How the share of the population living in urban areas relates to GNI per capita across countries, and where individual countries depart from the overall pattern.
Urban population share and national income are often examined together.
Each dot represents a country. The horizontal axis shows GNI per capita (gross national income per person, adjusted for purchasing power). The vertical axis shows the share of the population living in urban areas.
Across countries, higher income levels tend to appear alongside a higher urban population share, though the relationship is not uniform — countries can differ from the overall pattern in either direction. Countries define "urban" differently, so cross-country comparisons of urban population share should be read with that in mind.
A log scale for income makes the relationship easier to see.
GNI per capita ranges from under $1,000 to well over $100,000 across countries, so a linear scale compresses most countries into a narrow band. Switching the horizontal axis to a log scale spreads out lower- and middle-income countries.
The fitted line summarizes the overall association between income and urban population share across countries — it is not evidence that a higher urban population share raises income, or that higher income raises urban population share.
Some countries sit above or below the overall fitted relationship.
Jordan (GNI per capita $10,360; 92% urban) and Uruguay ($31,690; 96% urban) sit above the overall pattern — their urban population share is higher than the fitted relationship would suggest for their income level. Papua New Guinea ($4,340; 14% urban) and Guyana ($50,060; 27% urban) sit below it.
Countries at similar income levels can have different urban population shares, and countries with similar urban population shares can have different income levels.