Emerging Trends in Urbanization: A case Study of Haryana

Urbanism and urbanization, both are dynamic phenomenon. Both are, one of major indicator of socio-economic development of a region. In the urbanization process, it deals with the process of urbanization which indicates ‗migration‘ from rural to urban. Meaning thereby, the urbanization, deals with the change of residence, which is denoted by ‗geographical mobility‘. On the other hand, the urbanism phenomenon, does not deal with the ‗migration‘ or ‗geographical mobility‘, but it deal with the change, which is brought without any spatial movement. Urbanism means – to adopting the urban ways of life within the village or suburbs. The enthusiasm for the above package of "management solutions", both among the international as also national organisations, is responsible for the issues concerning their impact on settlement structure and access of the poor to the infrastructural amenities not receiving adequate attention among researchers. However, given the disparity in economic strength of the towns and cities and their unequal access to capital market and public institutions, this perspective would enable the larger cities to corner much of the advantage from the system. Also, large sections of urban poor are likely to be priced out of the formal systems of service delivery. A few researchers have pointed out that the indifference on the part of policy makers on these issues would institutionalize inequality in infrastructural facilities and accentuate disparity in the levels of economic development. In the light of the dominant perspective and criticisms thereof, as discussed above, the present paper overviews the recent initiatives for resource mobilisation for infrastructural investment and analyses their impact on the structure of settlements, access of poor to infrastructural facilities and process of segmentation within the cities. The analysis has been done by taking into consideration the recent changes in labour and capital market and land management\ development practices.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature on urbanization as a process and its spatial manifestation in terms of levels of urbanization has been extremely varied and intensive. Studies on the emerging trends of urbanization especially from environmental perspective are sectoral and widely distributed. In India, though urbanization is a recent

few large urban centres of the developing countries especially in connection with the on-going mechanism in India, have been widely criticized. The process of urbanization in India was labeled as ―pseudo‖ as it was different from the urbanization occurred sequentially and gradually. In India the process of population concentration in cities was not backed by corresponding economic progress. Similarly, the literature on environmental issues are immense, but dispersed and often concentrated on very specific problems and sometimes highly technical in nature. The literatures available on environmental economics are much less developed and it is only in recent times that economists are involved in the analysis of environmental problems. Furthermore, the extra-ordinary vastness of the topic contributes the integration of technological and economic aspects of environmental issues and it leads to the complexity of analysis. Here an attempt is made to review the available literature on the topic concerning urbanization and related environmental issues. Bert F. Hoselitz (1962) in his article “The Role of Urbanization in Economic Development; Some International Comparisons” summarizes the significant difference -s between European urbanization and Indian urbanization in the following words ―Compared with European cities during a corresponding period of economic development, the cities of India, therefore show the following economic features: Urban industry is less developed and characterised by a larger number of small-scale and cottage type enterprise s; the labour force, therefore, is made up of a smaller portion of industrial workers and a larger portion of persons in miscellaneous, usually menial, unskilled services; the urban labour market is fractionalized and composed of mutually non-competing groups, thus impeding optimum allocation of resources and preventing upward social mobility and relief in the amount of unemployment. All these features make economic development more difficult in India today than was the case in Europe in the 19th century‖. Louis Wirth (1964)2 in his book “Urbanism As a Way of Life” observed that urbanism is a way of life of the people who lives in urban areas tend to be highly mobile, there are weak bond between them, pace of life is faster, larger number of people live in close proximity to one another without knowing each other personally. Most contact between city dwellers are fleeting and partial rather than being satisfying relationships in themselves. G.K. Roy (1988)3 in his article “Economics of Urban Solid Waste Management” analysed the social crisis arising out of energy and material shortage and ecological imbalance is going to hit the developed and

In this background our objectives in this study are primarily to examine the challenges of Urbanization and Environment in India which are unprecedented in scale and significance. The magnitude of the challenge can be understood from the sheer fact that out of the total population of 1027 millions in India about 286 millions live in urban areas. Thus around 28 out of every 100 persons in the country reside in cities and towns. According to Census 2001, it is expected that in coming 20 years (2001-21), the urban population will nearly double itself to reach about 550 million. Within the framework of this broad objective the specific objectives set out for this study are as follows: 1. To analyse the trends of urbanization in pre and post reform periods.

areas like percentage of urban households having access to safe drinking water, health facilities, electricity and sanitation. 3. To examine the impact of growing urbanization on the overall quality of human life. 4. To examine the impact of urbanization on environmental factors. 5. To highlight on policy issues of Environment and GOI on migration from rural to urban areas.

