AsiamediaTitle.jpg (36574 bytes)



Founding Members:StraitsTimesLogo.gif (9503 bytes)IHT Logo.jpg (11739 bytes)JapanTimes.jpg (11674 bytes)KoreaTimeslogo.gif (4622 bytes)latimes.jpg (3521 bytes)
  UCLA Center for Korean Studies

 University of Technology Sydney NTU The Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific StudiesUCLA homeea-seal.jpg (10834 bytes)

A Daily Publication of the Asia Pacific Media Network
Founded in 1998


About APMN

Deadline Scholar

How to Join APMN

Summary Statement

Contact us


Deadline Scholar Passages From:
"Beyond the Third World City: The New Urban Geography"**
By P.J. Rimmer and H.W. Dick*
Urban Studies v35, n12 (Dec 1998)

"The city is the frontier of modern south-east Asia. In 1975, 22 per cent of the region's population was in urban areas; by 2000, it will have increased to over 37 per cent; and by 2025 will exceed 55 per cent (UN, 1995). Since the 1970s, industrialization has been the driving force of rapid urbanization. Industrialization and urbanization have involved dramatic changes in urban form and land use. The urban peripheries have now become the locus of job creation, especially in manufacturing plants and urban population growth."

"These phenomena have been attributed to the accelerating integration of south-east Asia into the world economy, the process known as globalization. Yet, ironically, the few attempts to interpret this transformation in spatial terms have reverted to the paradigm of a discrete south-east Asian variant of the Third World city..."

"This view of south-east Asian cities as being obviously different and having unique elements has never since been seriously challenged. McGee (1991) and others have sought to update the south-east-Asian-city-as-Third-World-city paradigm by invoking the desakota model. It is argued that these new regions of extended urban activity are characterized by a specifically south-east Asian settlement pattern. However, this model perpetuates the awkward dichotomy between the First and the Third World city."

"The purpose of this paper is to argue that globalization has made the paradigm of the Third World City obsolete in south-east Asia. Since the 1980s in most leading cities of south-east Asia, developers have acquired massive land portfolios and invested huge sums of capital to the point, as in Thailand, of actually destabilizing the national financial system. What has emerged is a pattern of new town developments integrated with industrial estates, toll roads, ports and airports. Although new to south-east Asia, the situation is familiar enough. Notwithstanding the very different settlement pattern on which it is being imposed, the new arrangement matches very closely with what Garreau (1991) described in Edge City. It is now timely to reintegrate debates over south-east Asian cities with mainstream First World and global debates."


"Analysis of south-east Asia cities within an explicitly spatial framework traces back no earlier than the 1940s. Colonial cities were not perceived to be problematic...This early literature was in general agreement that in south-east Asia the size of cities had been inhibited by colonial rule (Spate and Trueblood, 1942; Fryer, 1953)..."

"By the 1960s, attention had shifted to the explosive population growth of south-east Asian cities (Breese, 1966). The issues were now those of rural-urban migration. Discussion centered on concepts such as 'parasitic cities' and 'pseudo-urbanization' (Hoselitz, 1954; Dwyer, 1962; McGee, 1967). However, reflecting their different colonial experiences and the fragmentation of writing by local and colonial languages, south-east Asian cities were still seen as having little in common. Thus McGee (1967) was a seminal work in establishing a certain common identity that located south-east Asian cities as a category within the literature on the Third World. McGee identified the south-east Asian city as having three main elements. In contrast to colonial sources and reflecting contemporary trends, he discounted the element of elite garden suburbs while emphasizing the elements of kampung and squatter settlements."

"Ginsburg et al.'s (1991) The Extended Metropolis: Settlement Transition in Asia therefore is a curious throwback. Seeking to rediscover Asia's urban geography, the book attacks 'the persistence of the rural-urban paradigm'. However, it is not rooted in the contemporary literature but in debates over rural-urban transitions of the 1950s and 1960s. Its central hypothesis is that there has been 'the emergence of what appear to be new regions of extended urban activity surrounding the core cities of many countries of Asia'. New and different kinds of settlements in Asia are seen as

complex and compound regional systems consisting of central cities, fringe areas of those cities, exurbs, satellite towns, and extensive intervening areas of dense population and intensive traditional agricultural land uses in which wet paddy tends to dominate (Ginsburg, 1991, p. xiii)."

