Challenges
of Urbanization and Environmental Degradation in India
J. P. Singh
The
author is Professor of Sociology at the
Postgraduate
Department of Sociology,
Patna
University, Patna-800 005, INDIA
A study of the process of
urbanization and urban growth in India since the beginning of the twentieth
century reveals a steady increase in the size of urban population, the number
of towns and the degree of urbanization. But the tempo of increase became
faster from 1951 onward. From 1951 to 1991, India’s urban population more than
three times from 58 million to 216 million. The number of towns of different
size-classes swelled from 2,257 in 1951 to 3,697 in 1991, an increase of about
39 percent. The proportion of the population
living in urban areas increased from 16 percent in 1951 to 26 percent in
1991. The annual rate of growth of the
urban population during 1981-91 was 3.1 percent-- slightly less than that in
the previous two decades, 1961-71 (3.2 percent) and 1971-81 (3.8 percent). Thus
it appears that the pace of urbanization has been somewhat slower, albeit
imperceptibly so, in recent years.
Trends
in the growth of population by different classes of towns reveal that the
lion’s share of the increase in population since 1961 has been in Class I towns
(i. e., towns with a population of 1,00,000 or more). The proportion of
population living in Class I towns is steadily constituting two-thirds of the
total urban population. Towns of Classes V and VI (i.e., below 10,000
population) have actually recorded decline in their share of population during
the decade 1981-91. In 1981, India had 12 ‘million plus’ cities (henceforth
metropolises) with a total population of about 42 million, accounting for 6.2
percent of the country’s population. By 1991, the number of metropolises had
nearly doubled (23), with a total population of 71 million, constituting 8.4
percent of India’s total population. Thus, urbanization in India has
essentially been the growth of large towns and metropolitan cities, at the cost
of small and tiny towns.
India
is witnessing an unprecedented rise in urbanization and cities like Delhi,
Mumbai and Calcutta are over-crowded with people. Now nearly one-third of the
population lives in towns and cities. The urban population, however, is
economically very important and contributes 50 to 55 percent to the total GNP.
It also means that the hub of all modern activity is concentrated in major
cities, which continuously attract migrant workers in search of their
livelihood.
However,
unlike the big cities in rich countries, Indian cities are not able to take in
more and more people because of poor urban management and resource constraints.
The people continuously confront problems of safe drinking water, power,
sewerage and garbage disposal. With rapid natural increase and inflow of rural
population, cities are growing rapidly and there is an urgent need for better
governance, transport and basic amenities for the growing population. Here it is worthwhile to point out that most
people including many social scientists and journalists believe that rural to
urban migration is the prime factor of urbanization. This myth has already been
exploded by demographers. Studies have clearly established that natural
increase has been the most potent factor behind rapid rise in urban population
not only in India but also in most developing countries of the world.
Rural Backwardness and Cityward Migration
Rapid
urban growth can be slowed down only if family welfare programs are vigorously
pursued. In addition, rural development programs should also be augmented to
create employment opportunities in the villages themselves. The village economy
has to be made more vibrant by focusing on increasing non-farm employment.
However, this can happen only if villages have adequate facilities for
transportation and communication as well as power. Only then some small scale
manufacturing units and service industries can be established. However, since
the rural economy has been neglected for years and public investment has been
declining in agriculture for the last 15 years, most Indian villages do not
possess basic minimum infrastructure for civic amenities, transportation and
communication. Consequently the prospective investors are put off and thus the
unemployed rural youth are pushed towards cities to eke out their living.
Drastic
reforms can substantially transform the scene for which a hefty increase in
public spending would be essential. People themselves would then come forward
and take the initiative of supplying services to big cities. This had already
happened in China where the economic reforms were started in agricultural
sector. Farmers were free to sell their surplus produce in the open market and
they became so enthusiastic about taking their wares to nearby towns in order to
get better prices that they developed the required service industries
themselves. Entrepreneurs sprang up taking advantage of the trade
liberalization in the villages and jobs were created in the non-farm sector.
