Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An evaluation of the relative urbanisation in peri-urban villages affected by industrialisation: the case study of Bhiwandi in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region, India

  • Published:
Spatial Information Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Mumbai Metropolitan Region in India has a history of uneven development with a concentration of population and employment in the urban core of Mumbai city. Recently, there has been an increased rate of development in other nodes outside Mumbai city. Evaluating the intra-regional inequalities will facilitate more focused planning based on contextual issues. The peri-urban villages of Bhiwandi Surrounding Notified Area are among the least planned areas within the metropolitan region, witnessing intensive industrial development and a host of other resultant problems. This study focuses on the calculation of a measure of relative urbanisation for these villages in order to identify areas that are at an advanced stage of transition from rural to urban. The measure is based upon demographic, social, economic, spatial and infrastructural parameters. Variables were selected with reference to existing research in the field of indices for urbanity and the definitions of ‘urban’ and ‘rural’ in context of India, and comprehensive scores were generated for each village. The results guide the theoretical analysis of the pattern of development in the region and the influence of urbanisation on the socio-economic changes and living conditions in the villages. Further, this study discusses the formulation of customised planning policies for different categories of peri-urban villages in the Indian context. Since the development in these villages is driven primarily by secondary and tertiary sector employment, it can be concluded that the traditional consideration of ‘rural’ as being predominantly agricultural should be reassessed for peri-urban villages.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Source: Draft regional plan 2016-36 [25]

Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Notified area—An undeveloped area may be specified as a ‘notified area’ by the state government after issuing a notification in the Official Gazette. The state government may also constitute or appoint a body to be the Special Planning Authority for the notified area. (MRTP Act, 1966—Section 40).

References

  1. Population Reference Bureau. (2017). World population data sheet. Washington, DC. https://www.prb.org/international/indicator/urban/snapshot. Accessed 10 April 2018.

  2. Phadke, A. (2013). Mumbai Metropolitan Region: Impact of recent urban change on the peri-urban areas of Mumbai. Urban Studies, 51(11), 2466–2483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ravetz, J., Fertner, C., & Nielsen, T. S. (2013). The dynamics of peri-urbanization. In K. Nilsson, et al. (Eds.), Peri-urban futures: Scenarios and models for land use change in Europe (pp. 13–44). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Shaw, A. (2005). Peri-urban interface of Indian cities: Growth, governance and local initiatives. Economic and Political Weekly, 40(2), 129–136.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Lin, J., Cai, J., Han, F., Han, Y., & Liu, J. (2016). Underperformance of planning for peri-urban rural sustainable development: The case of Mentougou District in Beijing. Sustainability, 8(9), 858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Champion, T., & Hugo, G. (2017). Introduction: Moving beyond the urban–rural dichotomy. In T. Champion & G. Hugo (Eds.), New forms of urbanization—Beyond the urban–rural dichotomy (p. 2017). London: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Dupont, V., & Sridharan, N. (2006). Peri-urban dynamics: Case studies in Chennai, Hyderabad and Mumbai. CSH occasional paper no. 17/2006, Centre des Sciences Humaines, New Delhi.

  8. Sarkar, S., & Bandyopadhyay, S. (2013). Dynamics of the peri urban interface: Issues and perspectives for management. Transactions of the Institute of Indian Geographers, 35(1), 49–62.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pradoto, W. (2012). Development patterns and socioeconomic transformation in peri-urban area—The case of Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Doctoral thesis, TU Berlin. https://doi.org/10.14279/depositonce-3276. Accessed 10 April 2018.

  10. United Nations. (2018). World urbanization prospects: The 2018 revision. New York: United Nations.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. Government of India. (2011). Census of India. New Delhi: Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India.

    Google Scholar 

  12. United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat). (2016). World cities report 2016. United Nations. https://unhabitat.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/WCR-%20Full-Report-2016.pdf. Accessed 10 April 2018.

  13. Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA). (2016). Draft regional plan 2016–2036. Mumbai: MMRDA Planning Division.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA). (2012). Draft development plan 2008–2028 for Bhiwandi surrounding notified area. Report for MMRDA, Mumbai.

  15. McGranahan, G., & Satterthwaite, D. (2014). Urbanisation concepts and trends. IIED working paper, IIED, London.

  16. Rao, K. P., Mishima, Y., Srinivasulu, S., & Rao, B. N. (2016). Identification of urban sprawl—A case study of Vijaywada city, Andhra Pradesh, India. Lowland Technology International, 18(1), 59–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Government of India. (1961). Census of India. New Delhi: Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gupta, A. (2013). Measuring urbanization around a regional capital: The case of Bhopal district. USR 3330 “Savoirs et Mondes Indiens” Working papers series no. 6; SUBURBIN Working papers series no. 1.