"This settlement pattern has been made possible by a simple 'transportation revolution' of improved all-weather roads and 'cheap intermediate transportation technology such as two-stroke motorbikes' (Ginsburg, 1991, p. xiii-xiv; McGee, 1991, p. 5)."

"This process of 'settlement transition' involving the urbanization of the hinterland without massive in-migration was referred to by McGee (1989, 1991) as kotadesasi - kota in Bahasa Indonesia for town, desa for village and si to denote process. Later, the term for these new regions of economic interaction was rearranged as desakota for the settlement and desakotasi for the process (Ginsburg, 1991). Desakota areas have six main features:

* a dense population engaged in smallholder-cultivation, commonly of wet rice;

* an increase in non-agricultural activities;

* a well-developed infrastructure of roads and canals;

* a reservoir of cheap labor;

* highly integrated 'transactive' environments in terms of movements of people and commodities; and

* a state perception as being 'invisible' or 'grey' zones (McGee, 1991, p. 15-18)."


"Following the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869, south-east Asian cities were subject to most of the same influences as metropolitan cities and became much more Westernized. However, the path of urban development did not always run parallel between metropolitan and south-east Asian cities. There have been extended phases of convergence but also periods of divergence."

"...three separate phases of globalization defined by the intensity of technology transfer:

1. Convergence between urban forms in metropolitan countries and south-east Asia from about the 1880s to the 1930s was brought about by the increase in political and economic control exerted by metropolitan powers through colonial rule, trade, investment and new transport technologies.

2. Divergence in urban forms between metropolitan countries and south-east Asia occurred from the 1940s to the 1970s as a consequence of the breakdown of colonial political and economic control and the installation of indigenous administrations; marked by the disintegration of transport systems.

3. Convergence between urban forms in metropolitan countries and south-east Asia was renewed in the 1980s by increasing trade and investment and the application of telecommunications and high-speed transport."


"The model south-east Asian city of the 19th century was Singapore, founded in 1819 at a time of British naval supremacy. Singapore was protected by a fort and gun batteries, but was not a walled city. In terms of population and economic activity, it was more a Chinese than a British city. There was also a group of Malay settlements clustered around the palace of the nominal Malay ruler. Thus, from the outset Singapore exemplified the plural character of most south-east Asian cities..."

"During the 19th century, the growth in international trade and investment along with the consolidation of colonial rule provided channels for technology transfer. This was most direct between metropolitan cities and the main south-east Asian cities. It can be seen most clearly in transport technology. The new industrial revolution technologies of steamships, railways, electric tramways and motor vehicles were introduced to south-east Asian cities with very little time-lag. By the 1920s, towards the end of the colonial period, the European enclaves of south-east Asia's main cities looked remarkably like contemporary Western cities. This can be seen most easily in the 'International Style' in urban architecture and design (King, 1990)."

"By the 1900s, most of the world's port cities had a Victorian facade. This included the basic infrastructure of docks, steam railways, electric tramways, telegraph, roads and bridges... A perusal of travel guides of the late colonial period shows that Europeans and Americans could travel comfortably by sea and visit, or carry on business, in south-east Asian cities without any knowledge of the local cultures or languages. The exotic East was there in the background but at a comfortable cultural and social distance. These cities were accessible and safe to Westerners. It was because of colonialism and empire that these cities belonged to the West."

"Around the turn of the century, south-east Asia's port cities were also 'walking cities' (Rimmer, 1986). The shift away from crowded and unsanitary towns can be traced back as far as the 18th century, when leading European officials and merchants built country houses within comfortable riding distance of the city (Abeyasekere, 1987; Blusse, 1986)."

"... By the 1930s, most southeast Asian cities had bifurcated into distinct upper and lower towns. The lower town, having lost its European population, remained the central business district and Chinese quarter. The upper town consisted of European garden suburbs oriented around family life. These included the amenities of hotels, clubs and entertainment and modern prestige shopping centers."


