RURAL URBAN DIVIDE

DISTRICTS OF FARIDABAD [HARYANA] AND KANPUR NAGAR [UTTAR PRADESH], 1991.

KRITI KANAUJIA M.A. GEOGRAPHY, 2ND YR. 3RD SEMSETER DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY DELHI SCHOOL OFECONOMICS UNIVERSITY OF DELHI PAPER 306: URBAN SETTLEMENT SYSTEMS

CONTENTS: INTRODUCTION TO RURAL- URBAN DIVIDE DELINEATION OF STUDY AREA MAPS : a) ADMININSTRATIVE MAP OF DISTRICT FARIDABAD (HARYANA), 1991 AND MAP SHOWING DISTANCE FROM FARIDABAD CITY HEADQUARTERS. b) ADMININSTRATIVE MAP OF DISTRICT KANPUR NAGAR (UTTAR PRADESH), 1991 AND MAP SHOWING DISTANCE FROM KANPUR CITY HEADQUARTERS. METHODOLOGY AND INDICATORS GRAPHS SHOWING INDICATORS WITH DISTANCE. OBSERVATION AND INTERPRETATION CONCLUSION REFERENCES APPENDIX

INTRODUCTION TO RURAL- URBAN DIVIDE Rural- Urban divide cannot be understood without defining what is considered to be rural or urban. A Rural area is one which is characterized by domination of extensive uses of land. The rural community is the smallest spatial group which encompasses the principal features of society, being a group of people interacting socially with common ties or bonds with the geographically limited rural territory in which they live. It is also the smallest social group that is largely self- sufficient in terms of meeting its members daily social needs. The term Urban means characteristic of or situated in a city or a town. It is customary to define urban area in terms of its physical characteristics like size and density of population in the continuous built up area and functional criteria reflecting the concentration of employment in secondary and tertiary activity. The Census of India, 2001 defined an urban area as: a) Administrative: A legal status conferred upon the area by the state or law or any town area, notified board, statutory body or municipal corporation is termed as urban b) Demography: 1) Population Size: Any area having a population of 5000 persons or above. 2) Population Density: Any area having a population density above 334 persons per km. sq. 3) At least 75 % of male working population engaged in non- agricultural activities. The definition by Census is vague and needs a lot of clarity but it is still most widely used in India to classify or declassify any place as rural or urban. Rural- Urban divide should not be confused with Rural- Urban Fringe which is an area of land use conflict where a process of change from rural to urban use is taking place. Rural- Urban Divide is a phenomenon and not any land use process which describes the differentials in the economy, polity, society and infrastructure in rural and urban areas. It encompasses a wide array of variables that help in determining the extent and limit of rural- urban divide. It is the objective of each and every policy maker to reduce as much as possible the rural- urban divide to provide stage for rural- urban continuum. In political and planning context, rural- urban divide is caused due to differential allocation of resources. Demographically, rural- urban divide is reflected primarily in the size of population, densities and their social and medical status as well as the dominant societal norms, customs and traditions in a rural and urban place.

Rural-urban disparities, particularly in post-colonial countries, have for long been one of the causes of concern for the policymakers. The disparities are seen in all spheres of human life - economic and noneconomic. The extent of disparities, however, differs from country to country. The long colonial rule in India had created an urban-rural divide. What causes great concern now-a-days is the sharp increase in the level of disparities after a few decades of planning, especially because planning was conceived as an instrument to narrow down rural-urban disparities. Rural India encompasses a little less than three-fourths of the country's population and is characterized by low income levels, poor quality of life and a weak base of human development. Nearly one-third of the national income comes from villages, but there is a significant rural-urban divide.

