A Benchmark for a Metropolitan Geo-Statistical Framework in

Roberto Duran-Fernandez Transport Studies Unit Oxford University

Working paper N° 1022

July 2007

Transport Studies Unit Oxford University Centre for the Environment

http://www.tsu.ox.ac.uk/

A Benchmark for a Metropolitan Geo-Statistical Framework in Mexico

(DRAFT: PLEASE DO NOT CITE WITHOUT PERMISSION)

Roberto Duran-Fernandez §

Oxford University Transport Studies Unit Working Paper No. 1022

July 2007

Abstract

This paper presents a benchmark for the definition of standard metropolitan areas in Mexico. It proposes a criterion to identify metropolitan areas based on the analysis of demographic statistics and cartographic data. The paper identifies 69 metropolitan areas that resemble the Standard Metropolitan Areas (SMA) of the US Bureau of Economic Analysis. These metropolitan areas represent 56 per cent of national population and concentrate 77 percent of industrial output. They constitute the basis for a Metropolitan Geo-Statistical Framework in Mexico that enables the analysis of socio-economic at this aggregation level.

§ Transport Studies Unit, University of Oxford, Dyson Perrins Building, South Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3QY, England. +44 (0)1865 285192. Contact: sann2513@ herald.ox.ac.uk

1 1. Introduction

In this paper we present a benchmark for the definition of standard metropolitan areas in Mexico. We identify 69 metropolitan units that constitute the basis for a Metropolitan Geo-Statistical Framework in this country.

The definition of standard metropolitan areas based on commuting patterns has a long tradition in other countries such as the United States (Berry 1977). Unfortunately, the lack of suitable data does not allow us to carry out a similar exercise for Mexico.

The National Institute of Statistics, Geography, and Informatics (INEGI) does not publish a comprehensive catalogue of metropolitan areas, and the data that it produces is typically aggregated at state or municipal level. The most notorious exceptions are the labour statistics based on the National Urban Employment Surveys (ENEU), which define 44 integrated urban economic areas.

In this paper we present a criterion for the definition of metropolitan units which resembles the criterion used in the US for the definition of standard metropolitan areas by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The criterion is based on Berry (1977) and relies on the analysis of demographic statistics and cartographic data with geographic information systems. The motivation of this exercise is to propose an analysis framework that reduces and eventually eliminates the aereal problem that an arbitrary geographic aggregation of socio-economic statistics can generate.

2 2. Territorial Political Division

According to the constitution of Mexico, the municipality or municipio is the basis for the territorial division in the country. A municipality is governed by an Ayuntamiento an institution elected by popular vote, which constitutes the local government tier in the Mexican federal system.

The municipal government has several obligations and responsibilities according to the law. Among them, we can count the provision of water, and sewage systems, the administration of the local cadastre and land policy, the provision of local security and several urban services. This local government is mainly an executive authority that has to follow federal and state legislation. The municipal government does not carry out any judicial function either. These are responsibilities of federal and state judges.

The main fiscal resources of the municipal government are federal and state grants and transfers. However, the constitution grants municipalities the right to tax real estate property. Local governments, on the other hand, are not responsible for local schools, a situation that clearly differs from the United States.

Municipalities in Mexico are very heterogeneous both in their population and in territorial composition. Their population can range from less than 500 to more than one million. The larger and less dense municipalities are concentrated in the north of the country; on the other hand, in the south of the country we can find small and highly populated municipalities. The territorial division of the country into municipalities is not homogenous, and it was shaped according to which historical and political factors, which not necessarily portrait the spatial distribution of socioeconomic activities (Bassols-Batalla 1993). The arbitrariness of this political division can be illustrated by the following example: State, located in the south, is divided in 570 municipalities, while the northern state of Baja California is divided in only 5 municipalities. Both states have a similar surface (97.5 and 86.7 sq. km. respectively), population is higher in Oaxaca (3.4 versus 2.5 million), but production is considerably higher in Baja California (3.37 and 1.48 percent of national gross domestic product).

3

The territory of a metropolitan zone does not necessarily match the territory of a single municipality. The urban area of some cities may comprise all the territory of a municipality and in some cases, the conurbation extends itself over several municipalities.