"The exclusive colonial city began to break down during the Japanese occupation of 1942-45. The relapse of colonial control allowed cities to become porous to rural-urban migration. Informal-sector employment opportunities proliferated and squatters began to build their shacks throughout the city on any unoccupied land. Urban populations began to soar with the infill of already-settled areas and accretion of settlement on the periphery. In the 1950s and 1960s, these cities changed and became increasingly alien and dangerous for Westerners. Political unrest, first against colonial rule and later between communists and non-communists, was the main factor for this change."

"...Evidence of urban breakdown marked by the overloading of infrastructure, congestion, overcrowding, poverty and pollution appeared overwhelming. South-east Asian governments looked to be unable to manage cities. By the 1960s, south-east Asian cities had come to look like other Third World cities and to be regarded as a distinct urban category."

"In hindsight, judgements of south-east Asian cities may be more positive. Despite massive problems, south-east Asian cities have continued to function and to sustain a remarkable rate of industrialization and economic growth. Looking back from the mid 1990s, it is easier to appreciate that much of the post-colonial influx of population was an adjustment to a big disequilibrium. The breakdown of the colonial order meant the collapse of the segregated colonial city. As the European population lost its power and privileges, not least over land use and personal privacy, people moved with impunity into low-density urban space. Only much later did indigenous administrations try to regain lost ground by planning cities according to the needs of the new political and economic elites. The only city where this occurred as a relatively smooth transfer of power was in Singapore. In Singapore, there was no transitional phase of planning anarchy."


"Rising real incomes and the rapidly expanding urban middle class have created a new urban dynamic in south-east Asia. Although there is no reliable way to measure the size of the middle class in Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia, it is probably at least one-third of the population of Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur and Jakarta (Hewison, 1996; Hughes and Woldekidan, 1994; Robison and Goodman, 1996). Since the 1980s, the swollen middle class has attracted investment in multiple satellite towns surrounding the old central business district. This is especially true of Jakarta, Manila and Singapore."

"...The proliferation of multiple urban centers in the 1980s diminished the importance of the movement into and out of the CBD in favor of increasing movements between urban centers around the urban fringe ILLUSTRATION FOR FIGURE 2B OMITTED. This new pattern was facilitated by rapidly increasing rates of vehicle ownership, which freed the middle class from dependence on public transport. One symptom of this new pattern was the proliferation of suburban centers. However, this second and more complex system of multiple centers proved to be an unstable transitional form."

"The logic and momentum which generated activity and movement between satellite towns necessarily generated expansion beyond them into cheaper peri-urban land..."


"A new starting-point may be to recognize that many of the elements of the south-east Asian city are not only familiar, but are also common to the Western city. The elements include, for example, the home, which may be taken as the trip origin, and the destinations of office, shops, restaurants, schools, hospitals, sports center, hotel and cinema ILLUSTRATION FOR FIGURE 3 OMITTED. These are linked by the same technologies of the motor car and public transport. They may, however, be arranged or bundled in different ways. In other words, the city may be viewed in abstract as a set of elements which over time can be bundled, unbundled and reassembled in new urban forms. This process is restructuring, but in a specifically urban context."

"In historical perspective, the impulse for restructuring urban space in south-east Asia was the development in the 1960s of the first homogeneous new middle-class communities. These could be observed in Singapore, Kuala Lumpur (Petaling Jaya) and Manila (Makati). In Jakarta, the new town of Kebayoran Baru was under construction in the 1950s, but urban middle-class development slowed down in the 1960s because of the national economic crisis. As these 'new towns' acquired a threshold population of mobile consumers with relatively high disposable incomes, there arose market opportunities for entrepreneurs to build workplaces, and shopping and entertainment facilities in adjacent locations well beyond the old town core. In the 1970s and 1980s, as real incomes grew rapidly because of export-oriented industrialization, new centers proliferated around the urban fringe ILLUSTRATION FOR FIGURE 3 OMITTED. Foreign aid funds were invested in new freeways and tell roads to link these centers ILLUSTRATION FOR FIGURE 2C OMITTED."

