Urban Population Annual Growth Rate 2002
Urban population annual growth rate measures the year-over-year percentage increase in a country's urban population.
Interactive Map
Complete Data Rankings
Rank | Actions | ||
|---|---|---|---|
1 | Kenya | 9.849 % | |
2 | Timor-Leste | 9.461 % | |
3 | Nepal | 8.088 % | |
4 | Burkina Faso | 7.58 % | |
5 | Bahrain | 7.526 % | |
6 | Equatorial Guinea | 7.074 % | |
7 | United Arab Emirates | 6.73 % | |
8 | Sierra Leone | 6.451 % | |
9 | Laos | 6.417 % | |
10 | Afghanistan | 6.314 % | |
11 | Maldives | 6.258 % | |
12 | Turks and Caicos Islands | 5.876 % | |
13 | Haiti | 5.821 % | |
14 | Angola | 5.645 % | |
15 | South Sudan | 5.643 % | |
16 | Uganda | 5.633 % | |
17 | Burundi | 5.337 % | |
18 | Saudi Arabia | 5.211 % | |
19 | Gambia | 5.185 % | |
20 | Somalia | 5.156 % | |
21 | Qatar | 4.974 % | |
22 | Mali | 4.959 % | |
23 | Thailand | 4.945 % | |
24 | State of Palestine | 4.93 % | |
25 | Guatemala | 4.718 % | |
26 | Yemen | 4.701 % | |
27 | Nigeria | 4.656 % | |
28 | Bhutan | 4.582 % | |
29 | Congo, Democratic Republic of the | 4.519 % | |
30 | Tanzania | 4.493 % | |
31 | Sao Tome and Principe | 4.461 % | |
32 | Ethiopia | 4.459 % | |
33 | China | 4.397 % | |
34 | Ghana | 4.322 % | |
35 | Madagascar | 4.152 % | |
36 | Namibia | 4.128 % | |
37 | Eritrea | 4.069 % | |
38 | Malaysia | 4.053 % | |
39 | Benin | 4.032 % | |
40 | British Virgin Islands | 3.993 % | |
41 | Solomon Islands | 3.984 % | |
42 | Honduras | 3.849 % | |
43 | Togo | 3.811 % | |
44 | Cameroon | 3.737 % | |
45 | Vanuatu | 3.708 % | |
46 | Gabon | 3.682 % | |
47 | Botswana | 3.651 % | |
48 | Zambia | 3.595 % | |
49 | Chad | 3.588 % | |
50 | Liberia | 3.538 % | |
51 | Niger | 3.531 % | |
52 | Costa Rica | 3.523 % | |
53 | Côte d'Ivoire | 3.482 % | |
54 | Vietnam | 3.421 % | |
55 | Cayman Islands | 3.409 % | |
56 | Indonesia | 3.387 % | |
57 | Iraq | 3.368 % | |
58 | Palau | 3.364 % | |
59 | Rwanda | 3.325 % | |
60 | Bangladesh | 3.272 % | |
61 | Congo | 3.25 % | |
62 | Syrian Arab Republic | 3.198 % | |
63 | Papua New Guinea | 3.104 % | |
64 | Dominican Republic | 3.084 % | |
65 | Philippines | 3.079 % | |
66 | Malawi | 3.068 % | |
67 | Guinea-Bissau | 3.031 % | |
68 | Senegal | 3.015 % | |
69 | Pakistan | 3.012 % | |
70 | Mauritania | 2.951 % | |
71 | Cabo Verde | 2.896 % | |
72 | Mongolia | 2.873 % | |
73 | Kuwait | 2.825 % | |
74 | Uzbekistan | 2.797 % | |
75 | India | 2.784 % | |
76 | Seychelles | 2.774 % | |
77 | Mozambique | 2.769 % | |
78 | Belize | 2.733 % | |
79 | Turkey | 2.642 % | |
80 | New Caledonia | 2.638 % | |
81 | Lesotho | 2.638 % | |
82 | Brunei Darussalam | 2.624 % | |
83 | Algeria | 2.582 % | |
84 | Saint Martin (French part) | 2.567 % | |
85 | Panama | 2.565 % | |
86 | Sudan | 2.552 % | |
87 | Guinea | 2.5 % | |
88 | Djibouti | 2.487 % | |
89 | Turkmenistan | 2.467 % | |
90 | Bolivia | 2.442 % | |
