Why do large cities tend to attract more migrants than smaller towns? Discuss in the light of conditions in developing countries.

Introduction

Across the developing world, migration streams converge on the largest cities — Mumbai, Dhaka, Lagos, Manila — rather than spreading across the urban hierarchy. This is a rational response to how opportunity is spatially distributed.

Why Large Cities Attract More Migrants

• Agglomeration economies: metros concentrate industry, services and construction, offering dense and diverse labour markets where some work is almost always available.
• Higher expected income: as the Harris–Todaro model explains, migrants weigh urban wages against the probability of finding work; even informal metro earnings usually beat rural and small-town alternatives.
• Large informal sector: street vending, domestic work, construction and gig platforms absorb unskilled newcomers without credentials — an entry ladder smaller towns cannot offer.
• Superior amenities: better schools, hospitals, colleges and the perceived promise of mobility — the 'bright lights' effect — pull aspirational youth.
• Network effects: established kin and village networks provide housing, job information and shock insurance, making chain migration to the same metros self-reinforcing.
• Urban primacy: in developing countries, colonial port-capitals and post-independence investment concentrated infrastructure in one or two primate cities, while intermediate towns — the 'missing middle' — offer few jobs, weak credit and poor connectivity.

Conclusion

Migrants thus respond rationally to a lopsided spatial economy. Strengthening intermediate cities through investment, connectivity and urban-mission funding is the durable way to rebalance these flows.