"During the 1980s, there were signs that private urban development had reached new thresholds of investment and land area. Hitherto, the process could still have been described as suburbanizsation. Entrepreneurs for the most part continued to invest in discrete facilities such as hotels and office blocks, each of which generated custom for others. The innovation of the 1980s was the recognition by some of the richest south-east Asian businessmen that enhanced profitability would flow from bundling as many as possible of these discrete facilities into integrated complexes. These complexes comprise hotels, restaurants, shopping malls and office towers ILLUSTRATION FOR FIGURE 4 OMITTED. Such integrated projects enjoyed enhanced profitability because each facility fed the other, by attracting and circulating custom. The externalities were thereby internalized. These projects required the ability to mobilize huge sums of risk capital to buy up land and finance construction in anticipation of the market."

"The problem of these integrated projects was to attract sufficient custom to earn a profit from the huge initial outlays. Because consumers lived in discrete communities, and by virtue of vehicle ownership enjoyed the freedom of choice between competing centers, there was no captive market. As competition drove new developers to open ever more luxurious complexes with hitherto undreamed of facilities (such as bowling alleys and skating rinks), existing developers were at risk either of not recovering their outlay or of failing to enjoy the anticipated return. The solution, which became characteristic of the 1990s, was to buy up even larger tracts of land for integrated residential and commercial complexes ILLUSTRATION FOR FIGURE 5 OMITTED. The externalities are therefore internalized: facilities help to sell houses and the captive residential clientele sells facilities. A developer owning 10 hectares can build a suburban block, with 100 hectares, an entire suburb; but with 1000 hectares or more, a new town."

"...In post-independence south-east Asia, the street is typically perceived as a source of danger. Decorative fences and hedges are no longer a deterrent to thieves. Open suburban living thus becomes very insecure. One solution, especially for expatriates, was the compound - that is to say, a group of dwellings with a single controlled point of entry. An increase in scale allows controlled access and patrolled security to be provided to an entire suburb. By the logic of the market, in which the richest people sought the highest level of personal security, real estate developers were almost obliged to construct gated communities. In the late 1960s, gated communities appeared in Manila; in the late 1970s, in Jakarta; and by the 1980s, in Surabaya. In Singapore, where security was least problematic, the equivalent communities were high-rise condominiums. These have become popular for expatriates in Jakarta and Manila."

"The other new institutional feature is the shopping mall. South-east Asian cities had long been familiar with shopping streets, multistory markets and department stores. .. The step up from shopping-centers-cum-plazas to plaza-cum-malls can be dated to the 1980s in Manila, Bangkok, Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur."


"This new pattern of urban development is well illustrated by Jakarta..."

"The new urban developments are on a huge scale. The entire area of the Capital City Region of Jakarta, roughly equivalent to the area within the outer ring road is 66 000 hectares. By October 1996, over 90 000 hectares outside the Capital City Region had received government approval for urban development (Kompas, 1996). Of this total, only 13 300 hectares had been built upon by 1997."

"The balance constitutes a land bank in the hands of developers estimated to meet the supply of suburban residential land until the year 2018. Most of this land bank is controlled by a few large private business groups. Three of the largest projects (between 5000 and 6000 hectares) are all currently in progress. However, the largest project of some 30 000 hectares has yet to begin construction and, in view of the recent currency crisis, is likely to be long delayed."

"In 1984 a consortium of leading developers (including participants from the two earlier projects) took the gamble of acquiring 6000 hectares of land to the west of Jakarta and in 1989 they launched the first genuine new town project, Bumi Serpong Damai. The golf course and gated community were developed first; as the density increased, other facilities such as schools, offices and shopping mall were gradually added. Ultimately, this project will include a 300-hectare central business district and 200-hectare business park with a projected employment of 140 000 people."

"Even more ambitious projects are the new towns of Lippo Karawaci (2360 ha) and Lippo Cikarang (5500 ha) in west and east Jakarta respectively (Lippoland, 1996). Since 1991/92, the Lippo Group have sought to build as many facilities as possible at the outset. By 1997, Lippo Karawaci had a central business district with multiple office towers, a 100 000 square meter shopping mall (the largest in Jakarta), two condominium towers (52 and 42 stories), a 328bed international hospital, a private school and university, the essential golf course and country club and five-star international hotel. The projected population for 2020 is I million people. These projects are unambiguously 'bundled' cities which contain all significant elements under the control of a single developer. This is clearly First World not Third World."