3. Statistical Geographic Aggregation

Several official statistics produced by INEGI are available at municipal level. This is typically the lowest geographical disagregation level available for any official statistics in Mexico.1 In most of the cases, the municipal aggregation of socio- economic statistics is statistical neutral. However, the aggregation of data in arbitrary geographical units can lead to biased statistics. This problem is especially important when the geographic statistic units exhibit a high degree of heterogeneity. Another problem is the possibility of over (sub) sampling. When a given study area is divided into an arbitrary number of geographical or area units, the statistics employed to describe it may differ according to the size and number of area units into which it has been divided. The nature of this problem is clear in the description given above about the number of municipalities that compose Oaxaca and Baja California states: non- weighted statistics based on municipal observations systematically overestimate the importance of Oaxaca’s observations and underestimate Baja California, generating biased estimators.

The essence of the problem is identifying or eliminating differences in parameters, which may be merely attributed to differences in the size of the aereal unit from those differences, owing to truly different relationships (Thomas et. al. 1965). Robinson (1956) proposes as a solution for tackling the aereal aggregation problem the weighting of geographical observations. Ideally, the problem we face should be solved using weights such as, for example, the number of individual agents (i.e. firms, households, or individuals) represented by each geographic unit.

1 An important exception is census population data, which is available at town level.

4 Unfortunately, this possibility is only available for micro datasets. However, other types of datasets can be handled to tackle this problem. The most direct method is the aggregation of data in area units with a high degree of homogeneity. The most natural geographical unit that fulfils this requirement is the city or metropolitan area. Economic geography models suggest that that within the limits of a conurbation, economic agents are more likely to develop strong socio-economic interactions that are reflected in a high degree of homogeneity for certain socio-economic indicators.

4. Definition of the Metropolitan Geo-statistical Framework

The arbitrary division of the country in municipalities can be problematic for the definition of metropolitan areas. Fortunately, available statistical and digital cartographic data allows us to identify those municipalities whose territory belong to a particular metropolitan area. This process enables us to build a metropolitan geo- statistical framework, which in principle can serve as the basis for the estimation of geographically neutral statistics and estimators at metropolitan level. Unfortunately, in most cases municipalities contain more than one urban agglomeration. Therefore, a geo-statistical framework based on municipal data can not contain all the urban areas in the country.

INEGI defines municipal conurbations as those municipalities where one or more urban agglomerations are unified, such that there is an urban continuity among them. In other words, despite the political or administrative borders, there is no clear separation between streets or built-up areas that determines their limits,

The identification and classification of the municipalities into metropolitan areas was made according to the following criterion:

First, we identify a subset of metropolitan municipalities. This subset is defined as those municipalities with an urban population of 100,000 or higher. Each of these municipalities constitutes the core of each metropolitan zone. This criterion is uniform for all the municipalities except for Mexico City and Guadalajara, the two largest urban agglomerations. For these conurbations, we define the Federal District

5 and the municipality of Guadalajara as the core for each metropolitan area. If this distinction were not made, we would have two metropolitan areas within the same conurbation.

Once the subset of metropolitan municipalities is defined, we follow a contiguity criterion to group municipalities. We identify the conurbation adjacent to each core municipality. The conurbation is defined as the set of urban polygons contiguous to the core urban settlement. This process is carried out using digital cartography from the Topographic Digital Dataset as well as the municipal Geo-statistical framework 2000, both from INEGI. Finally, all the municipalities where the metropolitan area lies are defined as metropolitan units.

The contiguity criterion considers two exceptions. First, it excludes all those municipalities where part of a metropolitan area lies, but which have an urbanisation level –defined as the ratio of the population in the urban polygon to the population within the limits of the municipality- different to the rest of the metropolitan unit. For the case of Mexico City, this threshold was set at 12 percent points, whereas for the rest of the country it was set at 20 percent. Finally, we exclude municipalities with an urbanisation rate lower than 77 and 60 percent for Mexico City and the rest of the country respectively.

The second exception to the contiguity criterion comprises three urban agglomerations that are not contiguous. These areas are Cordoba-Orizaba and Coatzoacoalcos-Minatitla, both in the state of Veracruz, and Merida-Progreso in the State of Yucatan. Each of these urban agglomerations is considered as an integrated economic unit by INEGI in the National Labour Surveys.

The cartographic definition on municipal limits and urban polygons is from 2000, and constitutes the most up to date one. The demographic data is from the National Population Census 2000, which is compatible with the Topographic Digital Dataset and the Municipal Geo-Statistic Framework from INEGI.

