The US election provided more evidence of an unnerving global divide

As the votes were tallied last week in the US elections, it became clearer that most Americans inhabit urban islands in a sea of opposing political views.

While the US presidential election gave us an unmistakable winner (despite misinformation campaigns), it also reflected differences between cities and rural areas that are sharper in some states than ever before. The growing share of the US electorate that now lives in places that skew dramatically in a single political direction is more evidence of worsening rural-urban polarization around the world – with potentially unsettling implications for efforts to reset the global economy in a more just and sustainable way.

In the UK, for example, a “politics of resentment” reinforced feelings of neglect among in rural residents relative to their urban peers, and shaped the outcome of the 2016 Brexit vote. (According to official figures, gross disposable household income per head was 73% higher in London than in North East England as of 2018). A similar pattern has emerged in Thailand, where the poverty rate has remained steady in Bangkok while rising everywhere else, and voters in poorer, rural regions have been drawn to a populist political party.

As cities tend to be wealthier, full of people who rely disproportionately on public services like transportation, and generally offer easier access to health care and education, it may not be surprising if they’re at odds with rural areas in terms of priorities and voting patterns.

In North Carolina, a state where Donald Trump touted his support for “our farmers and ranchers” and Joe Biden focused partly on police reform and systemic racism during campaign speeches, rural and urban voters were more divided than ever – prompting one report to suggest that they “might as well be in a different country.” In Durham County, home to the state’s fourth-biggest city and Duke University, Biden won 81% of the vote, while in rural Yadkin country Trump won 80%.

In parts of the world where political differences might be a moot point, disparities between cities and in rural areas have hardened in other ways. Urban areas in general are growing faster than other regions (which may not be growing at all), drawing an ever-sharper contrast between life in crowded cities and emptied countryside.

China, for example, has been home to a dramatic increase in its urban population in recent decades. As more people arrive in cities in search of jobs and other incentives, that can result in the neglect of rural areas. Economists say the country’s rural-urban income gap is only getting worse.

China is far from alone in seeing its population shift dramatically towards urban areas, though its transformation has been particularly striking. Urbanization has also been notable in Brazil, where most population growth has occurred in poorer parts of cities.

The UN has projected that 68% of the global population will be living in cities by the year 2050, up from 55% as of 2018. Working to ensure that these urban areas don’t become even more alien to rural locales should be a post-pandemic priority.

For more context, here are links to further reading and listening from the World Economic Forum’s Strategic Intelligence platform:

On the Strategic Intelligence platform, you can find feeds of expert analysis related to Cities and Urbanization, Values and hundreds of additional topics. You’ll need to register to view.