"Jakarta is not an isolated example. Indonesia's second city of Surabaya has a 2000-hectare new town under construction as well as several adjacent semi-bundled projects of several hundred hectares. In Bangkok, large firms such as Bangkok Land, Tanayong and Land and House have built huge complexes around the city's outskirts. Even Ho Chi Minh has a new town project of 2300 hectares - Saigon South is a joint venture between Taiwanese interests and the Peoples' Committee of Ho Chi Minh City."


"The elements and the patterns that are now observed in new towns and settlements around the main cities of south-east Asia resemble those observed in the US. At first sight, this American architectural 'imperialism' seems implausible. If there were to be a convergence between south-east Asian and Western cities, one would surely look for a model towards Europe, with its intensive agriculture and high-density cities. Aside from America's cultural dominance, there seem to be two main reasons why south-east Asia is borrowing institutions more readily from the US. The first is the highly skewed distribution of income in Asia between the expanding middle class and the bulk of the population. The second, and associated reason, is the perceived low level of public security. In the US the respective features are poor minority populations and urban ghettos."

"The driving force behind the new urban geography of south-east Asia is the avoidance of social discomfort. In Indonesia and Malaysia, racial antagonism between the Chinese and Indonesians/Malays encouraged wealthy Chinese to seek the security of gated communities. In the Philippines, there is also the fear of kidnapping. However, more and more middle-class indigenous Indonesians, Malays and Filipinos are also choosing to live in such secure communities, primarily to protect their property against theft. As people acquire more private possessions, their level of insecurity rises."

"The common experience which draws together the separate urban experiences of North America and south-east Asia is the perceived deterioration in personal security. In the US, the fear of public space - in fact, the fear of the city itself - is grounded in racism and drug-related crime. In south-east Asia, the immediate threat is less apparent. However, rising real household incomes and the emergence of an identifiable middle class have been accompanied by a growing differentiation from, and fear of, the rest of the inchoate urban mass. In countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines, where the middle class is disproportionately ethnic Chinese, that fear has a palpable racial edge. Gated residential communities, condominiums, air-conditioned cars, patrolled shopping malls and entertainment complexes, and multi-storied offices are the present and future world of the insecure middle class in south-east Asia."

"This preoccupation with comfort and security is reflected in attitudes towards public space. In Europe, despite the popularity of the motor car, public space remains an integral part of social life. In the US, and increasingly in south-east Asia, public space has become an area of uncertainty. Middle-class people, therefore, seek to control their environment by insulating themselves from the uncertainties of casual social interaction with the poor. They live in air-conditioned houses in gated communities, travel in private air-conditioned vehicles to air-conditioned offices and shopping malls. Home, office and mall are increasingly patrolled by private security personnel backed up by overhead video cameras."

"The level of insecurity in the street is an important motive for patronizing shopping malls. Other factors are the convenience of park'n'shop and the opportunity to shop, eat or play in a socially comfortable, air-conditioned environment that eliminates the aggravations of pickpockets, jostling, name-calling and the challenge of the crowd. The attitude is reminiscent of 19th-century attitudes towards the threatening London crowd, which was regarded as being uneducated, uncouth and unpredictable. The attitude of the middle class in south-east Asia towards the urban mass is also not so very different from that of the colonial Europeans to their indigenous subjects. A common language does not bridge the cultural gap or the economic divide."

"The desire of middle-class south-east Asians for security and social comfort has, therefore, given rise to market opportunities for well-funded entrepreneurs to borrow urban elements from the US. This has occurred because those businessmen have visited or have studied in the US and are familiar with those models."

"In fact, the technology transfer has worked through an even more direct mechanism. Most developers of these large projects have hired master planners, design consultants, managers and advisers, property specialists and architects from the US and occasionally also from Australia, Canada, Japan and Singapore. In Jakarta, for example, Lippo Kawaraci hired at the outset a team of experts from the US. Other Jakarta examples are Alam Sutera (SWA Group, California), Bumi Serpong Damai (John Portman and Associates, US, Pacific Consultants International Japan), Bintaro Jaya (Development Design Group, Baltimore, US) and Cikarang Baru (Klages Carter Vail and Partners, US). Even the promotional brochures reveal a style and nomenclature that is characteristically Western. Western retailers such as WalMart, J. C. Penney and TOYS 'R' US and food franchisers such as KFC, McDonalds, Pizza Hut and Wendys are becoming familiar tenants in the large shopping malls."

"This heavy reliance on foreign expertise for both master planning and the design of individual elements leads to a social and cultural dissonance with the rest of the city. .. In the US the disintegration of the city is a recent, and to many people, an alarming phenomenon. In south-east Asia, it is familiar to anyone of the older generation. Formerly, it was the situation identified as colonialism; nowadays, the distinction is primarily one of wealth and status."

"Nevertheless, the situation is a logical outcome of market forces. Developers make their profit by careful market research and providing people with what they want. Those of higher incomes naturally exercise the greatest influence on the market. Many of these potential buyers do not wish to live in socially mixed and claustrophobic communities like the kampung. They can now afford to realize their suburban dream of a happy and independent middle-class family, living in comfort in a secure and green environment beyond the pollution of the inner city."


"Rapid urbanization has been a worldwide phenomenon since the industrial and transport and communications revolution of the 19th century. The tempo of trade, investment and technology transfer quickened more than a century ago in the era of high imperialism, long before globalization became the catchword of the 1990s. In the heyday of colonialism, between the late-19th century and the 1930s, south-east Asian cities became much more like Western cities; especially with the separation of central business districts and garden suburbs. There was very little lag in technology or modern design between the colonial mother country and the colony. This period may be considered as one of convergence."

"All the main trends in Western cities in the 19th and 20th centuries have eventually become formative influences on the development of south-east Asian cities (Table 2). What has differed over time and between cities is the length of the lag and the extent of the influence. Any attempt to explain either the historical or contemporary urbanization of south-east Asia as a unique phenomenon TABULAR DATA FOR TABLE 2 OMITTED is therefore doomed to absurdity. The issues and debates in the vigorous literature on cities in the US are highly relevant to what is now happening in south-east Asia. Property developers in south-east Asia have long recognized this; government officials and academics are still grappling with these new realities."

"Industrialization and job creation on the urban fringe and in the hinterland of southeast Asian cities reflect the shift of industry from the First to the Third World that has been facilitated by rapid improvements in the speed and cost of transport and communications. International demand has switched from south-east Asia's agricultural products, which required labor and land, to manufactures which are also labor-intensive but have only a marginal requirement for land. It is this international demand for the manufactures of south-east Asia which is leading footloose industries to locate in the vicinity of main cities and transport hubs in order to exploit abundant cheap labor. The spatial dimension of this process has been portrayed by Ginsburg et al. (1991) as desakotasi. This helps to draw attention to the phenomenon but confuses as much as it clarifies. It is not a uniquely south-east Asian phenomenon. The emerging urban forms take after North American patterns to a remarkable degree that has yet to be recognized, let alone explained."

"The study of south-east Asia's cities must now be informed by knowledge of urban processes, especially those of the US. Scholars need to challenge prejudices which have allowed them to partition the world into separate spheres according to their own particular areas of expertise. Even if the southeast Asian currency crisis of mid 1997 leads to a slowdown in real estate development, with the collapse of some prominent companies and suspension or scaling back of new town projects, the pattern of urban development will not change markedly from that which has been observed in recent years."


ABEYASEKERE, S. (1987) Jakarta: A History. Singapore: Oxford University Press.

ALLEN, C. (Ed.) (1983) Tales from the South China Seas: Images of the British in South-East Asia in the Twentieth Century. London: Andre Deutsch and file British Broadcasting Corporation.

AOHD (1981) The Land Transport of Singapore from Early Times to the Present. Singapore: Archives and Oral History Department.

ASKEW, M., and LOGAN, W. S (Eds) (1994) Cultural Identity and Urban Change in Southeast Asia: Interpretive Essays. Geelong: Deakin University Press.

BLUSSE, L. (1986) Strange Company: Chinese Settlers, Mestizo Women, and the Dutch in VOC Batavia. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.

BREESE, G. (1966) Urbanization in Newly Developing Economies. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

CHRISTOPHERSON, S. (1994) The fortress city: privatised spaces, consumer citizenship, in: A. ASH (Ed.) Post-Fordism: A Reader, pp. 409-427. Oxford: Blackwell.

DAVIS, M. (1990) City of Quartz: Excavating the Future in Los Angeles. London and New York: Verso.

DICK. H. and RIMMER, P. J. (1980) Beyond the informal/formal dichotomy: towards an integrated approach, Pacific Viewpoint, 21, pp. 26-41.

DOBBY, E. H. G., (1950) Southeast Asia. London: University of London Press.

DWYER, D. J. (1962) The problem of in-migration and squatter settlement in Asian cities: two case studies, Manila and Victoria-Kowloon, Asian Studies, 2, pp. 145-169.

FISHER, C. A. (1964) Southeast Asia: A Social, Economic and Political Geography. London: Methuen.

FORBES, D. K. (1981) Petty commodity production and underdevelopment, Progress in Planning, 16, pp. 104-178.

FRIEDMANN, J. and WOLFF, G., (1982) World city formation: an agenda for research and action, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 6, pp. 309-344.

FRY, D. W. (1953) The million city in Southeast Asia, Geographical Review, 43, pp. 474-494.

GARREAU, J. (1991) Edge City: Life on the Frontier. New York: Doubleday.

GINSBURG, N. S. (1955) The Great City of Southeast Asia, American Journal of Sociology, 40, pp. 455-462.

GINSBURG, N. (1991) Preface, in: N. GINSBURG, B. KOPPEL and T.G. McGEE (Eds) The Extended Metropolis: Settlement in Transition, pp. xiii-xviii. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

GINSBURG, N., KOPPEL, B. and McGEE, T.G. (Eds) (1991) The Extended Metropolis: Settlement in Transition in Asia Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

GOTTDIENER, M. (1991) Space, social theory and the urban metaphor, Perspectives in Social Theory, 11, pp. 295-311.

GOTTDIENER, M. (1994) The New Urban Sociology. New York: McGraw Hill.

GOTTDIENER, M. (1995) Postmodern Semiotics: Material Culture and the Forms of Post Modern Life. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

GOTTDIENER, M. and KEPHART, G., (1991) The multinucleated metropolitan region: a comparative analysis, in: R. KLING, S. OLIN and M. POSTER (Eds) Postsuburban California: the Transformation of Orange County since World War II, pp. 31-54. Berkeley: University of California Press.

GOUROU, P. (1940) Land Utilization in French Indochina. New York: Institute of Pacific Relations.

HEWISON, K. (1996) Emerging social forces in Thailand, in: R. ROBISON and D. GOODMAN (Eds) The New Rich in Asia, pp. 137-160. London: Routledge.

HOSELITZ, B. F. (1954) Generative and parasitic cities, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 3, pp. 278-294.

HUGHES, H. and WOLDEKIDAN, B. (1994) The emergence of the middle class in ASEAN countries, ASEAN Economic Bulletin, 11, pp. 139-149.

JACOBS, J. (1984) The Mall. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.

KEYFITZ, N. (1953) Population of Indonesia, Ekonomi dan Keuangan Indonesia, 6(1), pp 640-655.

KING, A.D. (1990) Urbanism, Colonialism, and the World-economy: Cultural and Spatial Foundations of the Worm Urban System. London and New York: Routledge.

KNOX P.L. (1995) World cities and the organization of global space, in: R. J. JOHNSTON, P. J. TAYLOR and M. J. WATTS (Eds) Geographies of Global Change: Remapping the World in the Late Twentieth Century, pp. 232-247. Oxford: Blackwell.

KNOX, P. L. and TAYLOR, P. J. (1995) World Cities in a World System. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

KOMPAS (1996) Daily Jakarta Newspaper. 21 October.

