Table l shows totl and urban populations with their rates of growth for each of the lO countries from 1950 through prqIeCted levels in the year 2000. The graphs in figure l show the urban population growth and the growing proportion of people livlng in urban areas. These show both the march of urbanization, and the great increase in the urban populations that have occurred and will certainly occur in the coming decade. All of the countries have experienced both total and utban population growth. All have become more urbanizedin the past 40 years. There are, however, three rather distinct patterns.

a. Japan was already predominately urban(50%) in 1950, and reached its current plateau of about 75% by 1980. It is now thoroughly urbanized, and probably will not experlence further changes in this general aggregate level.

b. Korea was predominately rural(79%) in 1950 but has become predominantly urban(72%) by 1990. Its most rapid rate of urban growth occurred in the 1960s and 1970s, When the urban population grew at rates above 5 percent per year. It has now reached the urbanization level of Japan and the woTld's other industrialized nations, and will likely remain at that level. Prqiections to 2000 estimate that it will be over 80 percent urban, Cbut that the annual rate of urban population growth will to Just over l percent

C. All the other countries are experiencing rapid urbamization, but they began from very low levels, usually less than 20 percent, and only Malaysia will reach a level above 50 percent by the end of this decade.

In comparison with the rest of the world's High and Low Income countries*2, Japan has followed the path of the High Income Countries; the other countries except Korea have followed that of the Low Income Countries. Korea stands in between, moving rapidly from the Low to the High condition. This general characterization hoIds for other social and economic measures as well

*2. High income countries are those identified by the World Bank as the OECD and the More Developed Countries. Low Income countries are those below this level in the World Bank rankings.

Table 1
Urbanization and Population Dynamics
in
10 Asian Countries with Comparisons of all High and Low Income Countries

Figure 1a
Urbanization in the
High Income Countries

Figure 1b
Urbanization in Large
Low Income Countries

Figure 1c
Urbanization in the Smaller
Low Income Countries

Tables 2, 3 and 4 provide basic data on the economic and social development of the 10 countries *3. We have chosen a small sample from the many different indicators that could be used, but these tell much of the story of economic and social development in the region. Table 2 focuses on economic conditions. Table 3 uses life expectancy, school enrollment and access to safe water for welfare conditions, and fertility and contraceptive use rates to track changes in population dynamics. Finally, table 4 provides data on housing space available, energy consumption and carbon emissions, which help tell the study of how development is linked to welfare and to environmental stress.

Table 2
Economic Development Indicators
in
10 Asian Countries

Table 2 shows that the countries in this survey range from one of the highest income countries, Japan, to some of the lowest, Nepal, Pakistan, India and China. It is important to note that all have made quite remarkable progress in raising percapita output over the past fewdecades. As in population change they fall into three broad categories, thoughthere is substantial variation in the large group of low income countries. Japan clearly ranks as the highest income with a very high level of percapita output and the of the UNDP's new Human Development Index.*4 Japan also has a large automobile population, one car for every four persons.

The Republic of Korea is Well known as one of the East Asian newIy industrializing countries or NICs. Its perCapita GDP has increased by a fhctor of 5 0and itshuman development index is similar to that of many industrialized countries. ItSautomobile population has grown rapidly and now there is about one car for every 40 of the population.
Among the other "lLow Income Countries" Nepal is by far the poorest, followed by China, India, and Pakistan, though all have made substantial gains in economic development. The countries of southeast Asia have done much better, showing higher levels and rates of economic growth. Malaysla Shows the highest level, fo1lowed by Thailand, ThePhilipplnes and lndonesia.

Table 3
MeaSures of Social development for lO Asian Countries

In measures of welfare or social development, We find the same general pattern, as seen in table 3. All these countries have made mqoradvances in the indicators of social development or well being. All have increased the life expectancy at birth for females(andformaleSasWell).All have increased ftmale primary schoolattendance, reduced totalftr (ility, increased contraceptive preva)ence, and increased the proportion of the urban population that has access to safe drinking water. Again there are three major categories, in which the Low Income category still shows considerable variance.

Japan shows the highest levels of welfare. Its life expectancy is the highest in the world. All of its children, male and female, are in primary school. The demographic transition had already been completed by 1965 (actually by about 1955), when its total fertility was already at 2.0, below replacement level, and it has decreased slightly below that today to 1.5. It does not, however, have a very high level of contraceptive use.

This is because Japan completed its demographic transition before modern contraceptives became available, and thus was led to use abortion as the major technique for fertility limitation. The full range of the modern contraceptive technology is still not widely available in Japan, but safe abortions are widely available, and continue to be used for fertility limitation. Finally, all of its urban population has access to safe drinking water.