Agriculture is the mainstay of most post-colonial countries like India. It supports roughly two-thirds of the workforce. But the lion's share of India's national resources is directed to the non-agricultural sector. The bias of the state in favour of urban areas is evident from the per capita expenditure on basic services. According to the estimate of the Eleventh Finance Commission, per capita expenditure on basic services in rural areas during 1997-98 was Rs.24, but in urban areas it was Rs.49. Rural India contributes 27 per cent to the GDP, but gets back only 5 per cent, which is less than one-fifth of its contribution. In a post-colonial capitalist country like India, uneven rural-urban development or rural-urban disparity is not unusual. While it is almost impossible to bring it to an end, it is possible to reduce the disparity to a tolerable level. It may be recalled that Gandhi emphasized on rural growth and pleaded for village swaraj. He wanted the engine of India's development to start rolling down from the villages. But it became clear from the discussions in the Constituent Assembly that it would not happen. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar characterized villages as "a sink of localism, ignorance and communalism". Nehru felt that villages were culturally backward and no progress could be made from such places. Urban bias was clearly reflected in the attitude of the policymakers. This seems to be continuing unabated. In the Human Development Index prepared by the Planning Commission, there is a significant divide. The value for rural areas is 0.340, in the case of urban areas it is as high as 0.511. The index is a composite of variables capturing attainments in three dimensions of human development namely, economic, educational and health. The same is the situation in respect of the Human Poverty Index: rural 42.25 and urban 44.8. We need to look further whether this rural- urban divide exists or is it lessening. The popular notion is that growth not only has been skewed towards urban India but also has been gained at the expense of the countryside. Some of this thinking can be traced back to economic decisions made soon after India won independence from Britain in 1947. At that time, policy makers emphasized capital-intensive industrialisation and urban infrastructure rather than agricultural investment and rural land reform, leading to the urban-rural imbalance. Often overlooked in discussions of this issue, however, is the fact that the rural economy is no longer limited to agriculture. During the past two decades, rural India has diversified significantly into non-farm activities -- and this has brought India's cities much closer to their hinterlands than people might imagine. In their research, Purushothaman and her colleagues uncovered four links between rural and urban economies: Production relationships, Consumption relationships, Financial linkages and Migration. Their study explores the consumption connection and highlights the impact of growing urban consumption expenditure on rural employment and incomes. She lists three urban myths about contemporary rural India. The first is that faster economic growth in urban India -- as compared to rural areas -- is driving rapid urbanization; second, that rural India is still an agricultural economy; and third, that rural-urban inequality is on the rise.

The reality, Purushothaman points out, is very different. During the past two decades, the rural economy in India has grown significantly faster than the urban economy. During the past decade alone, the rural economy is estimated to have grown on average by 7.3% as compared to 5.4% in the urban economy. Purushothaman points out that with agriculture only growing at 3.2% on average; much of this growth is driven by the rural non-farm sector. As of 2000, agriculture accounted for 51.8% of rural economic activity. This represents a significant decline from 64% in the early 1980s and 72% in early 1970s. Moreover, services -- which accounted for 21% of rural activity in 1981 -- now account for 28%. In addition, manufacturing, utilities and construction have nearly doubled their share in the rural economy, from just under 10% in 1971 to 18% in 2000. Purushothaman also debunked the popular notion that India's economic growth is driving rapid urbanization. According to Census data, while rural-urban migration as a share of total rural population was 6.5% in 1981, in 2001 it fell to 2.8%. The study points out that "the slow rates of rural-urban migration along with declining rates of natural increase in urban areas" indicate that the process of urbanization in India is actually slowing down as a result of economic growth. According to Purushothaman, policies that inhibit the growth of labor-intensive industries and a lack of urban infrastructure investment have slowed the process of urbanization. On the issue of rural-urban inequality, research by Purushothaman and her colleagues indicates that the urban-rural income gap (or the ratio of mean urban to rural incomes) has decreased since the early 1990s. Rural employment figures also reveal interesting insights. Between 2000 and 2005, rural agricultural employment growth was as low as 1%. This indicates that growth in the agricultural sector has not really resulted in a significant increase in jobs in the countryside. In contrast, during the same period, non-farm jobs have gone up by 20%.

In this paper, I am focusing upon 2 districts of India, 1991 i.e. Faridabad in Haryana and Kanpur Nagar in Uttar Pradesh. I have tried to bring out the true picture of rural-urban divide through some indicators like sex ratio, literacy rate, workforce participation in agricultural activities and population density of the leading city of the district and the surrounding villages. The cities of Faridabad and Kanpur were the leading metropolitan cities in their respective states in 1991, enabling me to bring out the differences or similarities between the villages and the city.

DELINEATION OF STUDY AREA The study area comprises of two districts, namely Faridabad in Haryana and Kanpur Nagar in Uttar Pradesh in 1991. Both the districts have been selected because of their leading cities of Faridabad and Kanpur who were metropolitan in nature in 1991. Both the districts are part of Northern plains in India and support large population size and agrarian society. The two areas have been discussed in detail as following:

FARIDABAD:

Location: Faridabad lies at 28 25' 16" N Latitude and 77 18' 28" E Longitude. The district shares its boundaries with the National Capital and the Union Territory of Delhi to its north, Gurgaon district to the west and Uttar Pradesh to its east and south. Faridabad enjoys a prime location both geographically and politically. At a distance of just 25 km from India's capital city of Delhi, Faridabad has well connected network of road and railways. Most of the South and West bound trains of India pass through the district and all the major towns are served by NH-2. Faridabad is a southeastern town in the state of Haryana founded in 1607 AD by a Muslim bureaucrat, Shaikh Farid, treasurer to Emperor Jehangir's court or named after Baba Farid, a Sufi saint. It is planned in a semi circle with the Industrial area along the circumference surrounding the town. One of the oldest towns in Haryana, it is a bustling industrial town, although the district itself is the 12th one to be formed on 15 August 1979. Being a project for Pakistani refugee resettlement after the partition, light industrial development was initiated in the town in 1950. Now famous for its tourist resorts, refugees laid down the initial infrastructure of the present Faridabad. Faridabad is the most populated and the most industrialized in the entire state of Haryana and is home to 14,77,000 people. Geography: It has an average elevation of 198 metres (649 ft).The city is located on the plains of the Yamuna river. It is bordered by the Yamuna to the east and Aravali Hills towards the west and southwest. Today, virtually all of the land has been developed with residential housing as the population of the city swelled during the mid 90s.Much like the rest of India, the people of Faridabad rely on ground water for their basic needs which is the gift of good monsoon season.

Economy: Wheat, pulses and commercial crops are products that contribute to the districts agricultural scenario. Electricity has reached practically every corner of Faridabad making it possible to highly mechanize this belt. About half a million people are employed in over 15,000 small, medium and large industries in this multifaceted land. Tractors, steel re-rolling, scientific instruments, power looms, agriculture implements, motorcycles, switch gears, refrigerators, shoes, tyres and JCB crane are widely produced in the district. Faridabad Heena is also a renowned production.

The district of Faridabad in 1991 had 4 tahsils named as Faridabad, Ballabhgarh, Palwal and Hathin with 5 Community Development Blocks with the same name along with Hodal. The districts extent is more as compared to Kanpur Nagar and it has more share of villages rather than urban areas.

KANPUR NAGAR:

Location: The city's coordinates are 26.4670 North and 80.3500 East, placing it 83 km from Lucknow, the capital city of Uttar Pradesh.Kanpur district (Kanpur Nagar District) is one of the districts of the Uttar Pradesh state of India. It is a part of Kanpur division and its district headquarters is Kanpur. Due to increase in population of Kanpur District, for proper administration it has been divided into two. The term Kanpur refers to the combination of Kanpur Nagar District and Kanpur Dehat District. Kanpur District was divided into two districts namely Kanpur-Nagar and Kanpur-Dehat in year 1977 and reunited again in year 1979. It was again separated in year 1981. Kanpur is the popular and biggest important industrial centre in Uttar Pradesh with its own historical, religious and commercial importance. Kanpur is located on the banks of the river Ganga. Kanpur, the name of the city derived from Kanhiyapur (the city of Lord Krishna). About 25 km from Kanpur is Bithoor. Legend has it that the wife of Lord Rama came to live at the ashram of the sage Valmiki, after Rama expelled her from Ayodhya. It was here that Sita gave birth to the twins Lav and Kush, and disappeared back into the earth when confronted by a repentant Rama. Bithoor is also the site of the fort to which Nana Sahib escaped following the British retaking of Kanpur. Today, Bithoor is a tourist spot on the banks of the Ganges and Kanpur is expanding very fast with new residential complexes sprouting up everywhere. Geography: Kanpur, along with Allahabad and Fatehpur, are part of the Lower Doab, which in antiquity was known as the Vats country. It is surrounded by two main rivers of India, the Ganges in the north-east and the Pandu river (Yamuna) in the south. The districts surrounding Kanpur are Hamirpur in the south and Unnao in the north-east Economy: After 1857 it became an important center of the Leather and Textile industries. The Government Harness and Saddler Factory were started in 1860 to supply the army with leather products, followed by Cooper Allen & Co. in 1880. The first cotton textile mill, the Elgin Mills was started in 1862 and Muir Mills in 1882, and many others that followed in the next 40 years, such as Victoria Mills and Atherton West & Co. (Atherton Mills), made Cawnpore a major textile producer. It has the population of 6 million people. It is famous for leather and textile goods of superior quality. It is now one of the main industrialized cities. Kanpur city is famous for leather, wool, cotton, vegetable oil mills, chemical works and sugar refineries. Formerly known as Manchester of the country, it is now also called the commercial capital of the state.

The district of Kanpur Nagar is basically smaller in area than Faridabad and is more urban in nature than Faridabad. The district of Kanpur Nagar had 1 tahsil in 1991 named as Kanpur with 3 Vikas Khands named as Kalyanpur, Bidhnu and Sarsaul.