6 According to this criterion, we identified 69 metropolitan units, which constitute the basis for the metropolitan geo-statistical framework. These 69 metropolitan units contain 229 municipalities and present an urbanisation rate close to 95 percent. Every state contains at least one metropolitan unit (Table 1)

These metropolitan areas represent approximately 56.5 per cent of the national population. Besides the metropolitan area of Mexico City, with a population of 17 millions, we identified seven metropolitan areas with a population of one million or larger (Table 2). They contain almost 77 per cent of the national workforce of the manufacturing sector as well as 84 per cent of the total wages. Finally, the municipalities that integrate the metropolitan framework produce 77 per cent of industrial output (Table 3).

The municipalities that are not considered in the metropolitan geo-statistical framework have a population of 42 millions. Only 50 percent of this population lives in urban agglomerations. The urban population of these municipalities is distributed through 3,275 urban settlements that have an average population of 6,613 (Table 4). The labour force of the industrial sector of this subset represents only 22 percent of national employment. Industrial output is approximately 22 percent of the national total (Table 5).

A complete catalogue of the municipalities that integrate each metropolitan area is presented in Table 6. Figure 1 shows the localisation of each of the metropolitan areas.

5. Final Remarks.

In this paper, we present a criterion for the definition of metropolitan statistical units for a Metropolitan Geo-Statistical Framework in Mexico. The criterion identifies 69 metropolitan areas, which include, with marginal variations, the 44 urban economic areas defined by INEGI for their labour statistics. This framework constitutes a benchmark for the analysis of socio-economic data at metropolitan level, which can serve as a basis to generate comparable statistics at international level.

7 6. References

Bassols-Batalla, A. (1993). “Formación de regiones económicas” UNAM, Mexico.

Berry, B. and Kasarda, J. (1977). “Contemporary urban ecology” Macmillan Publishing Co., New York.

INEGI (2000). “Conjunto de datos vectoriales y toponímicos: Carta digital” Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática.

INEGI (2000). “Marco geo-estadístico municipal” Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática.

INEGI (2000). “XII Censo General de Población y Vivienda” Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática.

Robinson, A.H. (1956). “The necessity of weighting values in correlation analysis of areal data” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, (46), pp. 233-236.

Thomas, E.N. and Anderson, D.L. (1965). “Additional comments on weighting values in correlation analysis of areal data” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, (55), pp. 492-505

8 TABLE 1 . Metropolitan Areas.

Metropolitan Area Metropolitan Area 1 Mexico City 36 Monclova 2 San Luis Potosi 37 Queretaro 3 Leon 38 Celaya 4 Guadalajara 39 Irapuato 5 Chihuahua 40 Cancun 6 Monterrey 41 La Paz 7 42 Ciudad del Carmen 8 Torreon 43 Pachuca 9 44 Mexicali 10 Veracruz 45 Ensenada 11 Orizaba 46 Ciudad Acuña 12 Merida 47 Piedras Negras 13 Cd. Juarez 48 San Cristobal de las Casas 14 Matamoros 49 Tapachula 15 50 Salamanca 16 Tijuana 51 Chilpancingo 17 Aguascalientes 52 Iguala 18 Campeche 53 Puerto Vallarta 19 Saltillo 54 Uruapan 20 Tuxtla Gutierrez 55 Zamora de Hidalgo 21 Durango 56 Cuautla 22 Acapulco 57 Tehuacan 23 Toluca 58 San Juan del Rio 24 Morelia 59 Chetumal 25 Cuernavaca 60 Ciudad Valles 26 61 Los Mochis 27 Tepic 62 Mazatlan 28 Oaxaca 63 Ciudad Obregon 29 Culiacan 64 Nogales 30 Hermosillo 65 San Luis Rio Colorado 31 Villahermosa 66 32 Coatzacoalcos 67 33 Zacatecas 68 Xalapa 34 Colima 69 Poza Rica 35 Manzanillo

9 TABLE 2 Metropolitan Geo-Statistical Framework: Demographics Population Urban Population Mean Population of Metropolitan Municipalities Share of Share of Urbanisation Main Urban Areas Total Total National National Rate Agglomeration

Metropolitan Municipalities 69 229 55,064,787 56.5% 52,023,717 70.6% 94.5% 10,173,961 Mexico City 1 23 17,613,380 18.1% 17,430,140 23.7% 99.0% 8,584,919 Metropolitan Municipalities /a 68 206 37,451,407 38.4% 34,593,577 47.0% 92.4% 1,589,042 Greater than 1Million 7 42 13,354,073 13.7% 13,013,709 17.7% 97.5% 936,630 500 K - 1 Million 19 93 12,971,278 13.3% 11,605,912 15.8% 89.5% 444,636 Less that 500 K 42 71 11,126,056 11.4% 9,973,956 13.5% 89.6% 207,776 /a Eexcludes Mexico City.

