A great article series by Nina from .id on Population Densities
How dense are we? Population densities have traditionally provided information on the distribution of populations across space. By assessing how dense an area is in terms of population, we can determine possible pressures on existing services and infrastructure, remoteness of a community, opportunity for growth and expansion of communities as well as strategies for redistribution of population from denser areas to less dense ones. Incorporating population density analysis into strategic planning of cities also allows us to visualise areas which may produce additional pressure on existing transport corridors, public transport and plan for new services and infrastructure for future population growth in currently ‘dormant’ areas (i.e. upcoming greenfield/brownfield growth areas). In many Australian cities, population density maps will show similar trends – very high population densities in city centres, high/moderate densities in inner established suburbs which may be densifying over time due to demand/proximity to amenities and a lower population density on the periphery of a city where land scarcity constraints and high demand for housing are not such limiting elements.
Factors which affect population density are physical and anthropogenic; Physical limitations which may increase/decrease or direct certain patterns of population density include geography/topography constraints, climate and accessibility to resources and services/remoteness. Anthropogenic/human factors include political stability – people desire to live in an area which provides security and the ability to prosper, socioeconomic benefits and pull factors – such as cities and parts of cities which provide employment and education opportunities, as well as general attractiveness and desire to live in a city or certain parts of a city due to what it has to offer.
This series of blog articles explores the 2011 population density of Australian capital cities (by SA1 as the geographic unit) and analyses what it is that dictates the population density distributions in these cities. As a population forecaster, I see population density analysis as an important way of maintaining or increasing living standards which currently make many cities in Australia quality places to live in for existing residents and a desirable destination for migrants from within Australia and from abroad. The information is illustrated in thematic 3D maps (extruded and colour coded by population density per km2) with commentary on each city attempting to give readers a bit of insight into the similarities and differences between our state capitals and comparing certain densities to those of other world cities.
Part 1
Greater Darwin – 2014 Preliminary ERP – 140,400
Greater Hobart – 2014 Preliminary ERP – 219,200
Australian Capital Territory – 2014 Preliminary ERP – 386,000
Part 2
Greater Adelaide – 2014 Preliminary ERP – 1,304,600
Greater Perth – 2014 Preliminary ERP – 2,021,200
Greater Brisbane – 2014 Preliminary ERP – 2,274,600
Part 3
Greater Melbourne – 2014 Preliminary ERP – 4,440,300
Greater Sydney – 2014 Preliminary ERP – 4,840,600
Darwin, Northern Territory
Greater Darwin 2011 population density (per km2) by SA1 geography
Darwin – the tropical capital of steady year-round 30-32 degree temperatures may look relatively simple and uniform in terms of population densities but there are some areas worth commenting on.
While most of outer Darwin (Berrimah – Coonawarra – Winnellie, Lee Point) has very low population densities (1.17 persons per km2), the “urban island”, as my colleague Johnny would call it, of Palmerston is visible to the south, with the suburb of Durack illustrating the highest population densities – 1,972 per km2 within six SA1s. Palmerston as a whole has a slightly lower population density of 1,380 per km2 – similar to that of Winnipeg in Canada.
Note – Comparisons to other world city population densities will be made throughout this blog series however I acknowledge that this is a slightly flawed technique as we are comparing a segment (and associated population density) of one Australian city to an entire city (and its population density) elsewhere in the world but this is done just to provide some context in terms of density, built form, the urban environment and possible stresses on infrastructure.
Back in Darwin, north of McMillans Road, several suburbs illustrate population densities similar to those of larger capital cities such as Brisbane, Adelaide or Perth. Coconut Grove, Alawa, Moil, Anula, Karama, Wagaman, Wanguri, Wulagi, Leanyer and several other suburbs make up just over a third of Greater Darwin’s total population with the SA1s hugging the coast around Casuarina Drive and Banksia Street illustrating some high densities, as seen on the map.
Darwin’s densest areas in terms of population are in the CBD, where over 90% of the dwelling stock is classified as “high density”. Two of the ‘towering’ SA1s which stand out on the map in central Darwin are located on both sides of Smith Street with a combined SA1 usually resident population of 1,318 (2013) and a high population density of 9,414 persons per km2.
Hobart, Tasmania
Greater Hobart 2011 population density (per km2) by SA1 geography
The population of Greater Hobart according to the preliminary ERP was 219,200 in 2014 (2011 Census population – 211,656). This makes up about 43% of the total population of the state of Tasmania as at 2011.
