport

Of the 7 megacities examined in this report one is in Africa (Lagos), one in the Arab World (Cairo) and

5 in Asia (Istanbul, Tehran, Karachi, Dhaka and Jakarta). Cairo is the city with the largest population,

with 18.4 million, followed by Dhaka (with 17.0 million) and Karachi (with 16.1 million). Istanbul has

a population of 14.0 million, Lagos has 12.6 million and Jakarta 10.2 million. Finally, as explained

above, Tehran has a population of 8.4 million, but nearly 11 million live in its wider urban area. Cairo

is currently the 10

th

largest city in the world is expected to be the 8

th

largest by 2030, as it grows by

2.1% annually. However, Dhaka and Karachi are growing significantly faster (3.6 and 3.3% annually

respectively) and are therefore expected to have a larger population that Cairo by 2030. Dhaka is

expected to be the 6

th

largest city in the world and Karachi the 7

th

. In addition, Lagos, which is now the

19

th

largest city in the world, is expected to be the 9

th

largest by 2030 as its annual average population

growth rate is 3.9%.

The OIC megacities examined in this report share both differences and similarities in their economies,

cultural characteristics, institutional arrangements and, inevitably, transport problems. To begin with,

Islamic megacities borrow the characteristics of the wider area where they belong, For example, Lagos

shares common characteristics with other African cities, Cairo has common characteristics with other

Arabic cities, and Istanbul is also influenced by both Europe andWestern Asia. The geographic location

of cities does not only influence their societal characteristics but also their governance and best

practice sharing. Although cities are beginning to build larger networks and share information using

information communication technologies, it is still more likely that cities that are closer geographically

will seek advice and borrow practices and policies from each other. In addition, these elements shared

between countries may not necessarily be considered practice, with informal transport being a

prominent example of shared practices (with minibuses prevailing in Africa and tricycles in South

Asia). The three selected case studies (Dakar for Africa, Cairo for the Arab World, and Jakarta for Asia)

will reveal these differences and similarities between cities that belong to these three regions of the

Islamic world.

In addition, the megacities examined in this report differ in terms of economic and political

development. Most of these cities saw their populations growing exponentially around and after the

1950s, primarily as a result of internal migration. Some of the cities examined in this report, such as

Istanbul and Cairo, have long histories and have been vibrant, strategically located cities for many

years. On the other hand, cities such as Lagos and Karachi mainly gained power as trade cities during

colonial times. Colonial cities also grew rapidly after independence (Nigeria gained independence in

1960 and Pakistan in 1947) but at the same time had to go through the political transition from the

colonial era. In both cases, transport systems in these cities had to cope with rapidly rising demand

while they were not expanded accordingly. At the same time, transport institutions in these cities had