Abstract
Four generalizations are made. 1/ Despite the varying interpretations made by the respective authors, previous studies indicate that urban growth in Latin America is caused by both rural-urban migration and a positive rate of urban natural increase. Thus to ascribe Latin American urban growth to a single prime causal factor is a misleading oversimplification. 2/ Net in-migration apparently plays a larger role in determining the rate of growth of large metropolitan centers than is the case with smaller urban areas. 3/ A significant portion of urban growth in a given intercensal period may be attributed to the growth of localities previously too small to be classified as “urban”. 4/ Urban natural increase is the weighted sum of the natural increase of in-migrants (after their arrival) and urban natives. Improper recognition of this last point may lead to an overstatement of the relative importance of urban natural increase as a component of urban growth.
