Download PDF here

Asian cities rank among the densest environments in the world, characterised by high-rise apartment blocks, teeming streets and jam-packed transport systems. Whether the cities of today are likely to grow or shrink tomorrow strongly influences residents’ attitudes—and it is clear that not all cities in Asia are moving in the same direction.

To gauge this sentiment, The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) conducted a survey, supported by Pure Group, of 1,000 people across five Asian cities: Beijing, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Singapore and Taipei. The results reveal that Beijing and Shanghai residents are unhappy about current overcrowding but far more sanguine about the future, whereas Hong Kong and Singapore show the opposite pattern, and Taipei falls in the middle. This is probably due to official initiatives in mainland China to restrict inflows of people and boost its cities’ capacities to handle more residents—a strategy that many would like to see emulated in Hong Kong and Singapore.

Despite living in the least densely populated of the five cities, with 5,100 people per km2, 1 almost half of Beijing respondents “strongly agree” that their city is overcrowded, the highest among our sample. Beijingers also feel most strongly that overcrowding causes pollution in their city, which is notorious for smog.

Significantly fewer people in Hong Kong think their city is overcrowded, despite it being the most densely packed of the five, with over 7m people squeezed into 264 km2 of built-up land.2 Singaporeans live in the second-most densely populated city but have the lowest perception of overcrowding of all.3

These surprising results reflect the cities’ disparate geographies. Beijing has expanded to an endless urban sprawl, whereas in Hong Kong, it is relatively easy to access the territory’s many hills and hiking trails, while the Singaporean government’s “Garden City” vision has created a verdant city with 300 parks and four nature reserves.4

Yet feedback was not universally positive in those two cities either. Respondents in Hong Kong, where business and shopping districts are clogged by pedestrians, feel most strongly that their sidewalks are overcrowded, while as many Singaporeans as mainland Chinese express negative sentiments about their public transport systems. This may be due to recent population growth, which reports claim have put the metro under strain.5 In addition, “Singaporeans have very high expectations” for efficiency, says Lily Kong, provost and chair of social sciences at Singapore Management University. Taipei residents, meanwhile, express concerns about the impact of overcrowding on pollution to a greater extent than those in other cities, bar Beijing.

Though overcrowding is clearly a problem now, the way residents of different cities anticipate the future varies markedly. Compared with Beijing, Shanghai and Taipei, twice as many people in Hong Kong and three times as many in Singapore anticipate that overcrowding will become much worse.

This contrast reflects each city’s mix of immigration policy and urban planning initiatives. Beijing and Shanghai have experienced a period of phenomenal growth: from 2000 to 2016, Shanghai’s population grew by 47%6,7 and Beijing’s by 59%, as migrant workers poured in from rural areas,8 spurring city planners to take action. Authorities have capped populations, torn down informal housing in Beijing, shed manufacturing facilities, and drawn up plans to expand green areas and improve public transport.9 The impact is already being felt; last year, the populations of both cities dipped for the first time since 1978.10

Beijing is also carrying out a five-year initiative to reduce the number of cars on its roads, and encourages residents to walk, cycle or use public transport.11 Additionally, authorities have set ambitious targets to clean the city’s air: during the winter of 2017, air quality showed a marked improvement over the previous winters.12 According to Juan Chen, associate professor of applied social sciences at The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, “Beijing urban residents are quite aware of [these interventions] and see that the policy is effective.”

In Hong Kong, by contrast, concerns about immigration stem from the Chinese government’s agenda of greater integration with the mainland, while property purchases by mainland Chinese have contributed to the territory’s skyrocketing house prices.13 In Singapore, immigration is also a hot political issue. Beginning in the 1980s, foreign workers were brought in to alleviate a labour crunch and boost the economy—immigrants now make up 40% of the population.14 Although they have underpinned the nation’s stellar economic performance, the swelling population has led to a backlash by some residents who disagree with the government’s policy.15

Although immigration policy is usually a top-down exercise, residents in our surveyed cities are hardly powerless in shaping their neighbourhoods. Nearly one in four respondents said they would “actively put forth suggestions about reducing overcrowding to city, district and community officials”. The channels they utilise vary: according to Ms Kong, “Hong Kong has an active NGO [non-governmental organisation] sector that will find means of engaging”, while “in Singapore, the urban planning authority is active in soliciting feedback, often organising engagement sessions”. In Taipei, systems such as the i-Voting digital platform facilitate citizen engagement; members of the public have used it to express their opinion on certain urban planning proposals, such as the development of Shezidao, a low-lying area prone to flooding.16,17

In mainland China, central authorities exert tighter control over planning,18 though residents of Shanghai and Beijing are able to exert influence at the grassroots level. Ms Chen, who has carried out research in Beijing, says that some people she has interviewed feel empowered by excluding migrant workers from using public facilities like community centres. Though this may smack of nativism, it’s clear that perceptions of urban overcrowding may hinge as much on controlling the inflow of people as making space for those already there.