Korea began this period substantially behind Japan, but has closed the gap in the ensuing 25 years. It, too, now has high levels of life expectancy and school attendance. The demographic transition has been completed and the total fertility rate is now below replacement level. Unlike Japan, however, this has been achieved almost completely with the use of modern contraceptives, thus its contraceptive prevalence rate (77%) is above that of Japan (56%).

The other countries of the "LowIncome"category show a range of success in achieving social Progress, and the different dimensions of progress are not necessarily closely associated. Malaysia and China lead in female life expectancy, Which is heavily influenced by the infhnt mortality rate. The Philippines, Indonesia and China are ahead in ftmaIe pnmary school attendance. Thailand and China are ahead in total fertility decline and in contraceptive use. Both have completed the demographic transition and are now what can becalled. "contracepting societies. " On all measures, however, Nepal, India and Pakistan show the lowest levels.

Finally, since the city questionnaire dealt with problems of urban pollution, We provide a few statistics on measures relevant to pollution, though data are not generally available on such things as air and water quality, Which are the most salient issues in urban pollution. Table 4 provides the relevant available data. We first include a measure relevant to the housing question posed to the admimistrators. Standard national aggregate data give us an average number of persons per household, and an average number of rooms per household. From these we can calculate a very crude ratio of the average rooms per person. Japan, as expected, has the highest in this sample, with more than one room per person. Korea has just under one, and all the "Low income" countries show about one-quarter to one half a room per person in the household. We then show energy consumption, which is both a measure of wealth and of potential pollution, since most of the energy we consume adds to air pollution. It would be better to have measures of air quality, but these are simply not available for most countries, so we must use energy consumption as a surrogate measure.

Finally we have two interesting measures of net carbon emissions, or the extent to which a country contributes to the global warming potential. The two measures must be taken together, since they tell a complex and interesting story. First we show the net carbon emissions in metric tons per capita. This includes fossil fuel consumption, cement making, deforestation, and CFC emissions. Then we show emissions from fossil fuel consumption alone, again in metric tons per capita. As we shall see, the countries in this sample vary considerably in both the amount of emissions, and in the source of those emissions.

Table 4
Housing and Po11utjon Potentials
for lO Asian Countries

Japan is again Clearly ahead in housing, but also in the pollution activities of energy consumption and carbon emissions. Note that its total carbon equivalent emission is twice the level of its fossil fuel consumpbon. This is due to the heavy consumption of CFCs, Which have a very heavy carbon equivalent as greenhouse gases. If the targels of the Montreal protocols are met, this will reduce CFC emissions completely by the year 2000, and then Japan's contribution to Net Carbon Emissions should decline considerably.

The Korean miracle is clearly evident here. Korea approaches Japan's level of housing availability, and has now surpassed the level of energy consumption that Japan showed in 1965. But Korea contributes less to global carbon emissions, coming in a levels about half those of Japan. Unfortunately, We do not have more direct measures of actuaI water and air pollulion, since these would show Korea to be far more troubled than Japan. In effect, rich countries have greater pollution potentials, but they also have the capital to clean up their pollution.

Among the "Low lncome" countries there are striking similarities and diffcrences. AII have relatively severe housing limitations, but in general Southeast Asia is better off than South Asia. All have increased energy consumption, but China, Malaysla and Thailand lead in the increases. In the difference between net carbon emissions and fossil fuel sources, We can see the heavy lmpact of defbrestation in Indonesia, Malaysia, The Philipplnes and Thailand, and to a lesser extent in India. China and Pakistan have relatively little fbrests and thus contribute little to carbon emissions through defbrestation. Nepal's very low level of development is reflected in its almost non-existent contribution to green house gas emissions through fossil fueI consumption, but it is contributing in other ways, largely through defbrestation.

Overall, then, We have the highly developed Japan, the rapid progress of the Korean "miracle", and the struggle to develop among the lower incomec ountries. We should expect to see some of these differences reflected in both the objective measures and in the administrators' individual assessments of their problems. But the differences should also alert us to the fhct that the perceplion of problems among different urban administrators will have very different objective bases, and thus we may not be able to compare them directly.

*3. The sources of data listed in tabloes 2-4 are as fllows: a)World Bank, World Development Report 1992; b)UNDP, HumanDeveloPment Report 1993; C)World Resources Instite WorId Resources 1992-3; d)World Resources Institute, World Resources 1990/1, divided by UN Population data shown in table 1.

*4. This is a composite that include gross domestic product percaplta, literacy and lifbexpectancy, or a measure of how healthy, Wealthy and wise a country's population is.