Urbanization of the Nonfarm Population: A Research Note on the Convergence

Urbanization as conventionally measured by demographers is urban population divided by total population. By thiscriterion rich nations are considerably more urban than poor nations. The purpose of this paper is to compare rich and poor nations on urbanization of the nonfarm population (which is, I argue, a better indicator of theurban Irural distribution of those who are eligible to live in cities). By this criterion rich nations and poor nations are roughly equivalent on urbanization. Cross-national comparisons of urbanization are haunted by two problems. The first is how to get the numbers (the boundary problem): how do we distinguish urban from nonurban residents? The second is how to put the numbers together in constructing measures of urbanization. While the first problem has attracted more attention, the second probably has created more confusion, especially among non-specialists. Consider, for example, the often-heard contention that LDCS (less developed countries) are urbanizing at an unprecedented rate. This con-tention is controversial, not so much from disagreement over the numbers, but from inconsistency in the measures used. "Urbanizing at an unprece-dented rate " has been interpreted variously to mean rate of increase in urban population (dU Idt), rate of increase in percent urban (d%UIdt), and absolute increase in percent urban (d %U). (And the measure one chooses does matter: indeed, the answer to the "unprecedented urbanization" question depends on it, e.g., Davis; Preston.)! Nevertheless these and other measures of urbanization are similar in one respect: all are "crude " measures-crude in the sense that they ignore subpopulation differences in eligibility for urban residence. Far