Confused About The Population

[pete98146]

of Chiang Mai. I read that metro CM is around 250,000 however the province has a tad over 1 million?

I have a customer of mine who has been to CM numerous times and he swears that the metro area is over 1 million people.

[sabaijai]

of Chiang Mai.  I read that metro CM is around 250,000 however the province has a tad over 1 million? 

I have a customer of mine who has been to CM numerous times and he swears that the metro area is over 1 million people.

Your figs are close, your customer is wrong.

According to the last municipal census (2000) the city pop was 167,776. Extrapolated following est. growth rates, the 2005 estimate is 200,952. That's city limits; metropolitan Chiang Mai (including villages nearby, eg Saraphi, Sanphisua, Sansai, etc) has an est. pop. of 250,000.

The 2000 census pegged the provincial pop. at 1,472,403. At present it is estimated the total pop. for the province is 1,763,560.

By ranking nationwide, Chiang Mai is the 5th most populous city, and that's not taking into consideration provincial capitals adjacent to Bangkok, eg, Nonthaburi, Samut Prakan, Pathum Thani, etc. If these are ranked separately - instead of lumped with Bangkok - CM falls to a rank of 7.

sources: World Gazetteer; Chiang Mai municipality; CMU

World Gazetteer

[cmsally]

Those figures are correct I believe.

You have to remember the figures cover only those registered on the tabien bahns as living here. Doesn't cover those coming in to work or study. Although some who come in to work longterm might be on a tabien bahn of someone they know in Chiang mai.

If you were to pick 100 people at random on the street and look at their ID cards, chances are only a very few would have an address in Chiang Mai city area.

[sabaijai]

Those figures are correct I believe.

You have to remember the figures cover only those registered on the tabien bahns as living here. Doesn't cover those coming in to work or study. Although some who come in to work longterm might be on a tabien bahn of someone they know in Chiang mai.

If you were to pick 100 people at random on the street and look at their ID cards, chances are only a very few would have an address in Chiang Mai city area.

That would be the same anywhere in the world, I believe, eg, a census taken in San Francisco or Moscow would count only residents linked to addresses.

[chownah]

Those figures are correct I believe.

You have to remember the figures cover only those registered on the tabien bahns as living here. Doesn't cover those coming in to work or study. Although some who come in to work longterm might be on a tabien bahn of someone they know in Chiang mai.

If you were to pick 100 people at random on the street and look at their ID cards, chances are only a very few would have an address in Chiang Mai city area.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That would be the same anywhere in the world, I believe, eg, a census taken in San Francisco or Moscow would count only residents linked to addresses.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I believe you are wrong about the US. The US census asks who actually resides in a place on a certain date. The US doesn't have ID cards or official address registrations. Census workers even go around and interview homeless people so that they will be counted. One reason that the US has such an accurate census is that money is sometimes allocated by the central gov't based on population so no state or city wants to be undercounted.

Edited July 19, 2005 by chownah

[PeaceBlondie]

I have no idea how many, but 250,000 seems very low for the metro area. Seems like twice that many.

I'm a United States-ian who lived in Mexico during the simultaneous censuses. Neither census counted me. The US census is notorious for undercounting illegal aliens.

[JohnRichard]

Chownah,

You are partially correct about the US Census. It "attempts" to count everyone

where they are on April 1st of the Census year. This in theroy includes the homeless and transients. However the vast bulk of the US Census is done by mail-in forms with only follow-up if the form isn't returned. The bottom line is that the US Census is found to undercount by 12-15% in most urban areas. There is some adjustments made for government funding purposes but the numbers of very suspect. In 2010 it appears that the US Census is going to be conducted by

"sampling" rather than raw count, as every other piece of info. the US Census produces now, besides the raw 10 year count, is done.

The Japanese Census machine is the incredible one. Every single birth/death/immigration/emigration is recorded as it happens and at any moment

you can get a number for exactly how many people are living in Japan and roughly where each one of them is. George Bush is planning on computer chips for all Americans so someday they'll have GPS to do the Census. JOHN

[sabaijai]

I'm a United States-ian who lived in Mexico during the simultaneous censuses.  Neither census counted me.  The US census is notorious for undercounting illegal aliens.

Precisely.

[meadish_sweetball]

I have no idea how many, but 250,000 seems very low for the metro area.  Seems like twice that many.

I'm a United States-ian who lived in Mexico during the simultaneous censuses.  Neither census counted me.  The US census is notorious for undercounting illegal aliens.

Don't forget how many tourists and out-of-towners (not only farang, lots of Thais and other Asians as well) on holiday and shopping sprees there are at any given time of the year in metropolitan Chiang Mai..

Based on where I have lived before myself I think 250,000 sounds like a reasonable estimate.