METHODOLOGY AND INDICATORS Methodology: This study basically focuses upon the applicability of the rural- urban divide in Kanpur Nagar and Faridabad in 1991. Initially, the data had been sorted in categories according to the distance from city center and calculated to obtain meaningful data corresponding to the indicators used to determine rural- urban divide. To bring out the differences more clearly, maps and graphs have been used to bring out a clear picture of the problem and allow for comparison. The Choropleth maps are used to demarcate the villages according to distances from the city center and the Bar graphs are used to show the difference among the indicators and between the indicators for the various distances and the city and district on the whole. Choropleth: It means quantity in an area. It is primarily used to show distribution and density. It helps in bringing out the distribution of indicators in each district of the state, hence giving a comprehensive picture about the major pockets of concentration of development and backwardness. Merits: Choropleth is used as it is helpful in reflecting variations and is easy to understand. It is also a good technique to represent absolute data. Demerits: Main demerit of Choropleth is that it follows administrative boundaries, so actual variations may not be known. Also, class interval and shading needs to be wisely selected in order to avoid distortions.

Vertical Bar: In bar diagram, height of bar is directly proportional to quantity. It is used to represent variations between components of same data set. Here, comparison is being made in context of Malefemale variations in each district and among the districts. Merits: The construction of bar is very simple and easy. It can be easily understood and is good for comparison. Demerits: It is not much useful in the event of high range between maximum and minimum values. It also covers a lot of space.

Indicators: The following indicators are being used for determining the Rural- Urban divide: 1) Population Density: Population density is a measurement of population per unit area or unit volume. It is a key geographic term. 2) Sex Ratio: Sex ratio is the ratio of males to females in a population at a particular point of time. 3) Literacy Rate: The total percentage of the population of an area at a particular time aged seven years or above who can read and write with understanding. 4) Workers in Agricultural and Non- Agricultural activities: More workers in agricultural activities represent an area to be more rural and vice versa.

OBSERVATION AND INTERPRETATION District of Faridabad, 1991:

The population density in Faridabad shows a decreasing trend from the city center with increase in distance. The decline is not steep or sudden but it is constant. The density decreases from 4 persons per km.sq. in 0-10 km. category to 2 persons per km. sq. in 50 -60 km. category. Less density is indicative of a rural setting as rural areas are characterized by large open spaces where man to land ratio is low. Declining population density as we move away from the city center also reflects the rural- urban disparity in utilization or under- utilization of resources. It also represents low levels of population in rural areas as compared to urban resulting in low levels of population density.

Haryana has always been characterized as a state having the lowest levels of sex ratio in comparison to the entire nation. The highest sex ratio of 847 females is found in 10-20 km. category while the lowest sex ratio of 806 females is found in 50-60 km. category. Low levels of females are not a positive indicator. Rural areas are generally representative of high sex ratios due to out- migration of male

members of the family in search of better employment opportunities, but the case with Haryana is different as it is a very prosperous state and does not require out migration by male members to access better opportunities. In such a scenario, having lower levels of females in rural areas is an indicator of rural urban disparity. This may also be because of the prevalent practices of female foeticide and female child abortions due to societal customs of the region wherein a girl child is seen as a burden on the family and not very much preferred over a male heir. These customs are more prevalent in homogenous rural societies rather than a heterogeneous urban setting.

High literacy rates are a prominent characteristic of urban areas and vice- versa. The current graph represents low levels of literacy rate as you move away from the city center. The highest level of literacy rate is found in 0-10 km. category with 54% and the lowest level of literacy is reflected in 40- 50 km. category with only 37% as literates. The areas nearer to the city center have high levels of literacy rate. This may be attributed to the fact that rural areas may be infested with problems of inaccessibility of schools along with their unavailability and scarcity. Also, the infrastructure of schools being provided might not be adequate enough to support larger capacities of students. Low levels of literacy in rural areas may also be attributed to the fact that in rural areas the employment opportunities is such that do not demand much of education and there is this easy going attitude in attending schools and becoming literates.

More number of workers engaged in agricultural activities is reflective of a rural area whose economy basically runs on primary activities and hence a large number or all of the workers are engaged in agriculture and allied activities. In the above graph, it is clearly visible that as we move away, the percentage of workers engaged in primary activities increase reflecting the more dominant rural nature of the area. The highest proportion of agricultural workers is reflected in 50-60 km. category with 83 % of workforce engaged in primary activities while the lowest proportion of agricultural workers is in 0-10 km. category with only 55% engaged in agriculture and allied activities. According to Census of India, 2001, for any region to be urban, at least 75% of its male working members must be engaged in nonagricultural pursuits. Any scenario opposite to this is reflective of a rural setting.