91 | Central African Republic | 2.346 % | |
92 | Libya | 2.27 % | |
93 | Egypt | 2.223 % | |
94 | Ecuador | 2.198 % | |
95 | Kiribati | 2.159 % | |
96 | Ireland | 2.123 % | |
97 | Jordan | 2.117 % | |
98 | South Africa | 2.117 % | |
99 | Israel | 2.101 % | |
100 | Colombia | 2.069 % | |
101 | Suriname | 2.052 % | |
102 | Comoros | 2.003 % | |
103 | Cambodia | 1.995 % | |
104 | Paraguay | 1.995 % | |
105 | Japan | 1.972 % | |
106 | Mexico | 1.959 % | |
107 | Morocco | 1.924 % | |
108 | Tajikistan | 1.918 % | |
109 | Iran | 1.909 % | |
110 | Venezuela | 1.901 % | |
111 | Montenegro | 1.866 % | |
112 | El Salvador | 1.858 % | |
113 | Portugal | 1.849 % | |
114 | New Zealand | 1.797 % | |
115 | Tuvalu | 1.795 % | |
116 | Cyprus | 1.756 % | |
117 | Peru | 1.729 % | |
118 | Brazil | 1.728 % | |
119 | Fiji | 1.712 % | |
120 | Spain | 1.645 % | |
121 | Myanmar | 1.63 % | |
122 | Albania | 1.566 % | |
123 | Lebanon | 1.562 % | |
124 | Tunisia | 1.538 % | |
125 | Luxembourg | 1.502 % | |
126 | Faroe Islands | 1.498 % | |
127 | Nicaragua | 1.461 % | |
128 | French Polynesia | 1.442 % | |
129 | Netherlands | 1.414 % | |
130 | Canada | 1.411 % | |
131 | Bahamas | 1.334 % | |
132 | San Marino | 1.325 % | |
133 | Australia | 1.297 % | |
134 | Sri Lanka | 1.295 % | |
135 | Argentina | 1.286 % | |
136 | Chile | 1.243 % | |
137 | United States | 1.227 % | |
138 | Marshall Islands | 1.201 % | |
139 | France | 1.177 % | |
140 | Zimbabwe | 1.157 % | |
141 | Oman | 1.135 % | |
142 | South Korea | 1.075 % | |
143 | Norway | 1.061 % | |
144 | China, Macao SAR | 1.032 % | |
145 | Iceland | 1.025 % | |
146 | Jamaica | 1.023 % | |
147 | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 0.952 % | |
148 | Liechtenstein | 0.926 % | |
149 | Singapore | 0.913 % | |
150 | Kyrgyzstan | 0.907 % | |
151 | Azerbaijan | 0.855 % | |
152 | Isle of Man | 0.852 % | |
153 | Malta | 0.832 % | |
154 | Belgium | 0.83 % | |
155 | Switzerland | 0.815 % | |
156 | Sint Maarten (Dutch part) | 0.759 % | |
157 | Guam | 0.757 % | |
158 | Greenland | 0.73 % | |
159 | Greece | 0.711 % | |
160 | Serbia | 0.692 % | |
161 | Finland | 0.681 % | |
162 | Tonga | 0.661 % | |
163 | North Korea | 0.642 % | |
164 | Gibraltar | 0.627 % | |
165 | Aruba | 0.611 % | |
166 | United Kingdom | 0.587 % | |
167 | Kosovo | 0.586 % | |
168 | Samoa | 0.565 % | |
169 | Austria | 0.564 % | |
170 | Andorra | 0.514 % | |
171 | Denmark | 0.451 % | |
172 | Bermuda | 0.444 % | |
173 | China, Hong Kong SAR | 0.443 % | |
174 | Sweden | 0.387 % | |
175 | Grenada | 0.386 % | |
176 | Dominica | 0.365 % | |
177 | Trinidad and Tobago | 0.358 % | |
178 | Hungary | 0.322 % | |
179 | Italy | 0.315 % | |
180 | United States Virgin Islands | 0.272 % | |
181 | Uruguay | 0.264 % | |
182 | Mauritius | 0.254 % | |
183 | Cuba | 0.251 % | |
184 | Germany | 0.186 % | |
185 | Eswatini | 0.173 % | |
186 | Belarus | 0.165 % | |