Most of Greater Hobart’s population is concentrated on the eastern and western shores of the Derwent River estuary – with the main urban area extending from Bridgewater in the north, southward to Taroona with another urban “island” on the map in the southeast illustrating Kingston and Blackmans Bay.
Central Hobart can be seen as the most densely populated segment on the map with several areas illustrating population densities of 2,800-3,800 persons per km2. Unlike cities such as Melbourne, the actual city centre is still predominantly occupied by commercial buildings and businesses whereas it is the immediate ring outside the business district which exhibits higher population densities – North Hobart, West Hobart, Sandy Bay and Battery Point being the most dense areas with New Town also displaying similar population densities as North and West Hobart.
On the other side of the river, in the north, the suburb of Risdon Vale which is approximately 1.5km from Risdon Cove can be seen on the map and has a 2013 preliminary estimated resident population of approximately 2,734 and a population density of 1,523 persons per km2.
Further south, the connected suburban areas of Lindisfame, Rose Bay, Montagu Bay, Bellerive, Mornington and Howrah complete the eastern side of Hobart. A couple of SA1s in Howrah with relatively high population densities 2,600-2,900 persons per km2 do have a few semi attached dwellings but are mainly just single dwellings with not much other land use other than roads in the area – hence the higher population density. This example illustrates that some areas of higher population density aren’t necessarily areas composed of a larger share of medium or high-density dwellings but could just be areas which are somewhat homogenous in land use/design with principally housing in the area and sparse sections of green space/parks or no green space in the mix at all.
To the east of Howrah and Tranmere, both on the shore, are a couple of other suburbs which appear on the population density map – Rokeby and Clarendon Vale which also have a rather homogenous housing stock type of stand-alone dwellings (though these may differ in size/number of rooms, for example).
Continuing east from Rokeby and Clarendon Vale, situated on the isthmus which connects the South Arm Peninsula to the mainland are the suburbs of Lauderdale and Roches Beach (City of Clarence) with a few east-facing SA1s illustrating quite high population densities for such a remote area (approximately 2,361 persons in 2013, with a density of 1,149 persons per km2).
Finally the township of Dodges Ferry (Sorrell Council) on the eastern side of the entrance to Pittwater (on the far eastern side of the map) stands out from the rural surroundings. With a 2013 preliminary ERP of approximately 2,987 (2011 Census population = 2,974), the western SA1s are all made up of stand-alone housing which contain almost 70% of the township’s population at an average population density of 885 persons per km2 – comparable to Cincinatti or Wichita in the USA.
Australian Capital Territory
Australian Capital Territory (ACT) (‘Greater Canberra’) 2011 population density (per km2) by SA1 geography
The nation’s capital of Canberra is another planned city (like the City of Adelaide) which was selected as a site for a new capital in 1908 – a compromise between the “giants” of Melbourne and Sydney (Lewis 2006). It was officially named in 1913 and from then grew to fulfil Walter Burley Griffin’s planned city ‘wheel and spoke’ design with the outer area districts of the city being built out after in the early 1900s, throughout the last century and even recently with the commencement of the District of Molongo Valley in 2010. These latter district developments did not follow the original Canberra Central geometric design.
In 2014, the preliminary population of the ACT was 386,000, an increase of 28,779 from the 2011 Census.
On the population density map, a few areas in the Canberra Central district stand out. On the south side of Lake Burley Griffin, a pocket of SA1s in Kingston, a wedge between Wentworth Avenue and Canberra Avenue has a higher proportion of high density dwellings (namely apartments) which makes the area stand out in terms of population density (3,511 persons at a population density of 5,615 persons per km2. Quite different to the surrounding areas of stand alone houses and some semi-attached houses which have population densities of 800-1,200 persons per km2.
North of the lake, along the north/south Northbourne Avenue corridor – several SA1s with apartment and older brick flat buildings also have population densities higher than the surroundings.
The District of Gungahlin, seen in the north-most segment of the population density map, displays some of the highest densities even though most of the SA1s up here are composed of stand alone houses at a density of around 10-13 dwellings per hectare.
Southwest and across the A25 of Gunghalin, the District of Belconnen, built in the 1960s also stands out on the map although with lower population and dwelling densities. When examined on an aerial photo map, these densities are lower due to the nature of suburb design – more green spaces and non-populated land, thus decreasing the population densities.