Following hypotheses have been tested in the study: 1) Urbanization in India is a consequence of availability of economic opportunities. 2) Urbanization leads to growth of slum population. 3) Rapid urbanization leads to poverty.

5) Environmental degradation is the consequence of rapid urbanization.

In order to assessing the urbanism in Haryana, various socio-economic and demographic parameters have been taken into consideration. These parameters are based on some of qualitative and quantitative parameters, so that we may a true picture of ‗urbanism‘ for the countryside of Haryana. For making the data analysis in the study, some simple statistical tools have been used either for interpreting the results or making a comparative analysis. In order to analyse the prospects and challenges of urbanization and environment, the methodology used is simple, analytical and involves calculations of statistics like CAGR, Correlation, Simple and Multiple regression, Interpolation and Extrapolation. The entire calculation has been done by using MS-Excel. In order to calculate the ‗composite figures‘ of ‗urbanism‘ in various districts, one score to each parameter has been allotted and the number of allotted score indicate a ‗aggregate score‘ for a district. Same procedure has been adopted to work out for all the 21 districts of Haryana. The primary information of ‗urbanism‘ of each district is available with the DRDA (District Rural Development Agency) offices. It is based on the In all the districts an annual BPL (Below Poverty Line) surveys are conducted by the district administration. Out of APL population in each district 5 per cent of the population has been taken into consideration. This segment of population is characterized by the traits of ‗urbanism‘. This 10 per cent of the segment of population has been randomly verified from the respective villages. In order to accomplish this process, the villages which are located within the limits of ‗Municipal Corporation‘ or cantonment areas, have been excluded.

In order to preserve, the loss of fertile agricultural land and to make available, affordable housing units with efficient public transport accessibility, it is imperative to evolve and adopt an alternative sustainable urban development pattern. The sustainable urban development concepts like Compact city, New Urbanism, Transport Oriented Development and Smart Growth which have evolved in response to the increasing need for a resource-conserving, sustainable, and people-centric city, have already found enthusiastic supporters among governments, urban development agencies, planners and urban designers in many parts of the world outside India. These diverse approaches share the important characteristics of compact, mixed use development, pedestrian and bicycle friendly environment, walkable communities and transit-based development. An alternative sustainable urban development pattern for future metropolitan cities of India need to be developed by combining and suitably modifying the underlying principles of various concepts of sustainable urban developments which could be summed up as given below: • Adopt, with suitable modifications for Indian situations, ―Traditional Neighborhood Design‖ that provides more livable and walk able neighborhoods‘ in a more pedestrian friendly environment. Create and maintain aesthetically appealing, functionally efficient and healthy built environment, which is designed to the last possible detail – ―New Urbanism‖ • Create a ―mixed-use community that encourages people to live near transit services in sufficient density to make public transport viable and attractive to decrease their dependence on driving. Provide high capacity, high speed, and multi-modal and multi-level transport corridors connecting cities – ―Transit Oriented Development‖ (TOD). • Adopt appropriate, innovative planning and development strategies, and urban design

choices for families and individuals, of diverse socioeconomic strata. Enforce conservation of agricultural land by containing urban expansion through appropriate development controls and zoning regulations – ―Smart Growth‖. • Compact, high density, mixed land use development in terms of walk able, bicycle–oriented and anthropocentric communities which are safe, secure and universally accessible and where all community facilities are available within easy accessibility – ―Compact City‖. • Maximize the accessibility of an area to people of different sexes, age groups, abilities and economic class. Create economic opportunities particularly for the people of EWS and LIG strata by facilitating and integrating informal sector activities at sector and city levels – ―Inclusive Design‖ or ―Universal Design‖. • Use indigenous resources and technological mixes that respect and emulate the natural ecosystems and respect local social and cultural patterns in achieving self-sustainability. Develop a city of human scale, slow intra-city and rapid inter-city transportation, multi-functional economic base, self-sustainability in basic and other needs, and integration of resource conservation measures in settlement development at all levels. Decentralize infrastructural development and maintenance functions of the city making the best possible use of resources and technology options available and involving community participation – ―Eco-Development‖. • Design streets to accommodate variety of transport modes and activity patterns and sustainable transport management. Use diverse modes of slow and medium speed transport within and between communities including walking, cycling, and other environment friendly Para transports, LRTS and BRTS – ―Traffic Calming and Sustainable Transport Management‖. • Integrate urban and rural lifestyles into a symbiotic, inter-dependant and holistic system through integration of land use and transportation, planning and design, and functional efficiency and aesthetic appeal – ―Synergic Development‖. and reducing dependence on transport-based lifestyles and development – ―ICET and e-Governance Based Development‖ and ―Connected Urban Development‖. (CUD).

