Suburbanization has become one of the dominant trends in spatial demographics in many parts of the world over the past several decades. As the name suggests, “suburbanization” refers to the rapid growth of suburban areas around major cities due to the spread of residential communities beyond the urban boundaries. This trend became widespread in the U.S. after WWII and was initially associated with the accelerated post-war growth of the economy and wealth of households. Indeed, relocation to suburban areas usually offers greater comfort, a peaceful environment, clean air, and more spacious housing, all of which improved the quality of life of suburban residents. Subsequently, suburbanization found its way to other wealthier countries of Europe and other Western countries that went through similar socio-economic transformations. In later periods, suburbanization emerged as a global phenomenon, experienced to varying degrees by different developed and developing nations. However, in more recent times, the process of suburbanization has begun to disconnect from increased wealth and instead become associated more with the spread of poverty [Hochstenbach and Musterd, 2018].
Due to a centrally planned economy where cities primarily served as hubs for industrial concentration and a rigid system of urban planning control, the suburbanization processes observed in Western countries did not occur in the USSR. However, following the collapse of the USSR, there was a sudden surge in the unrestricted spatial mobility of the population, which led to the emergence of new residential districts of private homes around big cities. This phenomenon can be seen as a manifestation of the adjustment of spatial demographics to the socio-economic realities of the new market system in post-Soviet countries. Since then, the public perception of suburbanization in the post-Soviet space has changed several times due to the highly dynamic and turbulent political and socio-economic developments in post-Soviet countries. In the very first stage, the large-scale relocation of the population to suburban areas was primarily seen as a negative process as it took place during a sharp economic downturn caused by the post-communist transition [Krisjane and Berzins, 2012]. The relocation of people from urban centers to suburban areas, therefore, was seen as a forced measure that people had to do in order to adjust their needs to their dwindling incomes. The social image of suburbanization started to change in the 2000s after more or less successful implementation of transition reforms in most of the post-Soviet states. The free access of banks to western finances and the availability of mortgages have made the relocation of the population to suburban districts an affordable option, thus contributing to the spread of suburbanization. In general, it could be said that currently, most post-Soviet countries are in the process of catching up in terms of suburbanization with countries of Eastern Europe, where it had started a bit earlier than in former Soviet countries.
Gaining a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon of suburbanization necessitates a more in-depth analysis of recent socio-economic developments and their specific geographic impacts in each country. First of all, some characteristics of the spatial demographics in Kazakhstan have displayed remarkably dynamic patterns, exerting significant influence on the process of suburbanization. Notably, the suburbanization process in Kazakhstan aligns with substantial changes in the size distribution of urban settlements that took place in the country following the independence. In particular, there has been a clear shift towards the enlargement of bigger cities and the contraction of smaller towns and urban settlements. All these changes were accompanied by significant population loss in the 1990s caused by the exodus of non-autochthonous ethnic minorities who mostly lived in cities. In fact, among all former Soviet states, Kazakhstan has had by far the largest population decline following the collapse of the Soviet Union. For instance, during 1990-2000 its population dropped by 8.9% primarily due to the exodus of ethnic minorities [Rowland, 2001]. Over two-thirds of the emigration in this period occurred due to the decline of urban settlements, especially smaller towns, which led to a realignment of the hierarchy and quantity of urban settlements. In this context, it was primarily the expansion of larger urban cities that facilitated the growth of suburban areas around major metropolitan centers. For instance, from 1989 to 2021, the share of the population in Kazakhstan living in cities with a population over 1 million has jumped from 0 to 21.4% [Citypopulation.de, 2023]. It is the five largest cities (Almaty, Astana, Shymkent, Karagandy and Aktobe) that account for the lion’s share of the suburbanization in the country accumulating suburban population around themselves. It could be said that these five major cities account for around 90% of the total suburban population of Kazakhstan [Citypopulation.de, 2023].
In official statistics of Kazakhstan, it is rather uncommon to consider suburbanization as a concept per se, but rather it goes within the context of agglomerations. The agglomeration is a human settlement area with high population density and an infrastructure of built environment. In other words, the nodal city together with its suburbs is considered as an agglomeration. There are five above-mentioned largest cities of Kazakhstan are also considered to be the country’s five agglomerations, according to official statistical records and legal acts [Bestprofi.com, 2015].