District of Kanpur Nagar, 1991:

The current graph is reflecting the trend of population density. The highest population density is 5 persons per km. sq. of 10- 20 km. category, followed by 0-10 km. with 4 persons per km. sq. and 20-30 km. having the least population density of all three i.e. 3 persons per km.sq.10 -20 km. category is having the highest population density because this zone has the highest number of villages and lies adacent to Kanpur city depicting the influence of city on its surroundings. Low levels of population density refer to the fact that both population levels and land area is less in the category 20-30 km.

This graph is showing the highest number of females in 10 -20 km. category with 838 females followed by 20- 30 km. category with 835 and 0-10 km. category with 834 females per 1000 males. The sex ratio is quite low but at least it is reflecting the narrow divide between rural and urban areas with all the categories having sex ratio almost or close to each other, further strengthening rural urban continuum or may be displaying fringe characteristics.

Literacy rate is showing a reverse scenario in context of literacy rates in Faridabad. In this, as we go away from the city center, the number of literates increase. This may be attributed to the location of the major universities and colleges in Kanpur Nagar away from and outside the Kanpur city resulting in concentrations and pockets of literates in the district.

The category of 20 -30 km. has the highest proportion of workers involved in agricultural activities i.e. 79 % followed by categories 0-10 and 10-20 km. with 77 % workers engaged in agricultural pursuits. This minor difference is indicative of lower levels of difference and reduced levels of rural urban disparity.

If we compare both the districts we might be able to see the difference between the two. The districts portray varied characteristics almost opposite to one another on all four indicators. Faridabad shows the ideal picture of increasing rural- urban divide with increasing distance whereas Kanpur Nagar is reflecting a reverse scenario. Kanpur Nagar is depicting closer affinity towards rural- urban continuum

or rural urban fringe rather than rural urban divide. The smaller extent of Kanpur Nagar district and its closer proximity to the city of Kanpur is responsible for this phenomenon in contrast to the Faridabad district which has a larger area span and has many villages located far away from the city of Faridabad.

CONCLUSION Given the situation, what can be done to reduce the level of disparity to a desirable level is a matter that calls for serious consideration. There is no doubt that India's rural economy cannot grow without agricultural development. Capitalist agricultural productivity is constrained by the system itself. Effective land reform coupled with non-land input support to the beneficiaries can result in an increase in agricultural productivity. Apart from taking steps to increase human development facilities in the villages, such as health and education, and develop appropriate infrastructure such as roads and marketing facilities, there is the need for generating employment, which can better the living conditions of villagers. We need to adopt a longterm policy, keeping in mind the requirements of the rural and urban areas. A close look at the development plan exercises tends to demonstrate that ad-hocism permeates the policy processes. In the rural areas there are many resources lying un-utilised. It is time to identify these and make proper use of them. The application of Information Technology can be of great help in identifying what is lying un-utilised or under-utilised. Kerala has shown the way through the people's campaign for de-centralised planning. Rural-urban disparity is the least in Kerala. There is a rural-urban continuum, rather than a divide. The people's campaign has definitely helped to make further improvement in the situation. The fact, however, remains that these steps at the State level, no matter how significant they are, cannot fully take care of the problem unless there is a shift of policy at the national level. This calls for sustained pressure from the bottom, that is, rural India. Secondly, urban development in a country like India has to dovetail with rural development. Otherwise, rural out migration will upset the applecart.

REFERENCES

District Census Handbook of Faridabad and Kanpur Nagar, Census of India, 1991. www.wikipedia.org

APPENDIX

DISTRICT FARIDABAD (HARYANA), 1991

DISTANCE POPULATION IN KM. DENSITY [PERSONS PER SQ.KM] 0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 4 3 3 4 3 2 SEX RATIO LITERACY [FEMALES PER RATE 1000 MALES] [EXCLUDING 0-6 YRS.][IN %] 835 54 847 53 844 47 840 38 842 37 806 38 WORKERS IN AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES [IN %] WORKERS IN NON AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES [IN %]

55 66 74 78 79 83

44 33 25 21 20 16

DISTRICT KANPUR NAGAR (UTTAR PRADESH), 1991

DISTANCE POPULATION IN KM. DENSITY [ IN PERSONS PER SQ.KM] 0-10 10-20 20-30 4 5 3 SEX RATIO LITERACY [FEMALES PER RATE 1000 MALES] [EXCLUDING 0-6 YRS.][IN %] 834 42 838 50 835 54 WORKERS IN AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES [IN %] 77 77 79 WORKERS IN NON AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES [IN %]

22 22 20