Why do countries build new capital cities?

this video is sponsored by Skillshare the first 500 of my viewers to use the link in the description will get a 2 month free trial brazil's capital used to be in rio de janeiro but in 1960 brazil moved its capital here in the middle of nowhere Nigeria's capital used to be in Lagos but in 1991 Nigeria moved its capital here again in the middle of nowhere Australia's de-facto seat of government was in Melbourne but in 1927 Australia moved it to here I think you get the point why did these countries and many others go through the tremendous trouble and expense to build brand-new capital cities on its face it seems sort of crazy but the government's had their reasons stated and unstated so let's just get right into it after some smooshy buildings like I was saying it doesn't seem obvious why a government will want to move its capital from a major city to a place where almost nobody lives but a couple of dozen countries have done it 13 since 1950 and they can't all be crazy or maybe they are but in every case the government of these countries gave a certain rationale for their decision they didn't just sneak out of town without any explanation but what was the logic they used to defend their decision to the public before we can answer that question we need to know what exactly a capital city is I like this definition from an old Journal article a capital is the place where the political authority of a territorial unit is concentrated another word for political authority is power capitals are the physical manifestation of the power of the state now imagine you're a wealthy business owner or really anyone who wants to exert influence over the power of the government proximity is key especially if this is before airplanes and video conferencing for those people having the capital in their city as an advantage and something worth fighting over this was certainly true for three Anglophone countries the United States Canada and Australia and it brings us to our first reason compromise each of these countries were once colonies of England and needed its own non London seat of power in each case elites from rival cities and regions jockey to play host to the new national capital in the u.s. representatives from the north preferred the capital in a major northern city like Philadelphia or New York or a new site in Pennsylvania southern representatives no surprise wanted it in the South the South got the capital in exchange for helping pay off the debts of northern colonies up in Canada the capital of the province of Canada a British colony bounced back and forth between Canada west and Canada east the two parts of the province in a move that is sort of like a mother telling two arguing toddlers that neither one gets to play with a toy Queen Victoria located the capital in between in the small town of Ottawa Australia story is similar to Canada's elites in Sydney and Melbourne both wanted to host the capital but a compromise was reached that will be a new city altogether in between both of them but no further than 100 miles from Sydney Canberra the pride of Australian Capital Territory was the result long-established countries can move their capital to that they generally need a really good reason to do it leaders often make an economic development argument for moving the capital that's the number one reason Brazil moved its capital from Rio de Janeiro to Brasilia in 1960 during the presidential campaign of 1955 who Cellino kubacheck ran on a ticket of fifty years of progress in five with progress primarily meaning economic development when he won he aggressively pursued as economic development goals and this included building a new capital city in the center of Brazil at the time nearly everyone in Brazil lived on the coast and then north and west were considered empty building Brasilia meant incorporating the few people in that region into the national economy and making it easier to exploit the natural resources in the region for economic gain did it work well one study found that the economic impact of Brasilia on Brazilians was basically non-existent except for those living in Brasilia itself not all capitals move for economic reasons sometimes leaders move a capital to bind a nation together this was the reason why several African nations move their capitals why was it so common there for many years Africa was divided among European powers as colonies when the colonies became independent they had to establish a nation in foster feeling of nationhood among its citizens most of Africa's largest cities and capitals are along the coast which was convenient for the colonizers but they're not always the best locations of foster national unity across diverse cultures religions and landscapes these new national governments also in to consolidate power and establish legitimacy sometimes it makes political sense to put the seat of power in the hinterlands where the power of the state is the weakest all of this played out in one of the most recent capital moves in nigeria Lagos was the colonial capital of Nigeria serving the British until independence in 1960 Nigeria has over 250 ethnic groups who speak many different languages the nation is also split in half by Muslims and Christians after independence Lagos continued to grow into a massive metropolis it's now the largest in Africa and one of the fastest growing in the world the federal government felt that the traffic and overcrowding hindered the government's ability to govern and in 1975 the government formed a panel to consider relocating the capital away from Lagos they recommended a new city be built in a central location they said that if the capital is located in a fairly central position this will assist the effective administration of every part of the country as radiating influence of power would