The new suburb of Casey does not stand out on the density map yet as the 2011 population of the suburb is approximately 1,462 – around 558 persons per km2. By 2013 however, the development of greenfield estates increases the population to approximately 2,881 based in 2013 preliminary SA1 results (note – 2014 preliminary ERP figures indicate a population of 3,813 for the area, this would be a density of 1,454 persons per km2 – a near threefold increase on 2011.
The (even newer) suburb of Moncrieff in the District of Gungahlin currently has no completed/occupied dwellings (based on March 2015 aerial imagery) but is expected to accommodate up to 1,800 residential dwellings. Based on the current earthworks footprint, this could be a density of 2,450-2,540 persons per km2 – similar to that of Cologne in France or Rotterdam in the Netherlands (link).
The population densities in the 1960s-1970s suburbs of Weston Creek and Tuggeranong (south of the centre) display similar population density and layout characteristics as other suburbs in the ACT which were built around that era with a dwelling density of around 8-10 dwellings per hectare – most are stand alone houses with some areas being higher in density due to the presence of multi storey flat buildings. Overall, these older suburbs tend to have slightly larger residential land parcels and a higher mix of residential areas with green space pockets, thus exhibiting lower population densities whereas the recent and newly emerging suburbs have a more mutually exclusive zoning design style of areas/SA1s with a higher residential land development saturation along areas specifically designed as distinct green space allocation – coupled with smaller parcels, the densities of dwellings in these new areas are around 10-12 dwellings per hectare.
Population densities of Australian capital cities – Adelaide, Perth and Brisbane
BY .ID NENAD – TEAM FORECAST · JUNE 9, 2015
In the previous blog, I described in more detail as to why population density analysis is important. This entry continues on from that and describes the population densities in Greater Adelaide, Greater Perth and Greater Brisbane.
Greater Adelaide
Greater Adelaide 2011 population density (per km2) by SA1 geography
Colonel William Light’s South Australian capital of Adelaide has grown from a planned vision to a state capital with an estimated population of 1,304,600 (in 2014, Greater Adelaide).
Compared to the visually towering 3D maps of Sydney and Melbourne, which will be discussed in the next blog, Adelaide actually looks quite neat with no extreme clusters of highly dense SA1s soaring over others. This may suggest that Greater Adelaide’s population density would be quite low but when examined closely, the population density of 400 persons per km2 is actually higher than that of Greater Sydney – namely due to Greater Sydney having large areas of very low population to the west.
The most dense SA1s are not just located in the City of Adelaide, as one might expect. Two SA1s, composed largely of apartment buildings in the City of Adelaide’s “South East Corner” have a combined population of 1,163 and a population density of 7,753 persons per km2.
The City of Adelaide’s population density as a whole is 1,296 persons per km2 which is similar to Washington, San Diego or Portland in the United States of America. Without the parklands, however, Adelaide’s population density is quite high at 3,489 persons per km2, comparable to that of Durban (South Africa) or Vienna in Austria. If we look at our Community Profile, these densities can be explained by looking at dwelling types which show that in 2011, 87% of residents lived in medium or high density dwellings, with the number of high density dwellings increasing by 1,663 from 2006 to 2011 (from 31% to 41% of all private dwellings in the City of Adelaide).
Other areas of Greater Adelaide which illustrate relatively high population densities are west of the City of Adelaide and include the suburbs of Largs Bay and Ethelton (in the City Port Adelaide), Semaphore Park and Grange-Henley Park (in the City of Charles Sturt) and the southern coastal strip of Glenelg, Sommerton Park and North Brighton in the City of Holdfast Bay.
Greater Perth
Greater Perth 2011 population density (per km2) by SA1 geography
Three of Greater Perth’s five most dense SA1s are located in the middle of East Perth, in a block bounded by Hay Street and Wellington Street which has a concentration of high density dwellings and a population density of over 10,000 people per km2. Our community profile for the small area of Perth shows that 94.3% of all dwellings in this small area are classified as high density.
Two other SA1s with (usually resident) population densities of >10,000 people per km2 are located south of the Swan River in Victoria Park (again in an SA1 dominated by apartment buildings and multi-storey flats) and in Wembley, where several apartment buildings which comprise the “Moondyne Gardens” with a 2011 population of 627 equate a density of 12,870 people per km2 given that the SA1 footprint is only 0.048 km2 in size (48,716 m2).
