Is Perth the most remote city in the world?
When preparing my last blog “Perth’s population – a story of economic boom”, I initially made a statement which I’ve long believed, though I forgot where I heard it. That is the “fact” that Perth is the most remote city of more than a million people on Earth. It seems right (certainly a long flight from Sydney or Melbourne and then it’s the Indian Ocean for many thousands of km in the other direction!) It’s been quoted about the place, and I’ve always taken it at face value.
So I checked it. Turns out, it’s false.
This Wikipedia article states that this meme came from Bill Bryson in his book Down Under, but says that it was originally about cities of more than 500,000, which isn’t how I originally heard it, it was definitely a million.
The nearest city of over 1 million (or 500,000) to Perth is Adelaide, which is 2,104km away as the (Adelaide) crow flies.
If you use 1 million population as the criterion, the most remote city in the world is actually Auckland, New Zealand. Auckland is 2,153km from Sydney, and with no other million cities in New Zealand, Sydney is the closest to Auckland. This is 49km further than Adelaide to Perth.
If you use 500,000 people as the criterion, which the original statement apparently did, then Honolulu, population 953,000 in the 2010 Census wins hands-down, having about three-quarters of the population of Hawaii and being 3,841km from San Francisco the closest large city. Not only that, Honolulu’s population is rapidly growing towards the 1 million mark, and then there can be no argument.
Maybe Bill Bryson was referring to road distance, in which case it’s about 2,600km from Adelaide to Perth. But in that case, it’s hardly fair to Honolulu or Auckland which you can’t drive to from the next equivalent size city.
Maybe it’s all about a feeling of remoteness? Certainly Perth feels more remote than Auckland, which has many other significant sized centres in New Zealand within a few hundred km, while most of the other centres in WA require a flight to reach from Perth, or a very very long drive.
As always, definitions of these things are tricky – while these sort of demographic statements can ring true, it doesn’t mean they’re always correct – anyway I won’t be using that particular meme again!
Learn more about the City of Perth’s population. You may also like to visit us at id.com.au where you can access our demographic resource centre for access to information about other places in Australia and New Zealand .
If you would like to learn more about the population of Perth and how it is changing, download our new eBook, Western Australia: Is it all doom and gloom after the boom?
Mythbusting – love it!
I have to admit, I’ve always thought it was a strange claim, and assumed it was related to remoteness due to the large size of the Australian land mass.
Back in the days before Perth had a population exceeding 1 million, it used to be said that it was the most isolated/remote capital city. There was no mention of population. I remember hearing this back in the late ’70s or early ’80s.
So it’s obviously been around for a while then – But Honolulu would still have qualified on that score, as the state capital of Hawaii in the USA.
Similar to Anthony’s point, perhaps it may have been before Auckland’s population reached a million. Hence the most remote city of over a million people would have been Perth till Auckland’s population reached that mark. However, since most people in Australia remembered that fact, no one bothered to update their info. Much like the tag line of Melbourne being the world’s ‘most livable city’. It’s oft repeated but not always reflected in recent surveys.
Good thinking – Perth’s population hit 1 million in the late 1970s, while Auckland didn’t get there until about 1993, so it could’ve been at that time. Would’ve been splitting hairs though (but then Auckland’s only slightly more remote than Perth anyway).
Interesting statistics.
More can be made from this topic.
For example, let’s see what major countries can be reached from the respective cities in question by air to further qualify the most remote city status.
Perth can reach:
Indonesia 3-4hours.
Singapore-5hours
Most large S.E. Asian cities within 6 hours.
Africa 10-11 hours.
The middle East 10-11hours.
Most cities on the East coast of Australia within 4.5-5.5 hours.Shorter to Adelaide.
When I look at this, and look at where you can reach from Auckland within these times, I have to say the Auckland would have to be far more remote than Perth.
I would conclude that Peth is the most remote Australian city from other capital cities, but I don’t think the “most remote city” in the world is correct.
Hang on Glenn, according to Wikipedia, Honolulu has a 2014 population of 350,000. Does that throw a spanner in the works? Where did you get the figure of 953,000?
The difference is between the City Limits population and the metropolitan area population. Most US Cities quote their municipal population rather than the greater urban area. The equivalent would be saying that the City of Sydney has a population of 205,000 rather than about 5 million.
The Wikipedia entry here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honolulu
shows the population of the City and the combined urban area – combined urban area is 953,000.
I’ve always known it to be the most isolated Capitol city in the world not just city so Perth is the most isolated Capitol city
Hi Brendan – Perth is the capital of the state of Western Australia, but Honolulu is the capital of the US state of Hawaii, so even by this measure Perth does not take this title.
The word I used to hear was “isolated” not “remote”. Though similar, isolated refers to more than just distance by sea, road or air, but also to connectedness to the world around it. Maybe Honolulu wins, but it’s more than just miles.
A quick follow up: Auckland doesn’t count because the capital city (though smaller) is Wellington nearby.
It is, but the criterion was population size, not seat of government.
If we reduce the population requirement to 100,000 though, Perth DOES become the most isolated city. Honolulu and Auckland have at least moderate sized nearby cities, Perth has nothing.
Ryan has a point – and only Glenn is focussed solely on numbers – must be a habit.
Maybe now consider Perth has the highest % of Brits of any city outside of the UK.
Distance is a good criteria when considering parameters. In my mind though, in the era of air travel connectedness might be a larger factor. Looking at the number of passengers served:
Perth airport: 13,691,611
Auckland airport: 20,530,048
Honolulu airport: 19,950,125
Note: I’m not being as diligent – just picking the most recent number I could find. A more accurate indicator of remoteness might be the number of *international* passengers only.
It’s the most isolated Capital City from another captial city in the world. Population has nothing to do with it… It’s “capital city”.
So Wellington is near Auckland… Honolulu is near other capitals in the Pacific.
Perths nearest capitals are Adelaide, Dilli, etc etc.
So by capital, you’re meaning state or regional capital presumably. Perth is the capital of Western Australia – If there is a criterion on this being the most remote CAPITAL city, I’d think that would usually apply to national capitals. If you use a state capital or regional administrative capital you could keep going down to smaller areas, where do you draw the line on what is actually a capital?
Anyway, however, if you’re equating Perth to Honolulu, both being state capitals – OK – but I think you’ll find that the latter is further from other capitals in the Pacific than it looks. Just googling a few – it’s over 3,000km from Apia (Samoa), Pape’ete (French Polynesia), Tarawa (Kiribati), which are all greater than the Perth-Adelaide distance.
Learnt a bit about capital cities whilst working on a recent project. Funny how people gravitate to country capitals but care less about country state capitals. Maybe it’s different in Oz. In Europe we tend to look at places on a map in Europe for example and tick places off out lists ( Aussies do the same of course as a spell in Hammersmith London attested )
In any case, having read this post I think I’ll revamp the project and add a 12000 mile option.
I’d add a link but don’t want to look like a spammer!
American just moved to Australia here – I had always heard that it was the most remote metropolis on the planet, defined by a massive city with more than a million residents (metropolis) without any other major city (more than 100,000) close by.
Although that seems like an oddly specific number to “make” Perth hold the top spot, I had always understood it as such. Of all the cities with more than a million residents, there is no other city as far away from any other smaller, regional city as Perth – let alone another metropolis.
That’s an interesting and very specialised definition! If you set the numbers right I’m sure you could make it work! That would preclude Auckland as it has cities of more than 100k nearby in New Zealand, and Honolulu I don’t think is quite a million.
The definition may not work for long for Perth though, as the Greater Bunbury area approaches 100,000 people.
Thanks for your input!