187 | Curaçao | 0.163 % | |
188 | Slovenia | 0.153 % | |
189 | Saint Vincent and the Grenadines | 0.117 % | |
190 | Barbados | 0.108 % | |
191 | Micronesia (Fed. States of) | 0.076 % | |
192 | Saint Kitts and Nevis | 0.074 % | |
193 | Puerto Rico | 0.07 % | |
194 | Croatia | 0.029 % | |
195 | Kazakhstan | 0.022 % | |
196 | Poland | -0.042 % | |
197 | Monaco | -0.077 % | |
198 | American Samoa | -0.119 % | |
199 | Slovakia | -0.25 % | |
200 | Czech Republic | -0.297 % | |
201 | Republic of Moldova | -0.367 % | |
202 | Russia | -0.374 % | |
203 | Antigua and Barbuda | -0.415 % | |
204 | Nauru | -0.475 % | |
205 | Armenia | -0.503 % | |
206 | Guyana | -0.597 % | |
207 | Estonia | -0.609 % | |
208 | Lithuania | -0.862 % | |
209 | Ukraine | -0.89 % | |
210 | Georgia | -0.892 % | |
211 | North Macedonia | -1.109 % | |
212 | Latvia | -1.213 % | |
213 | Saint Lucia | -1.251 % | |
214 | Northern Mariana Islands | -1.691 % | |
215 | Bulgaria | -1.754 % | |
216 | Romania | -1.865 % |
- #1
Kenya
- #2
Timor-Leste
- #3
Nepal
- #4
Burkina Faso
- #5
Bahrain
- #6
Equatorial Guinea
- #7
United Arab Emirates
- #8
Sierra Leone
- #9
Laos
- #10
Afghanistan
Analysis: These countries represent the highest values in this dataset, showcasing significant scale and impact on global statistics.
- #216
Romania
- #215
Bulgaria
- #214
Northern Mariana Islands
- #213
Saint Lucia
- #212
Latvia
- #211
North Macedonia
- #210
Georgia
- #209
Ukraine
- #208
Lithuania
- #207
Estonia
Context: These countries or territories have the lowest values, often due to geographic size, administrative status, or specific characteristics.
Analysis & Context
In 2002, Kenya recorded the highest Urban Population Annual Growth Rate at 9.85%, while the global range spanned from -0.30% to 9.85%. The global average for this metric was 2.46%, providing a benchmark for urbanization trends worldwide.
Drivers of High Urban Growth Rates
The countries with the highest urban population growth rates in 2002, such as Kenya (9.85%), Timor-Leste (9.46%), and Nepal (8.09%), were primarily influenced by rapid urbanization due to rural-to-urban migration. In Kenya, urban centers like Nairobi attracted individuals seeking better economic opportunities and services, contributing significantly to its high growth rate. Similarly, Timor-Leste experienced substantial urban growth as it rebuilt post-independence, with urban areas developing as hubs of governance and reconstruction.
Additionally, countries like Bahrain (7.53%) and the United Arab Emirates (6.73%) saw urban growth driven by economic diversification initiatives. These nations invested heavily in infrastructure and services, attracting both domestic and international migrants to urban centers. The allure of improved living standards and employment opportunities in sectors such as finance and tourism further fueled urban population increases.
