Jakarta’s growth reveals its limits

For the first time in half a century, Tokyo is no longer the world’s largest city. Jakarta now wears the crown. According to a new report by the United Nations using updated geospatial methods, the Indonesian capital is home to an estimated forty two million people, making it the most populous urban area on Earth. It has overtaken Tokyo, now ranked third with thirty three million residents, and Dhaka in Bangladesh which holds second place with thirty seven million. Jakarta previously stood at thirty third position in earlier UN lists. Its leap reflects not a sudden demographic surge but a transformation in how cities are defined and measured across countries using consistent spatial data rather than national estimates alone.

The UN now applies a harmonised Degree of Urbanisation methodology. This approach combines satellite imagery with population density to classify urban, town and rural areas consistently worldwide. Earlier rankings relied on national definitions that often differed significantly from one another. Under this uniform approach Jakarta now counts as a much larger urban agglomeration than previously recognised. To illustrate its scale, using the UN’s metropolitan measure it holds roughly three times the population of the New York urban area. That comparison depends strongly on which official boundaries are used but it still conveys the sheer size of Jakarta’s urban footprint and the complexity of planning at such a scale.

The 2025 report confirms a major global shift. In the 1950s only twenty percent of the world’s population lived in cities. Today the figure stands at forty five percent. Projections indicate that two thirds of all global population growth between now and 2050 will take place in urban areas. The number of megacities with more than ten million inhabitants has already quadrupled since 1975 and has now reached thirty three. More than half of them are located in Asia and among the ten most populous today Cairo is the only one outside the continent. The shape of the world is becoming decisively urban and increasingly Asian.

Yet urbanisation is not a guarantee of well-being. Jakarta offers both a symbol of modern growth and a warning of its limits. The city confronts severe congestion, polluted air and strained infrastructure. Much of it is sinking and millions remain vulnerable to floods and earthquakes. Jakarta is expanding faster than its foundations allow. Its challenges will intensify unless major adaptation takes place. As a result the Indonesian government has begun constructing a new capital city called Nusantara on the island of Borneo more than one thousand miles away. The project is scheduled for completion in 2045 although it has already encountered delays. This is not merely relocation but an attempt to rethink the structure of governance, population distribution and economic development using an entirely new physical setting.

Tokyo provides a contrasting lesson. Once the dominant city of the world, it is now slowly shrinking as Japan’s population ages and birth rates fall. Tokyo is expected to drop to seventh position by 2050 with around thirty one million residents. It is not a failing city but an ageing one. It shows that urban policy must prepare for demographic adjustment as well as expansion. A successful urban model is not purely based on growth. It must also offer resilience when population levels stabilise or begin to decline.

The UN highlights the wider stakes of these trends. Seven countries India, Nigeria, Pakistan, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Bangladesh and Ethiopia are projected to add more than five hundred million urban residents between 2025 and 2050. Their success in managing this growth will shape global progress on climate resilience, poverty reduction and the Sustainable Development Goals. Urbanisation will be central to national planning and international cooperation. Yet it cannot be treated only as a demographic fact. It is also a political and economic choice. Cities can develop as engines of inclusion or intensify inequality depending on how they are governed.

One frequent assumption is that the rise of cities means the fading of villages. That conclusion is not supported by evidence. Rural and small town life is not doomed by urban expansion. Instead it is put at risk when public policy and investment fail to support it. If broadband access, transport infrastructure, healthcare, credit and education remain concentrated only in major cities then rural communities will struggle to retain population and opportunity. Yet with investment in digital connectivity, agricultural innovation and local enterprise villages can contribute significantly to national economies. The fate of rural areas depends on policy decisions rather than demographic inevitability. The city does not have to come at the expense of the countryside.

Jakarta and other rapidly growing megacities may dominate international headlines. Yet the deeper question is what defines urban success. A city of forty million people is not inherently more advanced than one of four million. Size alone does not measure quality of life. Success should be defined in terms of liveability, sustainability, access to services and opportunity for citizens across income levels. A megacity built on weak foundations risks becoming a megacrisis. Jakarta therefore serves as a pivotal example that population rank is not a sufficient measure of progress. Infrastructure, planning and inclusion matter more than the raw number of inhabitants.

The next phase of planning must treat city and countryside as interconnected rather than competing spaces. A balanced development model should align land use, transport, education, housing and public health across urban and rural areas. Such coordination may prove essential in tackling both social inequality and climate change. Coordinated investment in digital networks, clean transport, healthcare delivery and local enterprise can build resilience across the entire landscape. National and local governments must design integrated strategies so that progress is widely shared and no region is left behind.

Jakarta’s rise to the top of the global rankings is therefore more than a statistical change. It signals the arrival of an urban century. Humanity is shifting its centre of gravity. Whether that becomes a story of innovation and shared prosperity or one of overcrowding and inequality will depend on how cities are designed and how villages are valued. Urbanisation is not destiny. It is a choice that requires vision and responsibility. Policymakers must build systems in which both megacities and smaller communities can thrive. The future should not be divided between urban and rural but built on connections between them. Jakarta embodies both the opportunities and the challenges ahead. Its ascent should prompt not only amazement but careful action.

The author is a policy commentator focusing on urban development, sustainability and public governance.