be more effective than the current polarized position of Lagos or of any other place similarly tucked away in one corner of the country the panel notice that some of the people in Nigeria felt disconnected from Lagos and that Lagos was controlled by one ethnic group and didn't represent the nation as a whole in 1991 Nigeria's capital was moved from Lagos to a new city Abuja in the centre of the country it was now much more easily accessible for both the Muslim north in the Christian South there is some evidence to suggest that moving the power base of a country out of a country's major city can reduce civil conflict and strife so this reason isn't totally bogus the last couple of reasons on their face at least were meant to help everyone in a country a citizen in Brazil for example may want a stronger economy in a citizen Nigeria may want national unity but not all reasons to move a capital are about what a citizen wants sometimes it's about what a ruler wants and what does a ruler often want to consolidate and hold on to power let's look at Kazakhstan as an example its capital prior to 1997 was in the largest city of Almaty the government under President Nursultan Nazarbayev moved the capital from Almaty to the small city of AK mola in the middle of a semi-arid steppe with no obvious strategic benefit the government's public rationale centred around all MIDI unsuitability as a capital city it was hemmed in by a nearby mountain range making expansion and economic growth difficult Alma D also seemed more connected to the other former Soviet states than the rest of Kazakhstan a change of geography for the capital would solve these problems that was the official rationale at least what was the real rationale President Nazarbayev used the move to remove his rivals and reward supporters the capital move came with a reorganization of government agencies a chancellor and Ezer by up to remove disloyal members of the bureaucratic ranks he further tested loyalty by making people move to the middle of nowhere if they weren't willing to move for him they weren't his true supporters and deserve to be left behind in all MIDI according to his logic furthermore Nazarbayev rewarded allies in the oil and gas industry by giving them lucrative construction contracts to build the city for Nazarbayev Astana wasn't really about national unity or anything like that it was about him holding on to power new capital cities can appeal to power-hungry rulers in another way - it can really inflate their egos politicians love nothing more than to cut ribbons on infrastructure projects like highways dams and schools imagine cutting a ribbon on an entire city filled with buildings meant to be iconic and representative of an entire nation that kind of thing is tempting for rulers it's part of the reason why president kubacheck built Brasilia so fast he could open it during his presidential term similarly President Babangida ensured Abuja would be finished during his term and hey the ego benefits keep paying off brasilia's airport is named after kubacheck and there's a memorial for him in the city as well Astana was straight-up renamed to Nursultan after Nazarbayev in March 2019 as you can imagine there are problems with building a new capital city from scratch when ego is an important reason for doing so speaking as an urban designer plant capital cities are the equivalent of building a Frankenstein's monster instead of letting someone grow organically it's nearly impossible to build a great city from scratch let alone a city filled with oversized monuments and government office buildings and a leader who already prioritized power over a citizens is probably not going to go above and beyond to make sure the new residents have a human-scale inviting city we show Kostas modernist plan for was famous for being bleak and auto oriented for example but there is some hope Washington DC was a planned capital that turned out pretty nice after an initial awkward phase were almost nobody lived there sometimes you just need to grow into a city I guess so there you have it capital cities get moved to random places for reasons such as compromise economic development national unity power consolidation and ego those are reasons though they aren't all good ones but that hasn't stopped other leaders considering capital moves leaders throughout Argentina's history of considered moving the capital from Buenos Aires as recently as 2014 president cristina kirchner floated the idea of moving the capital to Santiago del Estero so world leaders may not have learned their lesson about moving capital cities but you can learn a thing or two over at Skillshare Skillshare has been invaluable to me as I've developed this channel I learned 3d isometric illustration from a Skillshare class taught by DK ng Studios to do some of the awesome animations that have appeared in my last couple of videos if you don't have a specific need for 3d isometric illustration that's understandable and there are 25,000 classes on the platform on topics like business design technology and more you can check out Skillshare for free maybe one of the first 500 to visit the link in the description and if you decide you love it and you probably will Premium Membership is super affordable starting at less than $10 per month so consider supporting the channel and go check it out you

Channel: City Beautiful

Views: 1,417,394

Keywords: city planning, town planning, urban planning, urban design, planned capital cities, astana, almaty, kazakhstan, abuja, nigeria, brasilia, brazil, canberra, australia, ottawa, canada, washington, islamabad, pakistan, lucio costa, Kubitschek, Nazarbayev, Babangida, why did kazakhstan's capital move to almaty, why did brazil build brasilia, why did nigeria build abuja

Id: 5-9BHftRCmk

Length: 10min 43sec (643 seconds)

Published: Thu May 02 2019