Population, territory and sustainable development

43
Rodríguez and Meneses (2011) note that there are a number of factors that stand out when
countries’ official data are compared with measurements based on alternative approaches. Firstly, all of
the countries’ official figures overestimate the urban population, although the use of the cut-off point of
2,000 inhabitants to define rural areas leads to very similar results to official estimates in terms of the
figure for the rural population as a percentage of the total national population. Secondly, the size of the
population in human settlements and territories classified as being between rural and urban areas is
substantial, especially when using the approach defined by Chomitz, Buys and Thomas. Finally, the
percentage of the urban population is also smaller when the approach used by Chomitz, Buys and Thomas
is used.
Other authors (Candia, 2011; Rodríguez and Murillo, 2008) have developed slightly different
versions of this methodology. The gradient that they use combines population density and the level of
employment in agriculture, with the figures for population density being applied directly to digital
population maps derived from population censuses.
Density is therefore calculated on the basis of the next-smallest division after minor
administrative divisions, with these “areas of analysis”; these areas are identified with the help of
microdata and digital census maps. The economic activity variable is incorporated at a lower level, which
is generally the unit used for the collection of census data. At that level, all the small areas in which at
least 35% of the economically active population (EAP) is employed in agriculture are identified. Then,
the units identified on the basis of this criterion are aggregated into areas of analysis. This makes it
possible to determine the percentage of all small areas making up the area of analysis in which at least
35% of the EAP is employed in agriculture.
In the classification obtained using the proposed criterion, population groups residing in highdensity
areas of analysis in which a significant proportion of the population is employed in agricultural
activities are categorized as rural (see table IV.8).
Average density
per area of analysis
(inhab./km 2 )
Less than 50
50 – 100
100 – 150
Table IV.8
POPULATION DENSITY/ECONOMIC ACTIVITY GRADIENT
Percentage of small areas within the area of analysis in which at least 35%
of the EAP is employed in agriculture
0% - 20% 20% - 40% 40% - 100%
Low level of agricultural
employment and low density
(rural plus low level of agricultural
employment = diversified rural)
150 – 500 Low level of agricultural
employment and high density
500 – 1 000
(urban)
1 000 – 2 500
2 500 or more
Intermediate level of agricultural
employment and low density
(transitional rural)
Intermediate level of agricultural
employment and high density
(transitional urban)
High level of agricultural
employment and low density
(rural)
High level of agricultural
employment and high density
(urban plus high level of
agricultural employment =
agricultural urban)
Source: A. Rodríguez and J. Meneses, “Transformaciones rurales en Latin America and sus relaciones con la rural population”,
paper presented at the Expert Meeting on Population, Territory and Sustainable Development, Santiago, Chile, 16-
17 August 2011.