The population density map of Greater Perth hugs the coast predominantly to the north of the Swan River Inlet with Freemantle immediately to the south of the inlet and the “satellite” footprint of Rockingham visible further to the south (which has a few surprisingly high density SA1s in Port Kennedy, namely around an aged care facility. Mandurah is also visible at the bottom of the map by the Peel Inlet.
To the north of the contiguous Greater Perth corridor is a separate segment of moderately dense SA1s which stand out on the map are Mindarie, Clarkson, Quinns Rocks and Butler. Inland to the east are Kalamunda, Forrestfield, High Wycombe and Midland, to name a few areas.
Greater Brisbane
Greater Brisbane 2011 population density (per km2) by SA1 geography
The capital city of the maroon state looks quite impressive on a 3D population density map. Peripheral/suburban detached houses become more dense dwelling types as you travel further towards the city centre with a classic pyramid-type 3D profile of population density becoming higher around Fairfield, Greenslopes and Hawthorne (on the southern banks of the Brisbane River) and Toowong, Paddington, Spring Hill, St. Lucia and Fortitude Valley north of the river, to name a few.
The population density in Brisbane’s CBD is approximately 4,800 persons per km2, similar to that of Barcelona. The densest SA1 in between Spring Hill and Fortitude Valley has a density of 64,125 persons per km2 due to it being high density dwellings (apartments) on an area of only 0.007 km2 (7,000 m2).
Population densities seem to be almost radially symmetrical north and south of the CBD, with a mix of apartments, medium density townhouse/flat dwelling types. There are obvious restrictions to the east of the CBD, past Ascot with the airport and port inhabiting that part of the city.
South of the Port of Brisbane, the suburbs of Wynum and Manly have higher density populations than their surroundings and even further south along the coast and predominantly to the east of Redland Bay Road are Victoria Point and Redland Bay with a combined Census 2011 population of around 28,000 (2013 = 29,209, based on SA1s). There is an interesting “block” of four SA1s inland (west) of Redland Bay which is a relatively ‘normal’ subdivision of stand alone houses (10-12 dwellings per hectare density). They stand out because most of the SA1 coverage is dwellings and roads whereas some of the lower density ones around them also include segments of bush/forest hence appear to have low population densities. This is a good example of how micro-level planning of suburban layouts/estate masterplans can influence population densities by simply including/excluding segments of green space.
North of the outer suburbs of Brisbane (Brighton, Sandgate, Deagon, Bracken Bridge), the relatively densely populated settlement on the peninsula illustrates Redcliffe (Moreton Bay Regional Council), with a 2011 Census population of approximately 50,835 (2013 SA1 usually resident population = 51,847), with an average density of 2,018 per km2 (similar to New York City, USA).
Logan City stretches south in a continuous urban corridor from Brisbane down to Mount Warren Park which borders Yatala, just outside the Greater Brisbane boundary.
West of the City of Brisbane, along the river – Jamboree Heights and Forest Lake/Durack have several densely populated SA1s which are interestingly mainly stand alone houses even though the average population density in those suburbs is 2,835 persons per km2 – comparable to Dusseldorf in Germany or Brasilia in Brazil. Again interestingly, the entire central area of Ipswich (Ipswich, Raceview, Brasall), even when a few of the larger, less residentially zoned SA1s are excluded, only has an average population density of 1,226 per km2 – less than half the density of those two suburbs mentioned above.
Population densities of Australian Capital Cities – Melbourne and Sydney
BY .ID NENAD – TEAM FORECAST · JUNE 16, 2015
In part 1 and part 2 , I looked at the greater capital cities in order from smallest to largest with the two remaining ones being the heavyweights – Melbourne and Sydney.
Greater Melbourne
Greater Melbourne 2011 population density (per km2) by SA1 geography
Victoria’s sprawling capital of Melbourne may not have the largest “Greater Capital Cities Statistical Area” footprint (that award goes to Greater Brisbane with a footprint of 1,585,000ha/15,850 sq.km) but within the 998,500 hectare/9,985 sq.km footprint lies a population of 4,400,300 (2014p), second only to Greater Sydney’s 4,840,600.
It is amazing how large a part geography/topography can play in dictating the type of growth a city exhibits. Sydney, more hilly and constrained by coastal boundaries means that central high density growth is more intense and greenfield growth is forced to occur only in areas where geography and land availability allows for this – the outer west whereas in Melbourne, geography is not as much a constraint for outer growth as is planning and strategic limitations/guidance. By our classification, only 40% of new housing development between 2006 and 2011 was in what we called the ‘outer suburbs’ of Sydney. This compares with a figure of 57% in Melbourne – as explained in further detail in our ebook titled “Predicting the Australian growth hot spots“.
