7/28/2019 K.Bhavani

1/10

URBANISATION IN INDIA AND ECONOMIC GROWTH AND

DEVELOPMENT

*K.Bhavani**P.Ramesh

***M.Shraddanandam

Urbanization is an index of transformation from traditional ruraleconomies to modern industrial one. It is a long term process. Urbanizationis an index of transformation from traditional rural economies to modernindustries one. It is progressive concentration (Davis, 1965) of population inurban unit. Quantification of urbanization is very difficult. It is a long termprocess. Kingsley Davis has explained urbanization as process(Davis,1962)of switch from spread out pattern of human settlements to oneof concentration in urban centers. It is a finite process a cycle through whicha nation pass as they evolve from agrarian to industrial society (Davis andGolden, 1954). He has mentioned three stages in the process ofurbanization. Stage one is the initial stage characterized by rural traditional

society with predominance in agriculture and dispersed pattern ofsettlements. Stage two refers to acceleration stage where basic restructuringof the economy and investments in social overhead capitals includingtransportation, communication take place. Proportion of urban populationgradually increases from 25 percent to 40 percent 50%, 60% and so on.Dependence on primary sector gradually dwindles. Third stage is known asterminal stage where urban population exceeds 70% or more. At this stagelevel of urbanization remains more or less same or constant. Rate of growthof urban population and total population becomes same at this terminalstage.

The onset of modern and universal process of urbanization is relatively

a recent phenomenon and is closely related with industrial revolution andassociated economic development. As industrial revolution started inWestern Europe, United Kingdom was the initiator of Industrial Revolution.Historical evidence suggests that urbanization process is inevitable anduniversal. Currently developed countries are characterized by high level ofurbanization and some of them are in final stage of urbanization processexperiencing slowing down of urbanization developing countries, on the otherhand started experiencing urbanization only since the middle of 20th century.

*Lecturer in Economics, Government Degree College, Siddipet,Medak (Dist).**Research Scholar, Department of Economics, Osmania Univrsity,Hyd.***Lecturer in Economics, Government Degree College,Siddipet,Medak(Dist).

1

7/28/2019 K.Bhavani

2/10

7/28/2019 K.Bhavani

3/10

iii. a density of population of at least 400 persons per sq km.

Component of Urban Growth

Urban growth can be attributed to mainly three components 1. Naturalincrease, 2. Net migration, 3. Area reclassification, these components have

been estimated using residual method. Since separate information in wake

of change in the area and population due to extension of municipal

boundaries during the inter-censal period is not available either for total or

for migrant population it is difficult to estimate decadal migration to urban

areas. Besides migration data for new and declassified towns are not

available separately and so there is a possibility error in estimating

contribution of migration in the share or urban growth.

Components of Urban Growth

Percent Share 1971-81 1981-91

Natural increase 41.7(45.1) 59.9(58.7)

Net Migration +

changes in municipal

boundaries

39.4(36.1) 22.6(23.7)

Areal reclassification 18.8(18.8) 17.4(17.5)Source: Census of India 1991.

From the above table is evident that during 1971-81 about 41 percent of

urban growth can be attributed to natural increase which reflects the role of

demographic momentum, 36 percent to net migration and municipal

boundary changes and 19 percent due to reclassification of area. But urban

growth due to natural increase has increased from 42 percent in 1971-81 to

about 60 percent during 1981-91. Urban growth due to migration and

changes in municipal boundaries has reduced from 39 percent in 1971-81 to

22 percent in 1981-91. But estimates (figures in parenthesis ) by pathak and

Mehta for these components of urban growth reflects slightly different

results( Pathak and Mehta,1995). It is clear that urbanization process in India

3

7/28/2019 K.Bhavani

4/10

is not mainly migration lead but a product of demographic explosion due to

natural increase. People migrate to cities not due to urban pull but due to

rural push. Poverty led migration(Sen and Ghosh 1993) has induced very

poor quality of urbanization followed by misery, poverty, unemployment

exploitation, rapid growth of slum, inequalities, degradation in the quality

of ;urban life.

Basic Feature and Pattern of Indias Urbanization

Lopsided urbanization induece growth of class I cities

Urbanization occurs without industrialization and strong economic base

Urbanization is mainly a product of demographic explosion and poverty

induced rural-urban migration.

Rapid urbanization leads to massive growth of slum followed by

misery, poverty, unemployment, exploitation, inequalities, degradation

in quality of urban life.

Urbanization occurs not due to urban pull but due to rural push.

Poor quality of rural-urban migration leads to poor quality of

urbanization

Distress migration initiates urban decay.

The pattern of urbanization in India is characterized by continuous

concentration of population and activities in large cities. Kingsley Davis used

the term over-urbanization (Kingsley Davis and Golden, 1954)where in

urban misery and rural poverty exist side by side with the result that city can

hardly be called dynamic and where inefficient, unproductive informal sector

(Kundu and Basu ,1998) becomes increasingly apparent. Another scholar

( Breese,1969) depicts urbanization in India as pseudo urbanization where in

people arrive in cities not due to urban pull but due to rural push.