  19. Antrop, M. (2000). Changing patterns in the urbanized countryside of Western Europe. Landscape Ecology, 15, 257–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Madsen, M. F., Kristensen, S. B. P., Fertner, C., Busck, A. G., & Jorgensen, G. (2010). Urbanisation of rural areas: A case study from Jutland, Denmark. Danish Journal of Geography, 110(1), 47–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. United Nations. (2014). World urbanization prospects: The 2014 revision. New York: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Arouri, M. E. H., Youssef, A. B., Nguyen-Viet, C., & Soucat, A. (2014). Effects of urbanization on economic growth and human capital formation in Africa. HAL archives.

  23. Demetriades, J. (2007). Gender indicators: What, why and how? BRIDGE Gender and Indicators Cutting Edge Pack, 2007, UK. http://www.oecd.org/dac/gender-development/43041409.pdf. Accessed 10 April 2018.

  24. Rustagi, P. (2000). Gender development indicators: Issues, debates and ranking of districts. Occasional paper no. 33, Centre for Women’s Development Studies, New Delhi.

  25. Behera, D. K. (2016). Measuring socio-economic progress in India: Issues and challenges. Revista Galega de Economia, 25(2), 117–132.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Tacoli, C. (2012). Urbanization, gender and urban poverty: paid work and unpaid carework in the city. Urbanization and emerging population issues. Working paper 7, IIED Human Settlements Group.

  27. Gong, W., & Lyu, H. (2017). Sustainable city indexing: Towards the creation of an assessment framework for inclusive and sustainable urban-industrial development. BRIDGE for cities issue paper no. 2, United Nations Industrial Development Organization.

  28. Madhumathi, M. (2014). Challenges of rural urbanisation in Karnataka. In K. Sivachithappa (2014) Equality and sustainable human development—Issues and policy implications. Proceedings of 1st international conference of ECONO VISION 2014 (pp. 255–263).

  29. Krishnankutty, M. (2018). Fragmentary planning and spaces of opportunity in peri-urban Mumbai. Economic and Political Weekly, 53(12), 68–75.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Bhagat, R. B., & Jones, G. W. (2013). Population change and migration in Mumbai Metropolitan Region: Implications for planning and Governance. Working paper series no. 201, Asia Research Institute, Singapore.

  31. Adusumilli, U. (2007). Planning for the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR). In Conference presentation. Urban age India Conference, 01–03 November 2007, Mumbai.

  32. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide. Paris: OCED. ISBN 978-92-64-04345-9.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Mazziotta, M., & Pareto, A. (2018). Use and misuse of PCA for measuring well-being. Social Indicators Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-1933-0.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Antony, G. M., & Rao, K. V. (2007). A composite index to explain variations in poverty, health, nutritional status and standard of living: Use of multivariate statistical methods. Public Health, 121(8), 578–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Krishnan, V. (2010). Constructing an area-based socioeconomic index: A principal component analysis approach. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b115/2cdc9e9ca217434db492a9e1c4ba519640ce.pdf?_ga=2.49094564.341218921.1531303342-22812870.1531303342. Accessed 10 April 2018.

  36. Razavi, S. (2011). World development report 2012: Gender equality and development—An opportunity both welcome and missed (an extended commentary). Geneva: UNRISD.

    Google Scholar 

  37. United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). (2007). State of world population 2007: Unleashing the potential of urban growth. New York: United Nations Population Fund.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  38. Kandpal, R., & Saizen, I. (2018). A study on institutional imbalances of the urban–rural governance framework in Mumbai Metropolitan Region, India. Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41685-018-0089-x.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the officials in the Planning Division of Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority, and the Gram Panchayat officials in the villages of Bhiwandi Surrounding Notified Area for their support in carrying out this study. A special mention to Asst. Prof. Narumasa Tsutsumida (Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies, Kyoto University) for his guidance with the methodology.

Funding

This work was supported by Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science KAKENHI (Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research) Grant Number 16H03311, and the Japanese Government Monbukagakusho Scholarship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Regional Planning, Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan

    Richa Kandpal & Izuru Saizen

Authors
  1. Richa Kandpal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Izuru Saizen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richa Kandpal.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (XLSX 23 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kandpal, R., Saizen, I. An evaluation of the relative urbanisation in peri-urban villages affected by industrialisation: the case study of Bhiwandi in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region, India. Spat. Inf. Res. 27, 137–149 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41324-018-0221-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41324-018-0221-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation