A Comparative Study of Urbanization across Asian Countries Using the Degree of Urbanization

Leiwen Jiang , Asian Demographic Research Institute at Shanghai University
Yuanfei Li, ADRI at Shanghai University
Yinglei Yang, ADRI at Shanghai University
Kaoru Kakinuma, Shanghai University
Oh Seok Kim, Korea University
Geunho Choi, Korea University
Patrick Devahastin, Mahido University
Ajith Kaliyath, Kerala Institute of Local Administration
Siow Li Lai, Malaya University
Samir KC, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Orlando Olaya Bucaro, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Sunethra Perera, Colombo University
Yuxin Lei, University of Hong Kong
Maria Fernanda Lorenzo-Luaces, ADRI at Shanghai University
Michele Melchiorri, JRC EU Commission
Marcello Schiavina, JRC EU Commission

Asia is home to over half of the world’s urban population, yet its urbanization remains uneven compared with other regions. In 2020, only 47% of Asia’s population lived in areas officially classified as urban, reflecting the continent’s diverse development pathways, from megacities in East Asia to sparsely urbanized regions in South Asia. National definitions of urban areas vary widely, shaped by administrative, statistical, and historical criteria, complicating cross-country comparisons and international monitoring. This study applies the Degree of Urbanization (DoU) framework to harmonize urban classifications across ten Asian countries and territories—China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Hong Kong—using census data, spatial boundaries, and gridded population datasets. The DoU method classifies cells into urban centers, dense towns, semi-dense areas, suburban, village, dispersed rural, and mostly uninhabited zones based on population density, size, and contiguity, enabling functionally consistent spatial measures of urbanization. Results indicate that countries with statistical, density-based definitions, such as Japan, Korea, China, and Hong Kong, show strong alignment between DoU-derived and official urbanization levels, while administrative or hybrid systems, including India, Thailand, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, exhibit substantial discrepancies. Functional urban areas frequently extend beyond official boundaries, particularly in peri-urban corridors and secondary towns. The analysis also reveals diverse settlement morphologies, from compact megacities to polycentric metropolitan networks and dispersed semi-dense towns. By harmonizing urban classification, this study clarifies Asia’s spatial and demographic urban patterns, quantifies definitional biases, and provides evidence to support comparative research and policy planning in rapidly urbanizing contexts.

See extended abstract

 Presented in Session 94. Flash Session Data and Methods in Internal Migration and Urbanization