4

7/28/2019 K.Bhavani

5/10

Globalization, liberalization (Kundu and Gupta,200) ,

privatization addressing negative process for urbanization in India. Under

globalization survival and existence of the poor are affected adversely.

Liberalization permits cheap import of goods which ultimately negatively

affects rural economy, handicrafts, household industry on which rural poor

survives. The benefits of liberalization (Despande and Despande, 1998)generally accrue to only those who acquire new skills. It is unlikely that

common man and the poor will benefit from the liberalization. Privatization

causes retrenchment of workers. All these negative syndrome forces poverty

induced migration (Mukherjee, 1993) of rural poor to urban to urban informal

sectors (Kundu,Lalitha and Arora(2001). Hence migration which is one of the

components of urban growth occurs not due to urban pull but due to rural

push.

Relative Growth of Urban and Rural Population

Populatio

n in

Millions

Percenta

ge of

total

populatio

n

Percenta

ge

increase

in urban

populatio

n during

thedecade

Urba

n

Rira;

Ratio

Year Total Rura

l

Urba

n

Rural Urba

n1901 232.9 207.

3

25.6 89.0 11.0 .. 1:8.1

1911 246.0 220.

4

25.6 89.6 10.4 0.0 1:8.6

1921 244.3 216.

1

27.7 88.7 11.3 +8.25 1:7.8

1931 270.8 237.

8

33.0 87.8 12.2 +19.1 1:7.2

1941 309.0 265.

5

43.5 85.9 14.1 +32.1 1:6.1

1951 361.1 298.

7

62.4 82.7 17.3 +43.2 1:4.7

5

7/28/2019 K.Bhavani

6/10

1961 439.2 360.

3

78.9 82.0 18.0 +25.3 1:4.5

1971 548.2 439.

1

109.1 80.1 19.9 +38.0 1:3.7

1981* 685.2 525.

7

159.5 76.7 23.3 +46.8 1:3.3

1991**

844.3 627.1

217.2 74.3 25.7 +35.6 1:2.9

2001 1,027.0 742.

0

285.0 72.2 27.8 +31.2 1:2.6

*Includes projected population of Assam.

**Includes population projection for Jammu &Kashmir.

Source: Registrar Genera, India.

From the data above table it is evident that the process of industrialization,

though initiated during the Second plan could make little impact on the

economy in terms of population-shift to urban areas till 1961. Although the

Second and the Third Plan decided to have a big programme of

industrialization, the plans emphasized the development of heavy and basic

industries. The employment potential of these industries being limited, their

growth did not lead to absorption of lab our from the rural to urban areas to

such an extent as to have marked impact on the economy. One can,

therefore, observe that the process of industrialization, though started during

the sixties could not gather momentum. Urbanization could hardly absorb a

little more than the natural increase in urban population. As a result, a

serious dent in terms of the shift of population from rural to urban areas

could not be made.

Urban population increased from about 26 million in 1901 to 62 million

in 1951 an increase of only 36 million in 50 years. But, thereafter, the

absolute increase during the next three decades was of the order of 94

million (1951-81). This indicates that programmes of industrialization did

make an impact in terms of population absorption in urban areas, though this

impact is not very discemible. During the decade (1981-1991) alone, urban

population increased by 59.4 million which indicates a growing trend towards

urbanization. Urban population, in absolute terms reached the figure of 285

million accounting for 27.08 percent of total population in 2001.

6

7/28/2019 K.Bhavani

7/10

In conclusion, it may be mentioned that whereas urbanization and per

capita income are positively correlated, there is near absence of a correlation

between urbanization and unemployment and, urbanization and reduction of

population below the poverty line. Many factors may be responsible for the

situation. Firstly, the neglect of slums in urban areas in our planning

strategies may be perpetuating poverty. For instance, the slum surveyrevealed that in Calcutta, 33 percent of the population was living in slums,

Secondly, whereas the organized sectors are able to improve their income

levels by collective bargaining, the unorganized sectors are ruthlessly

exploited by the capitalists, the landlords, the contractors and other owners

of the instruments of production,. Thirdly, the increasing use of capital-

intensive technologies in urban areas results in increase in unemployment.

Consequently, the absorptive capacity of the economy continues to be low

and this explains to some extent the fact that urbanization did not make adefinite dent on the problem of unemployment. Last, but not the least, the

benefits of growth may be unequally shared by various sections of the

society and the resulting concentration of income and wealth may lead to an

increase in per capita income without either improving the economic

condition of the poor or enlarging employment at higher wage levels. In

other worlds, the country may be experiencing an enclave type development

whose spread effects are very limited.