TABLE 3 Metropolitan Geo-Statistical Framework: Industrial Production Population Urban Population Mean Population of Urban Municipalities Share of Share of Urbanisation Main Urban Agglomerations Total Total National National Rate Agglomeration Total 3,275 2214 42,418,624 43.5% 21,656,474 29.4% 51.1% 6,613 Greater that 100 K 233 47 6,248,456 6.4% 3,774,089 5.1% 60.4% 27,610 50 K - 100 K 475 158 10,646,596 10.9% 6,058,019 8.2% 56.9% 18,184 10 K - 50 K 1,459 926 21,054,604 21.6% 9,663,973 13.1% 45.9% 7,103 5 K - 10 K 413 389 2,811,726 2.9% 1,252,624 1.7% 44.6% 3,039 2,500 - 5,000 314 313 1,137,340 1.2% 575,065 0.8% 50.6% 1,830 Less that 2,500 381 381 519,902 0.5% 332,704 0.5% 64.0% 873

10 TABLE 4 Excluded Municipalities: Demographics Labour Wages GVA Capital Stock Share Share Share Mean Share of Employees of Total of Total Total of Wages National National National National Metropolitan Municipalities 3,234,959 77.1% 246,053,368 84.0% 6,338 722,342,776 77.8% 961,001,048 76.4% Mexico City 778,742 18.5% 63,820,980 21.8% 6,829 157,363,616 17.0% 177,261,056 14.1% Metropolitan Municipalities (excluding Mexico City) 2,456,217 58.5% 182,232,388 62.2% 6,183 564,979,160 60.9% 783,739,992 62.3% Greaterthan1Million 1,168,677 27.8% 88,965,144 30.4% 6,344 267,543,920 28.8% 328,186,240 26.1% 500K-1Million 714,168 17.0% 56,068,508 19.2% 6,542 207,027,424 22.3% 334,329,952 26.6% Lessthat500K 573,372 13.7% 37,198,736 12.7% 5,406 90,407,816 9.7% 121,223,800 9.6%

TABLE 5. Excluded Municipalities: Industrial Production Labour Wages GVA Capital Stock Share Share Share Mean Share of Employees of Total of Total Total of Wages National National National National Non Metropolitan Municipalities 963,335 22.9% 46,712,658 16.0% 4,041 205,634,891 22.2% 297,417,695 23.6% Greaterthat100K 159,168 3.8% 7,781,306 2.7% 4,074 42,083,836 4.5% 61,466,344 4.9% 50K-100K 315,880 7.5% 15,992,932 5.5% 4,219 77,095,384 8.3% 92,885,504 7.4% 10K-50K 421,362 10.0% 20,925,516 7.1% 4,138 77,629,312 8.4% 133,135,352 10.6% 5K-10K 40,548 1.0% 1,445,335 0.5% 2,970 7,109,176 0.8% 9,078,837 0.7% 2,500-5,000 17,912 0.4% 502,897 0.2% 2,340 1,491,039 0.2% 548,534 0.0% Lessthat2,500 8,465 0.2% 64,672 0.0% 637 226,144 0.0% 303,124 0.0%

11 TABLE 6 Metropolitan Geo-Statistical Framework

Urban Urbanisation Code Municipality Population Density Population Rate 1 Mexico City (MEX) 09002 Azcapotzalco 441,008 441,008 100% 13,196.15 09003 Coyoacan 640,423 640,423 100% 11,933.24 09004 Cuajimalpa de Morelos 151,222 149,743 99% 2,158.95 09005 Gustavo A. Madero 1,235,542 1,235,542 100% 14,129.74 09006 Iztacalco 411,321 411,321 100% 17,788.66 09007 Iztapalapa 1,773,343 1,773,343 100% 15,679.05 09008 La Magdalena Contreras 222,050 221,645 100% 3,509.15 09009 Milpa Alta 96,773 90,772 94% 338.88 09010 Alvaro Obregon 687,020 686,807 100% 7,199.17 09011 Tlahuac 302,790 301,317 100% 3,521.62 09012 Tlalpan 581,781 576,172 99% 1,887.21 09013 Xochimilco 369,787 364,647 99% 3,117.57 09014 Benito Juarez 360,478 360,478 100% 13,654.16 09015 Cuauhtemoc 516,255 516,255 100% 15,942.35 09016 Miguel Hidalgo 352,640 352,640 100% 7,676.47 09017 Venustiano Carranza 462,806 462,806 100% 13,774.41 15013 Atizapan de Zaragoza 467,886 467,544 100% 5,612.12 15020 Coacalco de Berriozabal 252,555 252,291 100% 6,683.99 15033 Ecatepec de Morelos 1,622,697 1,621,827 100% 10,320.45 15037 Huixquilucan 193,468 166,379 86% 1,364.64 15057 Naucalpan de Juarez 858,711 844,599 98% 5,702.94 15058 Nezahualcoyotl 1,225,972 1,225,083 100% 17,713.19 15104 Tlalnepantla de Baz 721,415 721,407 100% 13,443.37