This subsequently brought down the overall poverty level and pressure of
population on towns. The development of the rural sector thus became critical
for the success of economic reforms in China.
If
similar developments are to take place in Indian villages, many potential
migrants may be able to find jobs in their own villages. It can also reverse
the flow of migration and lessen the strain on the city’s basic infrastructure.
There will also be a decline in both urban and rural poverty. However, the task is not so easy.
Problems of Slum Formation
As a
result of burgeoning population in cities, the problems of space and housing
for all have intensified. Slums have become an inevitable part of the major
Indian metropolises. The proportion of the population in towns and cities
living in slums has been increasing over the years, and has risen from 18.8
percent of the urban population in 1981 to 21.5 percent in 1991. In absolute
terms, the population living in slums in Indian cities has increased from 30
million to 47 million. The State of Maharashtra is one of the most glaring
examples of this state of affairs. Nearly 7 million people lived in slums in
1991, although as a proportion of the total urban population of the state-- the
percentage works out to be only 22 percent, close to the national average. This
is explained by the fact that the state’s urban population is a very high
proportion of the total. The second highest slum population is in the state of
Uttar Pradesh, which has 5.8 million, followed by West Bengal with 4.6 million.
Slums of Delhi comprise 2.4 million people, accounting for 28.6 percent of the
city’s population.
The
proportion of people living in slums appears to be smaller than the actual, as
the National Building Organization and the National Sample Survey (1988-89)
have operationalized very liberal criteria of identifying slums in the country.
The NSS has defined slum as a compact area with a collection of poorly built
tenements crowding together, usually with inadequate sanitary and toilet
facilities. If an effort is made to identify slums in India on the basis of a
universal definition, the proportion of slum population would comprise more
than 50 percent of the total urban population in the country and from western
standard the proportion would be still higher— maybe around 80 percent of the
total urban population.
Since
most of the new migrants to cities are poor and homeless, slums and shantytowns
spring up to accommodate them. Thus, the contrast between the rich and the poor
becomes quite conspicuous. In fact, it is more visible in Indian cities than
those in the West because the proportion of the population living in slums is
much bigger and their living conditions far worse. The visible squalor of the
shantytowns in big cities put off foreign visitors and many may decide never to
return again, which is a loss to the tourism sector.
The
people in slums live under the most deplorable conditions, with little access
to effective social and health care services, potable water, or sanitation
facilities and are therefore more vulnerable to epidemics and developmental
challenges. Their low socio-economic status, low level of education and high
fertility and mortality all indicate that they need special attention in terms
of public health, family planning and reproductive health programs. But
unfortunately reverse is the case with such segments of urban population.
The
plight of the urban poor is no doubt real and 33 percent of a big city’s
population lives below the poverty line, which often means living in sub-human
conditions. About 19 percent of the population in cities still do not have
access to running water. Poverty or the misery is so transparent in the life of
slum dwellers that there is no need of any criteria, measurement, or probing
analysis to recognize raw poverty and to understand its antecedents. Efforts
have been on to remove the scourge of poverty since Independence. Ever since
then the government has been trying hard through various developmental programs
to raise the average standard of living of people. Nevertheless, our performances or
achievements in the field of poverty alleviation have been quite dismal and
disheartening.
In a
recent survey of 27 big Asian cities with over a million population, India’s
four largest cities have been ranked among the five worst with respect to
availability of water per day. Physical losses due to water wastage in these
cities are high despite low pressure and intermittent supplies. Low pressure
can lead to ‘back syphonage’ and contamination, responsible for many
water-borne diseases affecting the urban population. The lack of sufficient
water affects the urban poor still more. In Delhi, when the official supply per
capita is supposed to be 200 liters a day, around nine million people (a third
of the population) get less than 25 liters a day. Also, 36 percent of the urban
population does not have access to proper sanitation and most slum-dwellers do
not have a toilet of their own.
Despite
such dismal statistics, according to the latest National Sample Survey, poverty
in big cities has decreased slightly as compared to rural poverty, which has
increased during the last few years. However, unlike the rural poor, who can
hide behind a picturesque countryside, urban poverty is depressing and visible.