Factors Behind Low and Negative Growth Rates
Conversely, countries like the Czech Republic (-0.30%), Slovakia (-0.25%), and American Samoa (-0.12%) exhibited low or even negative urban growth rates. In these cases, factors such as economic stagnation, limited job opportunities, and in some instances, emigration played pivotal roles. For example, Poland (-0.04%) faced challenges related to economic transition, which led to urban population decline as individuals moved abroad for better prospects.
In Monaco (-0.08%), the negative growth can be attributed to its small geographic size and stringent residency policies, which naturally limit urban expansion. These examples highlight how economic and policy factors can influence urban growth dynamics, often leading to stagnation or decline in urban populations.
Significant Year-over-Year Changes
The year 2002 also saw notable year-over-year changes in urban population growth rates. Afghanistan experienced the most significant increase, with a growth rate rising by 4.57% (262.1%), reflecting post-conflict reconstruction efforts and increasing urbanization as populations moved to cities for security and rebuilding opportunities. Similarly, Bahrain saw a 3.87% increase (105.6%), driven by ongoing economic reforms and development projects.
On the other hand, Rwanda recorded the largest decrease in urban growth rate, dropping by 2.32% (-41.1%). This decrease may be linked to the stabilization and return to rural areas post-genocide, as well as limited urban infrastructure development. Singapore also saw a notable decline of 1.78% (-66.2%), which could be attributed to its already high urban population and mature economy, leading to a natural slowdown in urban growth.
Global Urbanization Trends and Implications
The global average urban population growth rate of 2.46% indicates a general trend towards increasing urbanization, driven by economic development, demographic shifts, and migration patterns. High growth rates in developing countries often reflect burgeoning economies and the shift from agrarian to industrial and service-based economies. Urban areas in these countries are seen as engines of economic growth, drawing in populations seeking better livelihoods.
However, rapid urban growth poses challenges such as infrastructure strain, housing shortages, and increased demand for services. For countries with negative growth rates, the challenge lies in revitalizing urban areas and creating attractive urban environments to retain and attract residents. Policymakers must balance the benefits of urbanization with sustainable development strategies to ensure cities remain livable and economically viable.
Frequently Asked Questions About Urban Population Annual Growth Rate in 2002
Which country had the highest urban population annual growth rate in 2002?
Kenya had the highest urban population annual growth rate in 2002, with a rate of 9.85%.
Which country had the lowest urban population annual growth rate in 2002?
Romania had the lowest urban population annual growth rate in 2002, with a rate of -1.87%.
What was the average urban population annual growth rate across all countries in 2002?
The average urban population annual growth rate across all countries in 2002 was 2.21%.
What was the median urban population annual growth rate in 2002?
The median urban population annual growth rate in 2002 was 1.91%.
Which countries were in the top 10 for urban population annual growth rate in 2002?
The top 10 countries for urban population annual growth rate in 2002 were Kenya, Timor-Leste, Nepal, Burkina Faso, Bahrain, Equatorial Guinea, United Arab Emirates, Sierra Leone, Laos, and Afghanistan.
How many countries were included in the dataset for urban population annual growth rate in 2002?
The dataset for urban population annual growth rate in 2002 included 216 countries.
Insights by country
United States Virgin Islands
In 2002, the United States Virgin Islands ranked #180 globally with an Urban Population Annual Growth Rate of 0.272241007238859 %. This growth rate is notably lower than many Caribbean neighbors, reflecting regional challenges in urban development. Factors such as economic reliance on tourism and limited land availability contribute to this slow urban population growth, as the islands face constraints in infrastructure and housing development.
