Primate City

Imagine a country where one city stands head and shoulders above all others—not just in size, but in power, influence, infrastructure, and economic activity. That kind of city is called a Primate City.

Technically, a primate city is a disproportionately large city in the urban hierarchy of a country or region. It is significantly larger and more influential than the next biggest city.

• It’s not just a big city—it’s the biggest by a wide margin, often double the size and double the importance of the next city.
• Such cities usually act as the political, economic, and cultural nerve centres.
• Most often, they are also the capital cities and serve as administrative hubs.

Think of Bangkok in Thailand, which is more than 40 times larger than the next biggest city, Nonthaburi. That’s primacy in action.

The Primate City Theory

Now, who formalized this idea? It was Mark Jefferson, a geographer, in 1939.

Jefferson’s Definition

• He defined a primate city as:

“A city that is at least twice as large and twice as significant as the second-largest city in the country.”

In short: Big in size, and bigger in significance.

Jefferson’s Ratio Approach

• He compared populations of the largest, second-largest, and third-largest cities.
• He found a pattern in many countries:
  → Population ratio of 100:30:20, meaning the primate city was more than double the size of the next.

Why do Primate Cities grow like this?

• Once a city gets a head start—like being a colonial capital or a trade hub—it begins to:
  • Attract more investment
  • Draw in resources and people
  • Leave other cities far behind

This is called a cumulative advantage—growth attracts more growth.

Later Studies: Fryer and Murphy

• Fryer (1953) studied cities over 1 million population in Southeast Asia, examining their growth patterns and morphology.
• Murphy (1957) traced city development in Asia, where many started as port cities and gradually became dominant urban centres.

Characteristics of Primate Cities (Linsky’s View)

While not detailed here, Linsky contributed by listing the functional and spatial characteristics of primate cities—like:

• Their centrality in decision-making
• Influence over media, culture, education
• High degree of inward migration

Role of Primate Cities in Economy

Let’s understand how they shape not just the city but the entire economy:

• Centralization of Resources: Revenues from trade, agriculture, and other sectors are often pumped into urban infrastructure of primate cities.
• Migration of Capital and Labour: Naturally, people and money move where opportunities lie—towards the primate city.
• Colonial Legacy: Many of today’s primate cities were originally colonial power centres, designed to serve foreign administrative or trade interests.

Economist Bert F. Hoselitz gave a caution:
“Urbanization is not always equal to economic development.”
In colonial cities, growth was often enclaved and stagnant, serving narrow interests.

Examples of Primate Cities

• Bangkok – The world’s most primate city (40x larger than its next city).
• London and Paris – Classic examples in Europe.
• Most Asian and African capitals – Due to post-colonial centralization.

Where Primate Cities Do Not Exist

Not every country has a primate city. In fact, balanced urban development is considered healthier in some respects.

• United States: Washington D.C. is smaller in influence than cities like New York, LA, Chicago.
• Germany: Urban power is shared between Berlin, Frankfurt, Munich, Dresden.
• India: No single city dominates nationally.

In these countries, urbanization follows a “rank-size rule”—the second city is half the size of the first, third is a third, and so on—a balanced hierarchy, not a primate one.

Primate Cities in India

At the national level, India does not have a primate city.

However, at the regional (state) level, primacy is seen. For example:

• Kolkata in West Bengal
• Chennai in Tamil Nadu
• Delhi in the National Capital Region
• Mumbai in Maharashtra

These cities dominate their respective states economically, culturally, and politically, but none of them overshadows all other Indian cities at the national scale.

Conclusion

The concept of a primate city helps us understand imbalances in urban development—where one city becomes too dominant, often at the cost of others. While it brings advantages in terms of investment and global visibility, it can also lead to regional inequality.

For UPSC Geography optional, understanding why, where, and how primate cities emerge—and their economic, historical, and spatial impacts—is key.