Inner Melbourne, although not as densely populated as Sydney, still has several areas which display anomaly-type population densities when compared to the rest of the central city. For example, in South Melbourne and Port Melbourne – several blocks (bounded by four SA1s) consisting of mainly apartment buildings have a population of over 2,600 persons and a density of 17,860 persons per km2 – the rest of Port Melbourne, Albert Park, South Melbourne and extending southeast to Middle Park have consistently high densities of 2,800-6,500 persons per km2 (comparable to the densities of the entire cities of Dublin, Ireland or Rio de Janeiro, Brazil). Collectively, the SA1s in these suburbs had a 2011 population density mean of 5,850 persons per km2 – slightly higher than the population density of the city of Athens, Greece and slightly lower than that of Guadalajara, Mexico.
A coastal population density ‘spine’ is visible on the map as it follows the shoreline of Port Phillip from the mentioned suburbs of St. Kilda, down part Beaumaris, Chelsea, Seaford eventually reaching and heading inland near Frankston. Further south from here, Mornington is also visible as a relatively developed settlement with a population density of approximately 1,700 in the main township area – similar to the density of another seaside part of the world popular for its sand and sea – Miami, USA.
Other inner east and southeast suburbs such as South Yarra, Prahran, Windsor, St Kilda, down to Armadale and Caufield in the south and Richmond, Abbotsford, Hawthorn and Kew in the east display similar population densities as other established parts of Melbourne – the dwelling type mix in these suburbs has changed over time from stand alone or semi attached Victorian villas, to slightly more dense townhouses and flats/apartments and nowadays to modern higher density apartment buildings, near existing transport corridors which all amount to higher population densities.
In the Melbourne CBD as well as south of the Yarra River in Southbank and north of the CBD, in Carlton and Fitzroy, – the “spikes” of very high population densities are a result of additions of large, high-rise apartment buildings over time which in certain cases have a population of over 600 in an SA1 the size of only one apartment building (albeit a building with over 300 apartments). Many of these high density SA1s illustrate very high increases in population (and therefore pop. density) as high-rises are built and quickly populated. One four-building block of SA1s in Southbank has a population of 3,039 (661 ten years ago) and a population density of 161,164 persons per km2 (35,159 ten years ago, almost a five-fold increase).
While I was writing these blogs, an article in The Age titled “A Forrest of towers: booming precinct goes from hundreds to thousands in decade” caught my attention as it discussed what I was describing here – large increases in population (as a result of high-rise apartment development) in certain parts of central Melbourne with an emphasis on the growing concern that development and growth in these areas may be outpacing the improvement of infrastructure such as public transport accessibility/capacity or footpaths.
A few blocks of high-density developments in North Melbourne, Collingwood and West Richmond also appear on the 3D map – some resulting from high density developments from the late 1990s/early 2000s, others (e.g. North Melbourne) mid-2000s developments which have “densified” some parts of these suburbs (e.g. Carlton, Fitzroy, Collingwood) and several (some already mentioned) developments in Southbank and South Wharf, developing in the late 2000s and increasing population densities in the area.
Most inner suburbs and middle suburbs of Melbourne illustrate similar population densities with diverse mixes of dwelling types in many LGAs. For example the City of Moreland has an increasing proportion of high density dwelling stock (see here) as is the case in other increasingly densifying LGAs such as Maribyrnong City (to the west of the CBD) or the City of Stonnington (east of the CBD) – all increasing in dwelling and therefore population density over time with the forecasts expecting these trends to continue in the inner and middle suburbs/LGAs of Melbourne.
As far as outer, greenfield growth areas are concerned – we can see northern pockets of population density in the Cities of Hume and Whittlesea – areas which have experienced a combined population increase of 76,472 in the 2001-2011 period. In a decade’s time, as greenfield development continues in these LGAs – the combined population growth for the Cities of Hume and Whittlesea is forecast to be 132,190, a change in population distribution patterns that will be clearly reflected on maps such as these.
In the east, the City of Casey can currently be seen on the map (far east of the map). It is expected to continue to grow at a steady average annual rate of 2.41% out to 2041 (almost doubling in population from 2011 to 2041). Even further east, the Cardinia Shire will change the landscape of Melbourne’s population density even more with continuing greenfield development and land availability resulting in large population increases.