Venezuela
In 2002, Venezuela had an Urban Population Annual Growth Rate of 1.90145106095909 %, ranking #110 out of 216 countries. This growth rate is notable when compared to many Latin American countries that experienced higher urbanization rates during the same period. Contributing factors to Venezuela's urban growth included rapid migration from rural areas driven by economic instability and the pursuit of better job opportunities in urban centers.
Vietnam
In 2002, Vietnam achieved a global rank of #54 with an Urban Population Annual Growth Rate of 3.42108090106931 %. This rate is notably higher than the global average, indicating a significant urbanization trend in the country. Key drivers of this growth include rapid economic development and rural-to-urban migration as people seek better employment opportunities and living conditions in cities.
Ukraine
In 2002, Ukraine had an Urban Population Annual Growth Rate of -0.890078067384368 %, ranking #209 out of 216 countries. This negative growth rate highlights significant urban decline, particularly when compared to neighboring countries that experienced urbanization trends during the same period. Contributing factors include economic instability following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, which led to population outmigration and a decrease in urban job opportunities.
Luxembourg
In 2002, Luxembourg had an Urban Population Annual Growth Rate of 1.50165944622789 %, ranking #125 out of 216 countries. This growth rate is notably higher than that of many neighboring countries, reflecting Luxembourg's dynamic urbanization trends. Contributing factors include its robust economy, driven by the financial sector, and a steady influx of expatriates seeking employment opportunities in the capital, Luxembourg City.
Malaysia
In 2002, Malaysia achieved a rank of #38 globally with an Urban Population Annual Growth Rate of 4.05272088883183 %. This growth rate was notably higher than the global average, reflecting Malaysia's rapid urbanization compared to many other countries. Key drivers of this trend include robust economic development, significant investment in infrastructure, and a youthful population migrating towards urban centers for better employment opportunities.
Portugal
In 2002, Portugal had an Urban Population Annual Growth Rate of 1.8490261784529 %, ranking #113 out of 216 countries. This growth rate is relatively modest compared to the global average, reflecting Portugal's stable urbanization trends. Key factors influencing this rate include the country's economic conditions, which have historically attracted migration to urban areas, and an aging population that influences demographic shifts.
Nicaragua
Nicaragua ranked #127 globally in 2002 with an Urban Population Annual Growth Rate of 1.46050674261321 %. This growth rate is lower than many Central American neighbors, indicating a slower urbanization process in comparison to countries like Costa Rica. Contributing factors include economic challenges, limited infrastructure development, and a significant rural population that has historically resisted migration to urban centers.
Oman
In 2002, Oman had an Urban Population Annual Growth Rate of 1.1353876331802 %, ranking #141 out of 216 countries. This growth rate is lower than many of its Gulf neighbors, reflecting a more gradual urbanization process compared to countries like Qatar and the UAE. Key drivers for Oman's urban growth include government investment in infrastructure and economic diversification efforts aimed at reducing reliance on oil revenues.
New Caledonia
In 2002, New Caledonia ranked #80 globally with an Urban Population Annual Growth Rate of 2.63828074738652 %. This growth rate is notable compared to many Pacific island nations, which often face slower urbanization due to geographic isolation and limited resources. Factors driving this growth in New Caledonia include its developing economy, driven by mining and tourism, and a relatively young population that is increasingly migrating to urban areas for better opportunities.
Data Source
Urban population growth (annual %) - World Bank Open Data
The World Bank Open Data provides comprehensive datasets on various aspects of global development, including urban population growth rates. The "Urban population growth (annual %)" indicator offers country-level statistics reflecting the annual percentage change in the urban population, based on the total population.
Visit Data SourceHistorical Data by Year
Explore Urban Population Annual Growth Rate data across different years. Compare trends and see how statistics have changed over time.
More People and Society Facts
Currently married (Percent)
The percentage of currently married individuals by country highlights societal trends in family structure and relationships. Understanding these statistics can provide insights into cultural norms and demographic shifts, influencing policies and social programs.
View dataBrowse All People and Society
Explore more facts and statistics in this category
All Categories
Discover more categories with comprehensive global data