Brazil and the USA: A Comparative Look at Urban Life

 

National economies are propelled by cities

These spaces are attractive to the most productive firms and the most talented workers due to the agglomeration advantages they generate, which are the primary cause for their existence. This environment is conducive to growth and development. Cities promote economic advancement by facilitating the sharing, matching, and learning of individuals and businesses through their high density (DURANTON; PUGA, 2004). Furthermore, Marshall (1890) asserted that ideas are "in the air," which implies that the mere concentration of individuals could result in novel outcomes. The functional role of each city in an urban system is contingent upon its ability to provide more specialized products and services to the surrounding areas (LÖSCH, 1964; CHRISTALLER, 1966). Given that population development enhances the capacity to generate economies of agglomeration and market potential, the centrality level of cities is also correlated with population size, which could potentially influence their role in the urban network. Additionally, higher welfare levels and development are the result of improved access to a broader spectrum of goods and services, as utility values diversity.

The demographics of a particular location are also significantly influenced by the interregional labor division and occupational structure. Fertility rates are demonstrated to be influenced by the proportion of women employed in nondomestic and nonagricultural sectors (TEITELBAUM, 2014). Furthermore, occupational structure has a substantial impact on regional age-standardized mortality rates (KIBELE, 2012). Nevertheless, the most critical aspect of population dynamics and occupational structure is the impact it has on migration differentials and selectivity, as well as other individual factors such as educational level, age, and gender (DE JONG; GARDNER, 2013). Barufi (2015) demonstrates that locational decisions are significantly influenced by sectoral composition in addition to city size. In light of the occupational structure, the static and dynamic effects of agglomeration economies are exacerbated by a workforce selection process. A critical factor in the selection of skilled laborers is the initial and return migrations (BARUFI, 2015). Therefore, it is crucial to ascertain the population development and dynamics of a specific locality by examining its occupational structure.

Nevertheless, the advantages associated with specialization (MARSHALL, 1898) and/or diversification (JACOBS, 1969)

are not the sole consequences of growth in size. The agglomeration benefits of cities can be stifled by the dynamics of unplanned urban expansion, which generates issues such as pollution, congestion, segregation, encroachment, and other unintended consequences. These inefficiencies are more likely to increase as cities grow, particularly if urbanization is not effectively managed and cities fail to provide essential public infrastructure. Alternatively, "urbanization's transformative force can be diminished and cities may become victims of their own success" (UNITED NATIONS, 2016, p. 32). It has become increasingly important to comprehend the function of cities as migration to urban areas increases globally. For instance, in the OECD countries, two-thirds of the population resides in cities with a population of 50,000 or more (OECD, 2014). The United Nations Report (2016) predicts that the global urban population will reach approximately 66% by 2050, with the most rapid urbanization occurring in underdeveloped or developing countries, which are those with a distinct development pattern from the United States and Western Europe. Chauvin et al. (2017) have noted that the rapid expansion of these localities has resulted in a knowledge mismatch between urban economists and urban theory, which is primarily concentrated on the cities of the "wealthy west."

These facts underscore the importance of conducting cross-country comparisons to investigate and comprehend the distinctions and similarities between cities in wealthy and impoverished nations.One The context of both the importing and exporting locations is disregarded when successful urban or economic strategies are merely imported into developing country cities. Comparative research serves as a framework for the development of policies that prioritize the external policies that are most appropriate for the context of the cities. Consequently, the primary objective of this paper is to compare the urban agglomerations of Brazil and the United States of America (USA) by analyzing occupational composition and correlating it with city size in order to identify the similarities and differences in the urban structure of both countries. The scarcity of empirical research that endeavors to comprehend cross-national variation between cities and their position in the urban hierarchy beyond simple city-size approaches persists, despite the increasing significance of this topic in urban economics.Two

The comparison between the United States and Brazil is significant because it enables us to compare the occupational structure of two countries with significantly differing levels of development, but a relatively similar geographic and populational structure. Our hypothesis is that the occupational and city-size structure of the two will correspond to the disparity in development levels, as development is intricately linked to the provision of modern and diverse products and services. We anticipate that the large urban agglomerations in both countries will exhibit more similar occupation structures due to regional development inequalities. Conversely, smaller cities are likely to exhibit very distinct patterns, with a greater degree of homogeneity in the United States than in Brazil. The findings of this investigation corroborate our initial hypothesis; however, they demonstrate that the occupational structures of the two nations are significantly more disparate than we had anticipated.

The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 illustrates

the feasibility of establishing a comparative base for the occupational employment structure and cities of Brazil and the United States. Section 3 presents the primary findings and discussion in a comparative framework between these two countries, emphasizing the occupational structure, its similarities and differences in relation to human capital and city size. Section 4 concludes with some concluding remarks and identifies potential avenues for further research. Comparative occupational structures in Brazil and the United States The decision to compare the occupational structures of Brazil and the United States in the context of this paper is predicated on the objective of comparing two countries at varying phases of development. Brazil is one of the few developed nations with a population and geographic area that are comparable to Brazil. Indeed, these two nations possess the fourth (USA) and fifth (Brazil) largest land areas in the globe, respectively, and a population size that is relatively comparable. Consequently, this comparison of city structures in developing and developed nations is applicable.The development of an international comparison that employs various data sources presents significant challenges and necessitates critical decisions. Consequently, it is crucial to establish a unified framework that enables the comparison of the occupational structures of the United States and Brazil, in accordance with the objectives of this paper.