LIPPOLAND (1996) Redefining urban development, Reprinted from Asia Money (brochure circulated by the Lippo Company).

LO, F. C. and YEUNG, Y. M. (Eds) (1995) Emerging World Cities in Pacific Asia. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.

McGEE, T. G. (1967) The Southeast Asian City: A Social Geography of the Primate Cities of Southeast Asia. London: G. Bell.

McGEE, T. G. (1978) An invitation to the 'ball': Dress 'formal' or 'informal'?, in: P. J. RIMMER, D. W. DRAKAKIS-SMITH and. T. G. McGEE (Eds) Food Shelter and Transport in Asia and the Pacific, pp. 3-28. Department of Human Geography Monograph 12, The Australian National University, Canberra.

McGEE, T. G. (1989) Urbanisasi or kotadesasi? Evolving urban patterns of urbanization in Asia, in: F. J. COSTA ET AL.(Eds) Urbanization in Asia, pp. 93-108. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

McGEE, T. G. (1991) The emergence of desakota regions in Asia: expanding a hypothesis, in: N. GINSBURG, B. KOPPEL and T. G. McGEE (Eds) The Extended Metropolis: Settlement Transition in Asia, pp. 3-25. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

McGEE, T. G. and ROBINSON I. M. (Eds) (1995) The Mega-urban Regions of Southeast Asia. Vancouver: UBC Press.

REID, A. (1993) Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce, 1450-1680, Volume H Expansion and Crisis. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.

RIMMER, P. J. (1986) Rikisha to Rapid Transit: Urban Public Transport Systems and Policy in Southeast Asia. Sydney: Pergamon Press.

RIMMER, P. J. (1990) Hackney carriage syces and rikisha pullers in Singapore: a colonial registrar's perspective on public transport, 1888-1923, in: P. J. RIMMER and L. M. ALLEN (Eds) The Underside of Malaysian History: Pullers, Prostitutes, Plantation Workers ..., pp. 129-160. Singapore: Singapore University Press.

RIMMER, P. J. and FORBES, D. K. (1982) Underdevelopment theory: a geographical analysis, Australian Geographer, 15(4), pp. 197-211.

ROBEQUAIN, C. (1944) The Economic Development of French Indo-China, trans I. Ward London: Oxford University Press.

ROBEQUAIN, C. (1952) L'Indochine. Paris: Armand Colin.

ROBISON, R. and GOODMAN, D. S. G. (1996) The New Rich in Asia: Mobile Phones, McDonalds and Middle-Class Revolution. London and New York: Routledge.

ROSCHLAU, M. W. (1985) Public transport in the provinces: A study of innovation, diffusion and conflict in the Philippines. Unpublished thesis, Department of Human Geography, Research School of Pacific Studies, The Australian National University.

SASSEN, S. (1991) The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

SETHURAMAN, S. V. (1975) Urbanisation and employment: a case study of Djakarta, International Labour Review, 112, pp. 119-205.

SPATE, O. H. K. and TRUEBLOOD, L. W. (1942) Rangoon: A study in urban geography, Geographical Review, 32, pp. 56-73.

SPENCER, J. E. (1952) Land and People in the Philippines. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

SPENCER, J. E. (1955) Asia East by South. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

UN (1995) World Urbanization Prospects: The 1994 Revision - Estimates and Projections of Urban and Rural Populations and of Urban Agglomerations. New York: United Nations.

WERNSTEDT, F. L. and SPENCER, J. E. (1967) The Philippines Island World: A Physical, Cultural and Regional Geography. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

WERTHEIM, W. F. (Ed.) (1958) The Indonesian Town: Studies in Urban Sociology. The Hague and Bandung: W. van Hoeve Ltd.

*H. W. Dick is in the Department of Business Development and Corporate History, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia. Fax: 03-9349-4292. E-mail:

*P. J. Rimmer is in the Department of Human Geography, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 0200, Australia. Fax: + 61-6-249-4896. E-mail:

Elanna Lowes provided editorial assistance. All figures were drawn by Neville Minch, Cartographic Unit, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University, Canberra. The authors are grateful for the comments of two anonymous referees.

**COPYRIGHT 1998 Urban Studies (UK)