Another significant characteristic of suburbanization in Kazakhstan is its correlation with the decline of remote small urban settlements, coupled with the rapid growth of towns situated near big cities and along major transportation routes [Makhanov, 2023]. In other words, the trend of decline in small towns, which became prevalent in the 1990s, was not uniform throughout the entire country. The decline was particularly pronounced in small urban settlements situated in remote and typically inhospitable areas [Rowland, 1990]. Conversely, towns of similar size and economic profile located near major cities in most cases experienced economic growth, which became particularly noticeable in the 2000s. As a result, there was a significant population shift from remote places to areas around major cities, which has greatly contributed to the growth of suburban areas. Typically, the towns that became suburbs are small urban settlements with a population under 50 thousand people and located at a distance of less than 50km from the nearest major city. In some cases, these suburbs administratively become part of the major nodal city, as happened with tens of small rural and urban settlements as a result of several waves of expansion of the administrative boundaries of Almaty and Shymkent.
In general, the growth of suburban areas in Kazakhstan occurred through two distinct pathways. On one hand, there has been a notable expansion of large cities beyond their administrative boundaries, carried out through the construction of new residential districts on previously vacant lands. On the other hand, settlements situated in close proximity to rapidly growing major cities adjusted to the suburbanization trend and adapted to its functionality, thus assuming suburban characteristics. Estimating the demographics of suburban areas in Kazakhstan, much like in any other country, is rather difficult due to the vague boundary between the core city and its suburbs. The main difference between nodal cities and suburbs lies in their functionality, which cannot be precisely reflected by administrative boundaries. However, very rough calculations based on an evaluation of the functionality of residential areas in large cities in Kazakhstan give a figure ranging between 2.5-3 million people [Citypopulation.de, 2023]. The vast majority of this suburban population is concentrated around the three major cities of Almaty, Shymkent, and Karagandy. Other big cities like Astana and Aktobe also have substantial suburban areas. It is worth mentioning though that the cities of Almaty and Shymkent considerably outperform the rest of the cities in terms of suburban population. This disparity can be attributed to the climatic factor, which is harsher in the case of the capital city, making it more costly and less desirable for people to reside further away from the city center. Another important factor is the difference in natural population growth rates, which tend to be higher in the southern regions of Kazakhstan.
It should be understood that the process of suburbanization reflects profound internal socio-economic and demographic changes within a society, exerting a transformative impact on the country’s spatial geography. First of all, the suburbanization in Kazakhstan is merely a part of a larger post-communist transition. It is one of the most visible manifestations of the change in the role and function of the city from an industrial hub to a market and an important chain in the global economic network. From the structural point of view, we can expect the suburbanization process to foster the stratification of the functions carried out by cities with more residential districts being pushed to the outskirts of major cities while the most essentially important and lucrative business activities will tend to concentrate more in the central districts. Given the fact that the share of the urban population in Kazakhstan is still under 60%, we can expect an acceleration of the urbanization process, in which suburbs will play an increasingly important role in absorbing the incoming rural population.
The process of suburbanization typically yields significant socio-economic impacts, the quality of which is heavily dependent on urban and regional planning policies. In more successful countries suburban areas are usually home to a middle-class population that ensures countries’ political and socio-economic stability. In less successful cases with rigid urban planning systems and mismanaged regional policies, the suburbanization process is often driven by negative factors, such as shortage of affordable housing in city centers, poor infrastructure, and transportation, etc. which obviously become a source of serious socio-economic issues.
References:
Bestprofi.com (2015). Dossier on the draft resolution “On approval of the Long-term plan for the formation and development of the Almaty agglomeration until 2030”. Retrieved from https://bestprofi.com/document/639551673?0§ion=639551675. Accessed on 29.06.2023.
Citypopulation.de (2023). The population of all Kazakh cities, urban and rural settlements with more than 20,000 inhabitants. Retrieved from https://citypopulation.de/en/kazakhstan/cities/. Accessed on 27.06.2023.
Hochstenbach, Cody and Sako, Musterd (2018). Gentrification and the suburbanization of poverty: changing urban geographies through boom and bust periods and bust periods. Urban Gepgraphy, 31 (1): pp. 25-53.
Khorev, Boris (1981). Spatial social organization (Current Problems of Regional Administration and Planning in USSR. Moscow: Mysl Publ.
Krisjane, Zaiga and Maris, Berzins (2012). Post-socialist urban trends: New patterns and motivations for migration in the suburban areas of Rīga, Latvia. Urban Stud. 2012 (49): pp. 289–306.
Makhanov, Kanat (2023). Soviet and post-Soviet transformations of urban system: Case of Kazakhstan from 1979 to 2022. Eurasian Research Journal, 5 (1): pp. 43-58.
Rowland, Richard (1999). Urban population trends in Kazakhstan during the 1990s. Post-Soviet Geography and Economics, 40 (7): pp. 519-552.
Rowland, Richard (2001). Regional population change in Kazakhstan during the 1990s and the impact of nationality population patterns: Results from the recent census of Kazakhstan. Post-Soviet Geography and Economics, 42 (8): pp. 571–614.
Note: The views expressed in this blog are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the Institute’s editorial policy.