2 San Luis Potosi (MEX) 15024 Cuautitlan 75,836 69,312 91% 2,804.70 24028 San Luis Potosi 670,532 638,122 95% 464.63 24035 Soledad de Graciano Sanche 180,296 169,574 94% 641.74

3 Leon (BJX) 11020 Leon 1,134,842 1,065,981 94% 930.44 15053 Melchor Ocampo 37,716 33,271 88% 1,933.29

4 Guadalajara (GDL) 14039 Guadalajara 1,646,319 1,646,183 100% 11,034.80 14070 El Salto 83,453 81,437 98% 952.69 14097 Tlajomulco de Zuñiga 123,619 99,456 80% 177.01 14098 Tlaquepaque 474,178 471,516 99% 4,250.22 14101 Tonala 337,149 325,772 97% 2,067.02 14120 Zapopan 1,001,021 980,796 98% 868.24 15060 Nicolas Romero 269,546 248,175 92% 1,212.98

5 Chihuahua (CUU) 08019 Chihuahua 671,790 657,876 98% 80.38 15091 Teoloyucan 66,556 59,841 90% 1,472.42

12 TABLE 6 (cont.) Urban Urbanisation Code Municipality Population Density Population Rate 6 Monterrey (MEX) 15095 Tepotzotlan 62,280 55,103 88% 321.48 19006 Apodaca 283,497 273,964 97% 1,160.92 19018 Garcia 28,974 25,958 90% 28.10 19019 San Pedro Garza Garcia 125,978 125,945 100% 1,514.86 19021 General Escobedo 233,457 232,326 100% 1,406.84 19026 Guadalupe 670,162 669,842 100% 5,798.70 19031 Juarez 66,497 53,822 81% 269.39 19039 Monterrey 1,110,997 1,110,909 100% 3,797.05 19046 San Nicolas de los Garza 496,878 496,878 100% 8,530.85 19048 Santa Catarina 227,026 225,976 100% 257.49 19049 Santiago 36,812 33,344 91% 50.00

7 Tampico (MEX) 15108 Tultepec 93,277 87,341 94% 3,341.85 28003 Altamira 127,664 105,297 82% 77.86 28009 Ciudad Madero 182,325 182,325 100% 3,853.77 28038 Tampico 295,442 295,442 100% 2,546.64 30133 Pueblo Viejo 50,329 45,316 90% 173.07

8 Torreon (TRC) 05035 Torreon 529,512 512,163 97% 1,752.96 10007 GomezPalacio 273,315 216,770 79% 326.28 10012 Lerdo 112,435 80,660 72% 53.57 15109 Tultitlan 432,141 428,163 99% 34,496.56

9 Puebla (MEX) 15121 Cuautitlan Izcalli 453,298 447,802 99% 4,088.64 21015 Amozoc 64,315 61,261 95% 484.24 21034 27,575 27,143 98% 745.90 21041 46,729 44,151 94% 1,238.49 21090 Juan C. Bonilla 14,483 14,187 98% 701.00 21106 23,619 17,037 72% 193.18 21114 Puebla 1,346,916 1,325,094 98% 2,479.44 21119 San Andres Cholula 56,066 51,937 93% 929.98 21125 San Gregorio Atzompa 6,934 6,804 98% 533.86 21136 9,350 9,274 99% 1,436.33 21140 99,794 99,474 100% 1,291.82 21181 Tlaltenango 5,370 5,340 99% 244.72

10 Veracruz (MEX) 15025 Chalco 217,972 209,810 96% 979.40 30028 Boca del Rio 135,804 134,754 99% 3,491.65 30193 Veracruz 457,377 221,170 48% 1,890.45