Extreme poverty and unemployment in big cities is giving rise to higher crime
rates and social tension.
In
order to cope with an increasing population, the municipal corporations could
invite greater private sector participation in the urban infrastructure so that
critical services are better managed. More money would also be needed by
municipal corporations to look after the growing population. Corporatization of
municipal finances is one way of raising additional funds. For example, the
Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation has raised money through bond issues. A demand
for greater accountability from municipal corporations will prevent corruption
and cost over runs. This will need the involvement of local self-help and civil
society groups. But providing adequate education, power, water and public transport
to its poorest inhabitants will continue to remain a major challenge for any
municipal governments when faced with continuous increase in urban population
through natural increase as well as cityward migration.
Urbanization and Environmental Degradation
Rapid
urbanization has caused wide spread environmental degradation in the country.
The government has conceded that despite imposition of regulatory measures, the
magnitude of pollution from industrial sources in the country has not shown any
appreciable decrease during the last two decades. Increase in pollution levels
in urban areas is also fuelled by ever-growing traffic. The number of
registered automobiles in the country, mostly concentrated in the cities, has
increased from 1.87 million in 1971 to 5.39 million in 1981 and 25.28 million
in 1993. These figures show an extraordinary high annual (exponential) growth
rate of 10.6 percent during 1971-81 and 12.9 percent during 1981-93, while the
urban population grew only by about four percent annually during this period.
Thus, the growth in the number of vehicles per capita in the past 12 years has
been very high in the country. The highest growth rate has been recorded in the
number of two-wheelers, at 15.1 percent during 1971-81 and 15.6 percent during
1981-93. These vehicles contribute the most to air pollution levels. Poor
maintenance of vehicles and traffic congestion have been found to be critical
factors of air pollution problems in urban areas. Most vehicles do not confirm
to permissible emission limits.
It
has been revealed by a survey of ten major cities of India by the National
Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI), Nagpur that there has
been a substantial increase of the suspended particulate matter (SPM) in the
air, which suggests the presence of dust and carbon particles coated with toxic
gases. The highest level of SPM is reported to be in Delhi and Calcutta. It is
as high as 460. The other metropolises, which cross the maximum, prescribed for
SPM by WHO (200 micrograms per cubic meter of air) are Kanpur, Nagpur, Jaipur,
Mumbai and Ahmedabad. The high levels of air pollution in these cities are
largely attributable to incomplete combustion of diesel and leaded petrol,
particularly in case of two- and three-wheelers, which use inefficient
two-stroke engines and indirect fuel injection. The study has revealed that the
SPM levels in the residential areas of all industrial cities have reached a
critical level. Rapid urbanization together with other associated problems of
shelter and provision of infrastructural facilities has caused a pernicious
effect on the eco-stability of the country.
Yet,
another serious problem is related to treatment of sewage collection and
disposal of waste materials. Hardly any city in India has 100 percent sewage
collection treatment and waste disposal facilities. Incidentally, of all the
capital cities of different states and union territories Patna (the capital
city of the State of Bihar) is considered to be the worst of all. The untreated
and partially treated wastewater ultimately contaminates rivers, lakes and
reservoirs causing manifold pollution problems. Rivers passing through cities
such as Ganga, Yamuna, Krishna, Kaveri, Godavari, Hoogly, Damodar, Kshipra,
Gomti, Mahanadi, Narmada, Tapti, Betwa, etc. are reported to be heavily
polluted. Urbanization had also enhanced the solid waste problem in the
country. With the present culture of use and throw and increasing use of
biodegradable packing material, the quantity and composition of waste is likely
to change in the coming decades.
Indian
cities also have serious problem of noise pollution. It is considered to be a
very big health hazard. Noise affects man physically, psychologically and
socially. Intense noise or long stay in a noisy environment can cause permanent
reduction of hearing sensitivity by damaging sensory organs of the inner ear.
It can also influence blood circulation, cause stress and other psychological
effects and could also be an accident risk by drowning warning signals.
No comments:
Post a Comment