Town vs City – Understanding Global Urban Classifications

The Global Puzzle of Defining a “City”

In today’s interconnected world, few questions seem as deceptively simple as “What is a city?” While we encounter this term daily – from presenting yourself at an event to filling out shipping forms – defining a city remains one of the most complex challenges in urban geography and postal systems. This complexity isn’t merely academic; it has profound implications for business operations, policy-making, and global logistics.

The challenge of defining a city extends far beyond simple population thresholds or administrative boundaries. What constitutes a city in New Zealand may differ significantly from what defines one in Japan or Brazil. This variability creates substantial challenges for international businesses, postal services, and logistics operators, who require standardized, reliable location data.

💡 For over 15 years, we have created the most comprehensive worldwide zip code database. Our location data is updated weekly, relying on more than 1,500 sources. Browse GeoPostcodes datasets and download a free sample here.

Key Concept: The definition of a city is not universal but varies based on cultural, historical, and administrative contexts.

In this article, we’ll explore the challenges of defining cities across different contexts. First, we’ll examine traditional dictionary definitions and their limitations. Then, we’ll investigate how cultural, historical, and administrative factors shape city definitions worldwide. Next, we’ll analyze standardized approaches like the Degree of Urbanisation methodology, and finally, we’ll discuss implementation challenges and practical considerations for addressing urban classification needs.

Dictionary Definitions: A Starting Point

Let’s begin by examining how dictionaries define urban settlements, which will highlight why these definitions alone are insufficient for practical applications. The local lexical approach to understanding urban settlements provides a hierarchical framework, though one that often raises more questions than it answers. The definitions can be found in the dictionaries below:

• City: An inhabited place of greater size, population, or importance than a town or village (Merriam-Webster)
• Town: A human settlement that is smaller than a city but bigger than a village (Britannica)
• Village: A settlement smaller than a town but bigger than a hamlet, usually a small community in a rural area. (Britannica)
• Hamlet: A small village (Britannica)
• Metropole: A chief town (Collins)
• Settlement: A place where people have come to live and have built homes (Collins)
• Locality: A distinct population cluster in which the inhabitants live in neighboring sets of living quarters and that has a name or a locally recognized status (UN Statistics)
• Urban: A city area considered as the inner city plus built-up environs, irrespective of local body administrative boundaries (Collins)
• Rural: Rural refers to areas located away from large towns or cities, typically characterized by farming and agricultural activities (Collins)

The challenge with these definitions lies in their vague, circular, and relative nature. A town is defined as being larger than a village but smaller than a city, while a city is described as larger than a town. This creates a logical loop that fails to provide concrete, actionable criteria for classification.

Why City Definitions Vary Across the World

Now that we’ve seen some dictionary definitions let’s explore the key factors contributing to international diversity in city classifications.

Cultural and Historical Factors

The concept of a city is deeply rooted in cultural and historical contexts. In Europe, cities often evolved from medieval settlements, where city status was historically granted by royal charter based on religious, economic, cultural, or political criteria. In contrast, newer nations like the United States developed different criteria based on their unique historical development and spatial organization.

Consider the following scenario: A settlement of 50,000 people might be considered a small town in China but would qualify as a significant city in the Netherlands. This disparity isn’t merely about numbers – it reflects fundamentally different cultural understandings of urban space and community organization.

Evolving Urban Landscapes

Consider This: How do evolving urbanization and changing settlement patterns affect our understanding of what constitutes a city?

Modern cities are dynamic entities that constantly evolve. The local notion of a clearly defined urban core surrounded by suburban areas has given way to complex metropolitan regions with multiple centers and fluid boundaries. This evolution challenges static definitions and necessitates more sophisticated classification systems.

National Priorities

Different nations define cities based on their specific administrative, statistical, and developmental needs. These definitions often reflect the following:

• Administrative efficiency requirements
• Statistical data collection methods
• Economic development goals
• Historical legacy systems
• Political considerations

How Different Countries Define a City

After examining why definitions vary, let’s look at specific approaches countries use to classify cities, focusing on population thresholds and official designation systems.

Population and Density Thresholds

Many countries employ numerical thresholds to define cities, though these vary significantly across nations. Denmark, for example, uses a relatively low population threshold compared to many other countries: Denmark defines urban areas as areas with at least 200 people living and a maximum distance between neighboring buildings smaller than 200m.

This encapsulates a wide range of settlements many people call villages, towns, or cities, depending on their size and density.

Let’s examine the advantages and limitations of city definitions based on population:

Official Designations

Different nations employ varying approaches to city classification, each backed by official documentation and frameworks:

Each system reflects unique historical development and administrative needs.

Important Note: Administrative classifications often provide stability but may not reflect current urban realities.

It’s not always easy to find the official lists of cities. For instance, for Belgium and Italy, there does not seem to be a public list gathering the places with current city status. Rather, one has to look for separate texts of law granting the title to different cities over time.

Postal cities: How do postal operators determine cities?

An important concept in defining a city is how address information is usually captured. In traditional forms to fill in addresses, there is one field to name the place/locality, which is frequently labeled “city.” This “definition” of the city does not correspond to any of the criteria above. It is purely related to postal services and the unique identification of addresses, which is also required for official documents.