13 TABLE 6 (cont.) Urban Urbanisation Code Municipality Population Density Population Rate 11 Orizaba (MEX) 15039 Ixtapaluca 297,570 289,657 97% 1,082.62 30014 Amatlan de los Reyes 36,823 19,670 53% 243.85 30022 Atzacan 16,998 11,878 70% 266.02 30030 Camerino Z. Mendoza 39,308 34,955 89% 1,722.49 30044 Cordoba 177,288 150,821 85% 1,104.85 30068 Fortin 46,053 37,623 82% 730.22 30074 Huiloapan 5,733 3,700 65% 326.94 30081 Ixhuatlancillo 11,914 9,966 84% 224.87 30085 Ixtaczoquitlan 56,896 41,603 73% 424.53 30101 Mariano Escobedo 28,622 15,248 53% 440.39 30115 Nogales 30,945 23,844 77% 515.57 30118 Orizaba 118,593 118,552 100% 3,983.00 30135 Rafael Delgado 14,730 13,100 89% 545.07 30138 Rio Blanco 39,327 39,286 100% 2,533.26

12 Merida (MEX) 15122 Valle de Chalco Solidarida 323,461 322,784 100% 6,591.29 31041 Kanasin 39,191 37,674 96% 404.82 31050 Merida 705,055 682,156 97% 801.32 31059 Progreso 48,797 47,684 98% 112.64 31101 Uman 49,145 39,340 80% 143.67

13 Cd. Juarez (CJS) 08037 Juarez 1,218,817 1,209,950 99% 338.65 15002 Acolman 61,250 55,747 91% 754.33

14 Matamoros (MEX) 15044 Jaltenco 31,629 30,682 97% 8,240.12 28022 Matamoros 418,141 383,339 92% 90.61

15 Nuevo Laredo (MEX) 15081 Tecamac 172,813 168,887 98% 1,146.46 28027 Nuevo Laredo 310,915 308,828 99% 256.37

16 Tijuana (TIJ) 02004 Tijuana 1,210,820 1,198,407 99% 1,078.54 15092 Teotihuacan 44,653 37,463 84% 590.36

17 Aguascalientes (AGU) 01001 Aguascalientes 643,419 601,228 93% 550.53 15100 Tezoyuca 18,852 17,153 91% 1,480.19

18 Campeche (CPE) 04002 Campeche 216,897 195,068 90% 67.64 15029 Chicoloapan 77,579 77,101 99% 2,327.50

14 TABLE 6 (cont.) Urban Urbanisation Code Municipality Population Density Population Rate 19 Saltillo (SLW) 05027 Ramos Arizpe 39,853 31,322 79% 6.03 05030 Saltillo 578,046 562,587 97% 103.10 15030 Chiconcuac 17,972 17,113 95% 3,619.12

20 Tuxtla Gutierrez (TGZ) 07101 Tuxtla Gutierrez 434,143 432,250 100% 1,400.21 15031 Chimalhuacan 490,772 482,530 98% 8,787.92

21 Durango (DGO) 10005 Durango 491,436 432,400 88% 53.67 15069 Papalotla 3,469 3,186 92% 960.33

22 Acapulco (ACA) 12001 Acapulco de Juarez 722,499 643,545 89% 422.10 15070 LaPaz 212,694 211,298 99% 6,252.21

23 Toluca (TOL) 15051 Lerma 99,870 62,584 63% 472.47 15054 Metepec 194,463 191,181 98% 2,816.41 15076 San Mateo Atenco 59,647 57,440 96% 2,471.26 15099 Texcoco 204,102 193,672 95% 508.33 15106 Toluca 666,596 621,875 93% 1,645.51 15118 Zinacantepec 121,850 90,465 74% 380.02

24 Morelia (MLM) 16053 Morelia 620,532 568,598 92% 522.85

25 Cuernavaca (CUE) 17007 Cuernavaca 338,706 330,689 98% 1,692.91 17008 Emiliano Zapata 57,617 50,499 88% 821.96 17011 Jiutepec 170,589 166,434 98% 3,227.21 17018 Temixco 92,850 89,019 96% 918.77 17028 Xochitepec 45,643 40,785 89% 488.18