In the west, the existing areas of mixed population densities such as Brimbank, Maribyrnong and Moonee Valley will in the future extend out towards Melton as greenfield development towards the west increases and along with the existing growth in the City of Wyndham (southwest section on the map), these areas will become the largest growth fronts of urban sprawl and greenfield development in Greater Melbourne.
Greater Sydney
Greater Sydney 2011 population density (per km2) by SA1 geography
Sydney is Australia’s most densely populated capital city. The 3D map with extruded densities speaks for itself.
The 2011 SA1 based statistics indicate the population of Greater Sydney to be 4,608,949 and the 2014 preliminary estimated resident population to be 4,840,600 (source). The population density of Greater Sydney, based on the population density figures of the 10,842 SA1s in the area is 390 persons per km2
Just within the central Sydney suburbs of Ultimo, Pyrmont, Surry Hills and Potts Point – there are 184 SA1s with a population density higher than 10,000 persons per km2. Of those, 89 have a density higher than 20,000 persons per km2 and five with densities of over 100,000 persons per km2 – those are all small SA1s which in most cases cover just the footprint of the high-rise apartment building/s with high populations (~300-2,000 persons). I wouldn’t be surprised if SA1 11703133712 (ABS 11-digit SA-1 code) was split up into two or three smaller units by the ABS in the future as the current population of the area (which encompasses a few apartment buildings) of approximately 2,199 in 2013 (2,156 at the time of the last Census) is the highest by far of all SA1s in Greater Sydney.
What else does the 3D map tell us, other than the fact that inner Sydney is a very densely populated place? North of “the bridge” for example, there are several areas along the M1 corridor which are highly populated areas – commercial/retail/residential activity centres such as Chatswood and St. Leonards in the City of Willoughby and further south, closer to the area zoned “Mixed use” around Milsons Point in North Sydney – with high rise apartment buildings wedged between Luna Park and the M1. Even the suburb of Artarmon has a few blocks of densely populated SA1s which stand out from the surroundings which tend to be mainly low-medium density stand alone housing or 3-5 storey flats.
On a macro scale, most of Greater Sydney, out to Parramatta and Liverpool maintains a relatively high density of population – roughly around 4,300 persons per km2 which can again be compared to the population densities of Stockholm in Sweden or Warsaw in Poland (link). The western urban corridor stretching from Blacktown, through to Penrith is clearly visible on the map, surrounded by large, low pop. density areas. The western-most cluster of population is Blaxland while to the south of Liverpool is the City of Campbelltown which weaves around either side of the Hume Motorway (M31).
North of the Parramatta River, the population density of places decreases, with Ryde and Hornsby having relatively low densities compared to their southern neighbours although there are a couple of exceptions in activity centres such as Eastwood (in Ryde) and the central Hornsby corridor along Pacific Highway.
Sydney’s famous beaches are also densely populated places – from Coogee up to North Manly and Dee-Why, the density of all SA1s just under 3,650 persons per km2 (roughly the population density of Riyadh in Saudi Arabia – link). Once you escape this hustle and bustle and get further north to Newport, Avalon Beach or Palm Beach – the urban footprint is still visible on the map but is lower than the southern beach areas.
The northern population clusters visible on the map, over the Hawksbury River are the City of Gosford, with an estimated population of 171,992 (in 2014) and the Wyong Shire suburbs of Berkley Vale, Killarney Vale and Long Jetty-Blue Bay, which hug Tuggerah Lake with a population of around 49,500 (density of approximately 2,160 persons per km2).
Factors which affect population density are physical and anthropogenic; Physical limitations which may increase/decrease or direct certain patterns of population density include geography/topography constraints, climate and accessibility to resources and services/remoteness. Anthropogenic/human factors include political stability – people desire to live in an area which provides security and the ability to prosper, socioeconomic benefits and pull factors – such as cities and parts of cities which provide employment and education opportunities, as well as general attractiveness and desire to live in a city or certain parts of a city due to what it has to offer.
This series of blog articles explored the population density of Australian capital cities and analysed what it is that dictates the population density distributions in these cities. As a population forecaster, I see population density analysis as an important way of maintaining or increasing living standards which currently make many cities in Australia quality places to live in for existing residents and a desirable destination for migrants from within Australia and from abroad.
The post Population densities of Australian capital cities appeared first on Personal Mortgage Brokers for Home Loans in Australia - Smartline.