Download PDF here

A drive along any of Beijing’s congested ring roads at rush hour can test the patience of the most jaded commuter. Although various aspects of city living in Asia’s biggest metropolises are taxing, grinding traffic often evokes a particularly primal response—as evidenced by the 17m incidents of “road rage” that beset China’s streets in 2015.1 Yet as cities expand, issues of urban sprawl like traffic become all the more acute. This has implications beyond simple inconvenience—it can affect one’s mental health in various ways. Research done predominantly on Western cities has shown higher rates of psychiatric disorders among city dwellers than their rural counterparts.2

For Asia, the link between urban living and mental health is only starting to come to light. Given that East Asia saw 200m people move to cities from 2000-10,3 much is riding on how people respond to the mental pressures of urban living in this fast-growing region. To gauge the impact of urban development on mental health, The Economist Intelligence Unit conducted a survey, supported by Pure Group, of 1,000 residents across five Asian cities: Beijing, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Singapore and Taipei. The findings suggest that density in its raw form is not the chief determinant of mental pressures among city residents. People’s perceptions of personal space do not necessarily correlate with actual crowding; rather, urban sprawl, and the change caused by a city’s rapid expansion, are just as likely to impede people’s feelings of personal space and lead to mental stress.

The cities we explore range from the extremely crowded (Hong Kong) to only moderately so by global standards (Beijing).

Yet residents of the less-dense cities in the sample—Beijing and Shanghai—report mental pressures that equal or surpass those reported by residents of Hong Kong, Singapore and Taipei. Beijingers strongly agree that their city suffers from overcrowding to a higher extent than other cities; Beijingers and Shanghainese agree to a higher extent that they lack sufficient personal space; and Beijingers feel more stressed out by their commute.

This could be due to urban sprawl: Beijingers and Shanghainese have endured rapid geographic enlargement in recent years. Beijing’s urban area increased by 6.7% per year from 1999-2013, compared with a global average of only 4.3%,4 while from 1991-2000, Shanghai’s shot up by 6.6%, versus 5.9% globally.5 Shanghai’s built-up areas now occupy 14 times as much land as Hong Kong’s,6 while Beijing recently opened its seventh ring road, measuring a whopping 1,000 km.7  

Layla McCay, director of the London-based Centre for Urban Design and Mental Health, says that in sprawling cities people often end up living in remote housing that lacks community and lifestyle facilities. “Being able to live close to employment, social and cultural opportunities is beneficial to people’s mental health, while being isolated…can be detrimental,” she says.

Global studies have shown links between urban sprawl and detrimental effects ranging from loss of natural habitats to greater wealth disparity.8 The increased hassle from long commutes may be a particularly damaging effect of sprawl, as the findings from Beijing, the most sprawling city in our sample, demonstrate. “The longer you spend in transit each week, the less time you spend with your friends and family and less time you have for leisure opportunities,” says Ms McCay. “Commutes represent a lost opportunity.”

The sheer pace of urban change, rather than simply its magnitude, may also play a role in the mental pressures felt by our Beijing and Shanghai sample. Research has shown a correlation between urban expansion and depression in China.9 Juan Chen, associate professor of applied social sciences at The Hong Kong Polytechnic University and the leading author of the urbanisation and mental health study, speculates that rapid changes in the urban landscape can lead to feelings of dislocation and unhappiness. “In cities like Beijing and Shanghai, you see so much construction going up overnight, which leads to many changes in people’s everyday life experiences,” she says.

On the other hand, high urban density, when managed well, has been shown to increase quality of life and boost positive mental outcomes. When complemented by robust infrastructure—something that Hong Kong and Singapore have in abundance, according to the World Economic Forum, which ranks the two cities first and second, respectively, in a global ranking of the quality of physical infrastructure10—density can raise convenience by promoting the agglomeration of goods and services and shortening commutes.11 One European study showed a negative correlation between higher urban density and increased risk of depression.12 

How residents of our five cities cope with the pressure of urban living are also split along the dense/sprawling divide. According to our survey, Beijingers and Shanghainese show a much higher propensity towards active release outlets like exercise and hiking, while Hongkongers, Singaporeans and Taipeinese are, comparatively, glued to the TV.

This could reflect a potential benefit to sprawling urban areas, despite all their ostensible drawbacks: more readily available outdoor space to enjoy physical activity, such as the group dancing popular in many Chinese cities. Climate may also play a role; both Ms McCay and Ms Chen emphasise that hotter, tropical environments like those in Hong Kong and Singapore deter people from spending time outdoors.

Other popular outlets include shopping and socialising with friends and family, both of which were cited by about a quarter of all respondents, and reading, noted by nearly a fifth. Using social media garnered slightly less support than reading, an interesting finding for this smartphone-addicted region. Regardless of the outlets people utilise, countering the negative effects of urban development will become more pressing as cities in Asia continue adding people and, potentially, sprawl.

The common perception that crowded urban areas in Asia contribute to feelings of stress and mental pressure is largely true, but is only part of the story. The Economist Intelligence Unit conducted a survey, supported by Pure Group, of 1,000 residents across five cities in East and South-east Asia: Beijing, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Singapore and Taipei. We found that pressures of urban living show some surprising differences and areas of overlap, leading to unique challenges for urban planners and individuals alike in addressing these challenges.