Basically, in this concept, “city” should be understood as we have defined “locality” previously: A distinct population cluster in which the inhabitants live in neighboring sets of living quarters and that has a name or a locally recognized status. It is the name the administration or postal services use to identify places, which are usually further divided by streets and house numbers.

For example, USPS (United States Postal Services) assigns a city to every postal code. For zip code 80449, the recommended CITY name is HARTSEL CO. However, Hartsel is a small census-designated place, with a population estimated at 38 in 2020.

While USPS uses the word “City” for the recommended names linked to zip codes, other postal operators and the Universal Postal Union (UPU) prefer the term “locality.” The predominance of US-designed systems may have influenced the widespread usage of “city” in international or local address capture forms.

Local vs. Standardized Approaches

Challenges in Local Methods

• Inconsistent standards across regions
• Outdated criteria that don’t reflect modern urban patterns
• Difficulty in handling rapid urbanization
• Limited applicability to international comparisons

Standardized approaches have been designed to tackle the inconsistencies of local city definitions and the loose usage of the “city” term. Their city classification emphasizes:

• Data-driven methodologies
• Standardized criteria
• Global comparability
• Regular updates to reflect changes
• Integration with digital systems

A Standardized approach: the Degree of Urbanisation

Introduction to the Methodology

The Degree of Urbanisation (DEGURBA) significantly advances standardized urban classification. Developed through collaboration between the United Nations, the European Union, and other international bodies, this methodology provides a consistent framework for identifying urban areas worldwide.

Key Concept: Degree of Urbanization is a standard methodology to classify administrative units by relying on analyzing population density and geographic connectivity.

Classification Methodology

The DEGURBA methodology organizes territories into three basic categories: cities, towns or semi-dense areas, and rural areas. This is achieved using a homogenous population data grid: each cell is exactly 1 km², and the data is obtained from census and population projections.

Key concept: A population grid is a global raster dataset in which each cell has an aggregated population value for that area. Each cell is the same size, eliminating the influence of variable area sizes when calculating population densities.

The classification process is performed in two stages. In the first stage, the grid cells are classified by performing a contiguity analysis and creating clusters of cells.

• High-density cluster or urban center: Cluster with a density of ≥1,500 inhabitants per km² and more than 50,000 inhabitants total.
• Medium density cluster or urban cluster: Clusters with a density of at least 300 inhabitants per km² and a minimum total population of 5,000 inhabitants.
• Low-density cluster or rural cluster: Cells that are not part of the urban clusters.

Once the clusters have been defined, local administrative units can be overlayed and classified as belonging to one of three categories:

• Cities: Spatial units with at least 50% of their population in urban centers.
• Towns and Semi-Dense Areas: Spatial units that have less than 50% of their population in urban centers and no more than 50% in rural grids.
• Rural Areas: Spatial units with more than 50% of their population in rural grids.

This classification can be further refined with a more detailed framework that identifies six distinct zones: dense towns, semi-dense towns, peri-urban areas, villages, dispersed rural areas, and mostly uninhabited regions.

The Degree of Urbanisation’s layered approach comprehensively explains how population and development patterns vary across different spaces.

Application Example: Consider a region with several settlements. Using DEGURBA:

• A population grid is constructed for the target area. The grid is uniformly divided into 1 km² cells.
• Each cell is classified into a cluster type according to its total population and the population of contiguous cells.
• Groups of cells that meet density thresholds are clustered together.
• Boundary data of local administrative units is overlayed on top of the clustered cells and thus classified.

Pros and Cons of the Method

OECD’s Functional Urban Areas (Metropoles)

The OECD has developed a complementary approach focusing on functional urban areas:

Important Note: OECD’s methodology considers economic and commuting patterns in addition to population density.

Key features include:

• Identification of urban cores
• Analysis of commuting patterns
• Economic integration measures
• Metropolitan area delineation

Challenges in Implementing Standardized Definitions

The implementation of standardized urban definitions faces several challenges:

Data Availability and Accuracy

Data Collection Issues

• Varying census frequencies across countries
• Inconsistent measurement methodologies
• Resource limitations in developing regions

Quality Control Challenges

• Verification of population data
• Temporal consistency

Think About It: How can organizations balance the need for standardization with practical data limitations?

Administrative vs. Statistical Discrepancies

A significant challenge arises from the disconnect between:

• Official administrative designations
• Statistical classification results
• Practical urban functions
• Local perceptions and usage
• Postal usage: Postal and official addresses

Conclusion: Embracing the Diversity of Urban Landscapes

Throughout this exploration of global urban classifications, we’ve seen how the definition of a city varies significantly across different countries and contexts, demonstrating the inherent complexity of standardizing location data. From local designations to standardized methodologies like DEGURBA and OECD’s Functional Urban Areas, each approach offers unique insights while presenting distinct challenges for international businesses and organizations handling address data at scale. We have also mentioned related (or relative) terms such as town, locality, or metropole and seen that these can also have varying meanings and interpretations.

From a very practical point of view, fostered by postal definitions, official addresses, and online forms, the term city encapsulates any size or type of settlement that is used by local operators to distinguish places above the street network. On the other hand, historical, cultural, and linguistic understandings of the city concept refer to notions of importance and density.

Your use case will determine which interpretation is best suited for you. This points to our biggest advice: Be clear in your objectives and be careful about the usage of terms like city, town, or locality. As we have seen, they point to various and/or vague definitions, giving them different meanings depending on culture and concept.

FAQ