26 Tlaxcala (TLA) 29001 Amaxac de Guerrero 7,679 7,107 93% 2,394.66 29005 67,675 65,708 97% 1,415.06 29009 Cuaxomulco 4,255 2,361 55% 251.03 29010 57,512 53,517 93% 816.51 29017 Mazatecochco de Jose Maria 8,357 8,259 99% 1,029.10 29018 Contla de Juan Cuamatzi 28,842 22,646 79% 1,296.57 29022 Acuamanala de M. Hidalgo 4,357 2,614 60% 171.86 29023 Nativitas 21,020 12,360 59% 370.46 29024 Panotla 23,391 15,988 68% 409.92 29025 San Pablo del Monte 54,387 54,057 99% 915.30 29026 Santa Cruz Tlaxcala 12,824 11,035 86% 506.17 29027 Tenancingo 10,142 10,102 100% 841.87 29028 Teolocholco 17,067 16,600 97% 217.81

15 TABLE 6 (cont.) Urban Urbanisation Code Municipality Population Density Population Rate 29029 Tepeyanco 9,006 3,106 34% 521.13 29031 Tetla de la Solidaridad 21,753 18,857 87% 125.85 29032 Tetlatlahuca 10,803 8,810 82% 479.77 29033 Tlaxcala 73,230 73,213 100% 1,404.70 29035 Tocatlan 4,735 4,722 100% 336.00 29038 Tzompantepec 9,294 7,222 78% 249.26 29039 Xaloztoc 16,857 16,098 95% 385.56 29041 Papalotla de Xicohtencatl 22,288 22,226 100% 1,070.36 29042 Xicohtzinco 10,226 10,226 100% 1,262.49 29043 Yauhquemecan 21,555 14,378 67% 618.80 29044 31,915 31,700 99% 1,167.30 29048 La Magdalena Tlaltelulco 13,697 13,697 100% 940.85 29049 San Damian Texoloc 4,360 4,261 98% 389.75 29050 San Francisco Tetlanohcan 9,081 9,063 100% 176.11 29051 San Jeronimo Zacualpan 3,234 3,203 99% 394.70 29053 San Juan Huactzinco 5,547 5,513 99% 1,300.42 29054 San Lorenzo Axocomanitla 4,368 4,368 100% 1,352.83 29057 Santa Apolonia Teacalco 3,676 3,633 99% 453.25 29058 Santa Catarina Ayometla 6,997 6,997 100% 667.73 29059 Santa Cruz Quilehtla 4,883 3,542 73% 1,114.43 29060 Santa Isabel Xiloxoxtla 3,184 3,184 100% 558.25

27 Tepic (TPQ) 18017 Tepic 305,176 275,728 90% 183.33

28 Oaxaca (OAX) 20067 Oaxaca de Juarez 256,130 254,515 99% 2,654.53 20083 San Agustin de las Juntas 4,970 4,668 94% 225.00 20087 San Agustin Yatareni 3,400 2,974 87% 781.56 20091 San Andres Huayapam 3,909 3,443 88% 167.78 20107 15,261 14,866 97% 1,082.81 20115 4,740 2,954 62% 81.99 20157 8,343 8,343 100% 4,537.58 20174 Animas Trujano 2,887 2,797 97% 703.38 20227 San Lorenzo Cacaotepec 9,965 8,037 81% 280.76 20293 San Pablo Etla 7,103 2,479 35% 185.09 20350 San Sebastian Tutla 15,690 14,789 94% 3,176.30 20375 Santa Cruz Amilpas 6,457 5,621 87% 3,017.75 20385 Santa Cruz Xoxocotlan 52,806 46,494 88% 1,145.77 20390 Santa Lucia del Camino 44,364 43,313 98% 10,456.89 20399 Santa Maria Atzompa 15,749 13,433 85% 663.93 20403 Santa Maria Coyotepec 1,658 1,512 91% 288.98 20409 Santa Maria del Tule 7,272 6,824 94% 601.80 20519 2,834 2,367 84% 89.80 20553 6,777 6,242 92% 82.91

16 TABLE 6 (cont.) Urban Urbanisation Code Municipality Population Density Population Rate 29 Culiacan (CUL) 25006 Culiacan 745,537 606,749 81% 120.33

30 Hermosillo (HMO) 26030 Hermosillo 609,829 573,337 94% 38.93

31 Villahermosa (VSA) 27004 Centro 520,308 410,220 79% 304.90

32 Coatzacoalcos (COA) 30039 Coatzacoalcos 267,212 260,405 97% 870.57 30048 Cosoleacaque 97,437 83,979 86% 359.92 30108 Minatitlan 153,001 112,150 73% 72.35 30206 Nanchital de Lazaro Carden 27,218 25,909 95% 10.22