As the study is entirely based on secondary sources of data obtained from different published sources, authentic sources have been chosen without any personal bias. However, the limitations inherent in the secondary data are to be recognised. Although the degree of urbanization and environmental concern is not a complex, mathematical variable, its treatment poses some technical problems: i) The NSS and Censuses data are rich sources of information, which allow us to analyse and understand the urbanization, migration patterns and their characteristics. But neither of these major sources provide reliable measures on vital aspects such as to determine the impact of urbanization, return migration and secondary or subsequent migration which restricts us to reach at proper conclusion by making a comparative analysis and changes in the relevant information. ii) The perception about what constitutes essential expenditure as a part of minimum level of living in an urban areas has to change. A minimum of expenditure on housing, health, and education should be considered essential. In the ‗official‘ poverty line the ‗essentiality‘ criterion applies only to ‗food expenditure‘. This implies that the ‗poverty line‘ on the basis of which poverty has been estimated is an underestimate. However, we have taken the same estimate for our study. iii) In some cases correlation coefficients were found to be statistically significant between two variables and concluded that one causes the other. Significant correlation= coefficients are not necessarily a proof for cause-effect relationships and therefore they have their own limitations. However, theoretical base or economic reasoning were supplied in such cases. iv) Further, we need to develop a strong database on environmental issues, which our policy framers mostly lack. Time series data

to come. v) The study is mainly based on different Censuses reports upto Census 2001. However, some estimates of provisional 2011 census were published when this work was at the stage of compilation. Hence, this couldn‘t be included into our analysis. Further, mixing up of actual data with the provisional data was not proper. However, the observations based on these provisional 2011 census data have been incorporated at the relevant places.

Agarwal O.P. (2006). Urban transport. In: Chapter 6 in India Infrastructure Report 2006, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, pp. 106–129. Aggarwal A. (2006). Special economic zones: revisiting the policy debate. Economic and Political Weekly, November 4, pp. 4533–4536. Bhagat R.B. (2005). Urban growth by city and town size in India. Paper Presented for the Annual Meeting of Population Association of America, 31 March–2 April 2005, Philadelphia, USA. Brueckner Jan K. (2007). Government land-use interventions: an economic analysis. In: 4th Urban Research Symposium, World Bank, Washington, DC. CMDA (2001). Master Plan (2011) – Chennai Metropolitan Area. CMDA, Chennai. D. Balaguravaiah Impact of Land Utilization Systems on Agricultural Productivity Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo, Japan (2003). DB Research (2006). Building up India-Outlook for India‘s Real Estate Markets. Deutsche Bank Research. De, P. (2007). Infrastructure development in India. In: Kumar, N. (Ed.), International Infrastructure Development in East Asia-Towards Effective and Balanced Regional Integration. Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA). Dhanapal G. (2011). Eco-cities for India. Article published in India Carbon Outlook. Last accessed at FICCI (2005). Survey Report on Foreign Direct Investment in India. and Design Methods (in Chinese), Science Press, Beijing (2002) GOI (2005). National Urban Housing and Habitat Policy 2005. Ministry of Urban Employment and Poverty Alleviation, Government of India, New Delhi. Available from: http://mhupa.gov.in/policies/duepa/DraftNHHP2005-9.pdf. GOI (2006a). Report of the Technical Group (11th Five Year Plan: 2007-12) on Estimation of Urban Housing Shortage, National Buildings Organisation, Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, New Delhi. GOI (2006b). Housing Statistics an Overview. National Buildings Organisation, Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, New Delhi. Gopinath S. (2008). Development through planning, markets or decentralisation. Seminar Paper Presented at Indian Institute of Technology Mumbai, January 21. Iyer, N.K., Kulkarni, S., Raghavaswamy, V. (2007). Economy, Population and Urban Sprawl: a comparative study of urban agglomerations of Bangalore and Hyderabad, India using remote sensing and GIS Techniques. Paper Presented at PRIPODE Workshop on Urban Population, Development and Environment Dynamics in Developing Countries, Nairobi, Kenya.

#13/238/1, Street No. 1,Gobind Nagar, Sirsa, Haryana, India E-Mail –