The use of more relaxed definitions of urban areas in LAC versus non-LAC countries is most evident from the minimum population threshold criterion, where this is used. Hence, among the countries that use this criterion, the mean threshold is 1,958 people for LAC as compared to 4,799 people globally. This mean difference is not, furthermore, driven by the small island nations of the Caribbean – the mean population threshold for the Caribbean countries is almost identical to that for the Latin American countries. The mean difference between LAC and the rest of the world is also statistically significant at the 10 percent level in a simple one-sided two-sample _t_ test where the alternative hypothesis is that the mean difference is negative (i.e. the mean for LAC is less than that for non-LAC countries). Likewise, a Mann-Whitney U test – which may be more appropriate given the large difference in size between the LAC and non-LAC samples and the absence of normality – rejects the null hypothesis that the LAC and non-LAC samples come from the same underlying population. Hence, on average, LAC countries include smaller settlements in their urban population figures than do non-LAC countries. This may at least partially explain the apparent “overurbanization” that we observe in Latin America.<sup>16</sup>

**Table 1: Types of criteria used by countries in their urban definitions, by region**

||**_Total no._**<br>**_countries_**|<br>**_sp_**<br>**_cri_**|**_No_**<br>**_ecific_**<br>**_teria_**<br>|**_Po_**|**_pulatio_**<br>|**_n Size_**<br>|<br>**_D_**|**_Pop_**<br>**_ensity_**<br>|**_U_**<br>**_serv_**<br>**_chara_**<br>|**_rban_**<br>**_ices or_**<br>**_cteristics_**<br>|**_Eco_**<br>**_ac_**|**_nomic_**<br>**_tivity_**<br>|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|||**n**|**%**|**n**|**%**|**Mean**<br>**value**|**n**|**%**|**N**|**%**|**n**|**%**|
|World|**232**|**99**|**43%**|**103**|**44%**|**4,799**|**11**|**5%**|**30**|**13%**|**16**|**7%**|
|LAC|**40**|**23**|**58%**|**12**|**30%**|**1,958**|**0**|**0%**|**8**|**20%**|**0**|**0%**|
|**Non-island**|20|8|40%|9|45%|1,938|0|0%|7|35%|0|0%|
|**Caribbean**|||||||||||||
|**islands**|20|15|75%|4|20%|2,000|0|0%|1|5%|0|0%|
|Rest ofthe world|**169**|**59**|**35%**|**87**|**51%**|**5,226**|**7**|**4%**|**21**|**12%**|**15**|**9%**|
|**EAP**|36|17|47%|15|42%|5,607|3|8%|6|17%|1|3%|
|**SSA**|48|13|27%|31|65%|5,694|0|0%|7|15%|8|17%|
|**SAR**|7|4|57%|3|43%|5,125|1|14%|2|29%|0|0%|
|**ECA**|54|18|33%|22|41%|4,395|1|2%|3|6%|5|9%|
|**MNA**|21|6|29%|14|67%|5,607|0|0%|3|14%|1|5%|
|**N. America**|3|1|33%|2|67%|1,750|2|67%|0|0%|0|0%|

**Notes:** Criteria are not mutually exclusive, i.e. countries with multiple criteria are listed in more than one of the columns (Source: authors’ analysis of data from UN, 2014)

# _2.2. Approaches to the consistent measurement of urbanization_

A growing recognition of the problems posed for cross-country analyzes of urbanization and development by the use of national definitions of urban areas has led to several proposed

> 16 The fact that LAC countries tend to count smaller settlements as ‘urban’ may be related to the history of human settlement in the region. Unlike, for example, Asia and Europe, which experienced more organic urban growth, most of Latin America’s cities were purposefully and ‘abruptly’ founded by European colonizers (Morse, 1962; World Bank, 2009). Perhaps due to these origins, Latin American countries might consider these settlements to be ‘urban’ regardless of how small or sparsely populated they are, whereas an Asian village that has expanded and densified over time might still be considered ‘rural’. However, this is a speculative hypothesis which would need further investigation to substantiate.

6