Problem of Urbanization:

Problem of urbanization is manifestation of lopsided urbanization, faulty

urban planning, and urbanization with poor economic base and without

having functional categories. Hence Indias urbanization is followed by some

basic problems in the field of: 1. Housing, 2. Slums, 3. Transport 4. Water

supply and sanitation, 5. Water pollution and air pollution 6. Inadequate

provision for social infrastructure (school, hospital, etc.,)

. Class I cities such as Calcutta, Bombay, Delhi, Madras etc., have reachedsaturation level of employment generating capacity (Kundu,1997). Since

these cities are suffering from of urban poverty, unemployment, housing

shortage, crisis in urban infra-structural services these large cities can not

absorb these distressed rural migrants i.e. poor landless illiterate and

7

7/28/2019 K.Bhavani

8/10

unskilled agricultural laborers. Hence this migration to urban class I cities

causes urban crisis more acute.

Most of these cities using capital intensive technologies can not

generate employment for these distress rural poor. So there is transfer of

rural poverty to urban poverty. Poverty induced migration of illiterate and

unskilled laborer occurs in class I cities addressing urban involution andurban decay.

Indian urbanization is involuted not evolutes (Mukherji,1995). Poverty

induced migration occurs due to rural push. Mega cities grow in urban

population (Nayak,1962) not in urban prosperity, and culture. Hence it is

urbanization without urban functional characteristics. These mega cities are

subject to extreme filthy slum and very cruel mega city denying shelter,drinking water, electricity sanitation ( Kundu, Bachi and Kundu, 1999) to the

extreme poor and rural migrants.

Urbanization is degenerating social and economic inequalities (Kundu

and Gupta, 1996) which warrants social conflicts, crimes and anti-social

activities. Lopsided and uncontrolled urbanization led to environmental

degradation and degradation in the quality of urban life pollution in sound,

air, water, created by disposal of hazardous waste. Illiterate, low-skill or no

skill migrants from rural areas are absorbed in poor low grade urban informalsector at a very low wage rate and urban informal sector becomes in-efficient

and unproductive.

Policy Implication:

Redirection of investment is recommended to develop strong economic base

for small and medium city neglected so far.

Redirection of migration flows is required. Since the mega cities have

reached saturation level for employment generation and to avoid over-crowding into the over congested slums of mega cities i.e. Bombay, Calcutta,

Delhi, Madrasetc it is required to build strong economic sector (Kundu and

Basu,1998) in the urban economy,growth efforts and investments should be

directed towards small cities which have been neglected so far so that

8

7/28/2019 K.Bhavani

9/10

functional base of urban economy is strengthened. Then redirection of

migration to these desirable destinations will be possible.

Policy should also relate to proper urban planning where city planning will

consist of operation, developmental and restorative planning. Operational

planning should take care of improvement or urban infrastructure, e.g road

traffic, transport etc. Developmental planning should emphasize ondevelopment of newly annexed urban areas. Various urban renewal

processes can be used. Restorative planning should aim to restore original

status of old building monuments which have historic value.

Economic development is generally associated with the growth or

urbanizations. During the first half of the 20th century, India passed through a

period of economic stagnation, consequently, the extent or urbanization was

very limited. Urban population which accounted for 11 percent of total

population in1901 lazily crept to the figure of 14 percent in 1941. With avery liberal definition of the urban area adopted in 1951. Urban population

became 17.6 percent total. Much of the increase therefore was statistical.

This explains why the adoption of a little more strict definition of the urban

area in 1961 census resulted in recording a very small increase in the urban

population and it was estimated at 18.3 census has also continued with the

definition adopted in 1971.

The urbanization of India is taking place at a faster rate than in the rest

of the world. By 2030, 40.76 percent of Indias population will be living inurban areas compared to about 28.4 percent now. So says the United

Nationss State of the World Population 2007 report,

But at the same time, the report adds, metropolitan cities like Mumbai and

Kolkata have a far greater number of people moving out that coming in. It

also says that a few cities will be the size doomsayers had predicted in the

1970s,Mega cities are still dominant but they have not grown to the size

once projected and have consistently declined inmost world regions, the

report says.Releasing the report in India, Urban Development Minister Jaipal Reddy said

urbanization was a sign of liberalization but the condition of slum-dwellers

was even worse than that of the poor in villages.

According to the report, over 90 percent of slum-dwellers live in developing

countries with China and India accounting for 37 percent of them. About 56

9

7/28/2019 K.Bhavani

10/10

percent of the urban population lives in slum conditions. The report also says

that in countries like India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, the literacy rate of

women living in slums is as low as 52 percent.

For countries like India, the report says, getting ready for the aging

population is another big challenge. In Chennai, it says, total fertility rate has

fallen to below replacement levels. The city has closed down 10 maternityclinics and reopened them as geriatric units.

Nesim Tumkaya, United National Population Fund representative in India, said

that by next year, half of the worlds population would be living in urban

areas. But in most regions, the rate of urbanization is showing a declined

except in growing economies like India.

The population of towns and cities in developing countries like India is set to

double in the space of a generation, while the urban population in the

developed world is expected to grow relatively lower, the report says.In comparison to the urban population growth rate, the worlds rural

population is expected to decrease by some 28 million between 2005 and

2030.

Reference:

1. Ruddar Datt and K.P.M Sundaram: Indian Economy: 55th

revised.

2. Pranati Datta: Urbanization in India- population studies Unit,

Indian Statistical Institute.3. Time of India News paper December8th 2008.

10