Over half of the world’s population now lives in urban
areas. Whereas, according to the 2011 census, only 31% of Indians stay in urban
territories. So, why does India have such a low urbanization rate compared to other
countries? Or is this actually comparable? The straight answer is, No. Because
different countries around the world define ‘Urban’ differently. What one
country might describe as a small ‘city’ might be a ‘town’ or ‘village’ for
someone else; one country’s ‘megacity’ might be a cluster of cities from a
different perspective. On the one hand, it is not very easy to define urban
from a universal perspective. However, on the other hand, it is crucial to
define urban to avoid policy bottlenecks and good governance.
India is 31% urban. However, if we apply Ghana’s definition of urban, India is 47% urban, and if we apply Mexico’s definition, India is 65% urban. This gives us an idea of the complexity of defining ‘urban’ in India. The countries decide whether to define a place as ‘urban-based on population size, population density, type of economic activity, physical characteristics, level of infrastructure, or a combination of these or other criteria. India has two different government definitions of ‘Urban’ – the administrative definition and the census definition. The administrative definition is simple, areas governed by urban local bodies are to be called ‘urban’. The census of India, 2011 defines urban settlement as: -
All the places which have municipality, corporation, cantonment board, or notified town area committee.
All the other places which satisfy the following criteria:
a. A minimum population of 5000 persons;
b. At least 75 % of the male working population engaged in non-agricultural pursuits; and
c. A density of population of at least 400 persons per square kilometer
If a particular place has fulfilled all of these criteria, then it is called a Census Town. A census town is remained to be governed by Panchayats, and it becomes urban only if the state government converts it through requisite legal processes, including notification. The problem starts here because every state has different sets of rules in declaring an area as ‘urban’. Furthermore, because of this, the urbanization rate varies across states with small hill states such as Mizoram (37%), Nagaland (26%), and Manipur (25%) surprisingly having a higher percentage of its population governed as urban than larger states such as West Bengal (23%), Bihar (11%) and Kerala (16%). This shows that the states are reluctant to declare villages as urban areas. The reason behind this is that different pressure groups within the villages want to stay rural. The desire to stay in rural areas may stem from perceived advantages enjoyed by rural areas, such as financial access through rural development schemes or lower taxes. Even getting an allocation of funds in the MGNREGS is one of the main factors in staying rural. Having a uniform criterion in defining ‘urban’ across Indian states is not possible because of diversity in demography. Nevertheless, some kind of model guidelines should be there to recognize and develop urban areas.
In 2016, the central government asked the states to set up urban local bodies in the census towns and recognize those areas as urban. After this, an official from the state of Kerala stated, “If the parameters prescribed by the Union ministry were strictly followed, there might not be any panchayat left in the state.” This is because Kerala differs from other States in that it is about 16 percent urban in administrative terms, while it is about 99% urban in census terms. These are the kind of problems India faces for not having a proper definition of ‘urban’.
There is a lot of adverse effects of not having the proper urban-rural categorization in India. Not recognizing areas with urban-like characteristics as ‘urban’ creates problems, which are becoming barriers to balanced, equitable, and inclusive development. Urban areas need a different governance structure which the panchayats are not able to provide. Defining the ‘urban’ properly will help the policymakers to devise targeted development goals. From the time of independence, India focused on rural developments because they are thought to be more deprived or agrarian. However, with the transformation of these areas as urban need some special treatment. There is a link between urbanization and socio-economic indicators. One way to assess the suitability of various urban definitions is to examine the relationship of urbanization rates using different definitions with these socio-economic indicators. Addressing urban is also essential because of economies of scale, and it helps the infrastructure provider design sustainably. So, to achieve inclusive socio-economic growth, an accurate definition of ‘urban’ is warranted in India. Urban will be the “engines of economic growth” only if we properly define and recognize the ‘urban’.
India is 31% urban. However, if we apply Ghana’s definition of urban, India is 47% urban, and if we apply Mexico’s definition, India is 65% urban. This gives us an idea of the complexity of defining ‘urban’ in India. The countries decide whether to define a place as ‘urban-based on population size, population density, type of economic activity, physical characteristics, level of infrastructure, or a combination of these or other criteria. India has two different government definitions of ‘Urban’ – the administrative definition and the census definition. The administrative definition is simple, areas governed by urban local bodies are to be called ‘urban’. The census of India, 2011 defines urban settlement as: -
All the places which have municipality, corporation, cantonment board, or notified town area committee.
All the other places which satisfy the following criteria:
a. A minimum population of 5000 persons;
b. At least 75 % of the male working population engaged in non-agricultural pursuits; and
c. A density of population of at least 400 persons per square kilometer
If a particular place has fulfilled all of these criteria, then it is called a Census Town. A census town is remained to be governed by Panchayats, and it becomes urban only if the state government converts it through requisite legal processes, including notification. The problem starts here because every state has different sets of rules in declaring an area as ‘urban’. Furthermore, because of this, the urbanization rate varies across states with small hill states such as Mizoram (37%), Nagaland (26%), and Manipur (25%) surprisingly having a higher percentage of its population governed as urban than larger states such as West Bengal (23%), Bihar (11%) and Kerala (16%). This shows that the states are reluctant to declare villages as urban areas. The reason behind this is that different pressure groups within the villages want to stay rural. The desire to stay in rural areas may stem from perceived advantages enjoyed by rural areas, such as financial access through rural development schemes or lower taxes. Even getting an allocation of funds in the MGNREGS is one of the main factors in staying rural. Having a uniform criterion in defining ‘urban’ across Indian states is not possible because of diversity in demography. Nevertheless, some kind of model guidelines should be there to recognize and develop urban areas.
In 2016, the central government asked the states to set up urban local bodies in the census towns and recognize those areas as urban. After this, an official from the state of Kerala stated, “If the parameters prescribed by the Union ministry were strictly followed, there might not be any panchayat left in the state.” This is because Kerala differs from other States in that it is about 16 percent urban in administrative terms, while it is about 99% urban in census terms. These are the kind of problems India faces for not having a proper definition of ‘urban’.
There is a lot of adverse effects of not having the proper urban-rural categorization in India. Not recognizing areas with urban-like characteristics as ‘urban’ creates problems, which are becoming barriers to balanced, equitable, and inclusive development. Urban areas need a different governance structure which the panchayats are not able to provide. Defining the ‘urban’ properly will help the policymakers to devise targeted development goals. From the time of independence, India focused on rural developments because they are thought to be more deprived or agrarian. However, with the transformation of these areas as urban need some special treatment. There is a link between urbanization and socio-economic indicators. One way to assess the suitability of various urban definitions is to examine the relationship of urbanization rates using different definitions with these socio-economic indicators. Addressing urban is also essential because of economies of scale, and it helps the infrastructure provider design sustainably. So, to achieve inclusive socio-economic growth, an accurate definition of ‘urban’ is warranted in India. Urban will be the “engines of economic growth” only if we properly define and recognize the ‘urban’.
