I don't have the data to respond to this entire paper, especially on big stuff like GDP ratios, etc, but an important part of their argument stuck out as shaky

I don't have the data to respond to this entire paper, especially on big stuff like GDP ratios, etc, but an important part of their argument stuck out as shaky to me. The paper argues that China's urbanization rate is already much higher than is commonly believed, due to China's definition of an urban centers. It notes that Houston or Brisbane would not be counted as cities, due to low population density. But, as a Chinese resident, I don't find it unreasonable at all that Houston wouldn't be counted as a city here - Houston, w/ a population of 2.2m and a density of 1375 people / square kilometer, is dwarfed when you compare it to a dense city of 11+ million like Tianjin, which is considered a bit of a hick town here in Beijing. It seems unreasonable to use American standards for the definition of a city when China's population to usable land ratio is much higher than is frequently encountered in the West.