33 Zacatecas (ZCL) 32017 Guadalupe 109,066 91,236 84% 135.50 32056 Zacatecas 123,899 113,947 92% 278.72

34 Colima (CLQ) 06002 Colima 129,958 119,639 92% 176.63 06010 Villa de Alvarez 80,808 76,679 95% 276.72

35 Manzanillo (ZLO) 06007 Manzanillo 125,143 104,791 84% 93.62

36 Monclova (LOV) 05010 Frontera 66,579 66,041 99% 148.62 05018 Monclova 193,744 192,554 99% 155.08

37 Queretaro (QRO) 22006 Corregidora 74,558 58,843 79% 331.30 22014 Queretaro 641,386 594,513 93% 882.23

38 Celaya (CEL) 11007 Celaya 382,958 327,474 86% 692.29

39 Irapuato (IRA) 11017 Irapuato 440,134 355,550 81% 520.77

40 Cancun (CUN) 23005 Benito Juarez 419,815 412,484 98% 185.58

41 La Paz (PAZ) 03003 La Paz 196,907 170,366 87% 12.81

42 Ciudad del Carmen (CME) 04003 Carmen 172,076 143,624 83% 20.07

17 TABLE 6 (cont.) Urban Urbanisation Code Municipality Population Density Population Rate 43 Pachuca (PCH) 13048 Pachuca de Soto 245,208 234,329 96% 1,559.74 13051 Mineral de la Reforma 42,223 32,964 78% 390.01

44 Mexicali (MXL) 02002 Mexicali 764,602 658,159 86% 58.28

45 Ensenada (ENS) 02001 Ensenada 370,730 305,557 82% 6.93

46 Ciudad Acuña (ACU) 05002 Acuña 110,487 108,159 98% 9.61

47 Piedras Negras (PNG) 05022 Nava 23,019 21,809 95% 25.26 05025 Piedras Negras 128,130 126,386 99% 275.96

48 San Cristobal de las Casas (SCC) 07078 San cristóbal de las Casas 132,421 112,442 85% 352.25

49 Tapachula (TCL) 07089 Tapachula 271,674 195,878 72% 281.51

50 Salamanca (SMC) 11027 Salamanca 226,654 167,393 74% 303.84

51 Chilpancingo (CPG) 12029 Chilpancingo de los Bravo 192,947 161,679 84% 88.17

52 Iguala (IGL) 12035 Iguala de la Independencia 123,960 110,649 89% 218.04

53 Puerto Vallarta (PVR) 14067 Puerto Vallarta 184,728 178,490 97% 270.28

54 Uruapan (URU) 16102 Uruapan 265,699 245,169 92% 281.71

55 Zamora de Hidalgo (ZHG) 16108 Zamora 161,918 141,105 87% 477.19

56 Cuautla (CUA) 17006 Cuautla 153,329 140,617 92% 1,556.53

57 Tehuacan (THC) 21156 Tehuacan 226,258 215,136 95% 416.69

18 TABLE 6 (cont.) Urban Urbanisation Code Municipality Population Density Population Rate 58 San Juan del Rio (SJR) 22016 San Juan del Rio 179,668 131,202 73% 230.24

59 Chetumal (CHE) 23004 Othon P. Blanco 208,164 147,133 71% 14.33

60 Ciudad Valles (CVL) 24013 Ciudad Valles 146,604 108,215 74% 61.17

61 Los Mochis (LMC) 25001 Ahome 359,146 276,306 77% 90.46

62 Mazatlan (MZT) 25012 Mazatlan 380,509 347,057 91% 155.08

63 Ciudad Obregon (CEN) 26018 Cajeme 356,290 324,380 91% 71.95

64 Nogales (NOG) 26043 Nogales 159,787 156,854 98% 88.50

65 San Luis Rio Colorado (SRC) 26055 San Luis Rio Colorado 145,006 134,502 93% 16.05

66 Reynosa (REY) 28032 Reynosa 420,463 403,718 96% 135.11

67 Ciudad Victoria (CVM) 28041 Victoria 263,063 249,029 95% 183.14

68 Xalapa (JAL) 30026 Banderilla 16,433 15,422 94% 739.57 30087 Xalapa 390,590 383,266 98% 3,291.96

69 Poza Rica (PZC) 30131 Poza Rica de Hidalgo 152,838 151,441 99% 3,286.70

19 FIGURE 1 . Standard Metropolitan Areas

Source: Own elaboration based on INEGI Municipal Geo-statistical Framework.

20