geography optional: 2017

SETTLEMENTS

Types, patterns and morphology of rural settlements;

Urban developments;

Morphology of Indian cities;

Functional classification of Indian cities;

Basis of Classification of Towns

There are many basis of urban classification or we can identify different types of urban classification. The 5 type’s are-

Genetic Classification- Deals with the origin of cities in context of time.

Location/ Size Classification-Geographical setting of the town

Morphological Classification- Form and the internal structure of the cities.

Hierarchical Classification- cities classified on the bases of order of functions performed an their intensity.

Functional Classification- Cities may be classified on the basis of type of economic activities carried on in the city. Certain economic activities may have acquired greater significance than others. For example: - presence of Iron and Steel industry lends a certain name and character to the city. Some cities are known for their administrative status as State / District capitals, others for their educational Institutions and yet others for Trade and Transport. In terms of India, generally tertiary activities are most important followed by Secondary (including household and organized Modern industry). Primary activity forms third important activity and it is a dominant activity in the small towns.

Functional Classification of Urban Places

There are two approaches to study of Functional classification of towns:-

1.      Dominant Function Approach- In which largest number of workers are employed in one activity in the city. This approach is far too simple and ignores the presence of other activities in town. Moreover, the number and percentage of workers is not always the best measure because manufacturing, by its very nature can employ more people than in trade. Hence, the number of workers in these two activities is not directly comparable.

2.      Multiple Function approach- This approach measures the degree of specialization in a particular activity. The degree of specialization is determined by number of workers in city in relation to some norms which is set for a city.

The dominant function approach can be exemplified by that of Harris and Multiple Function approach by that of Nelson.

Dominant Function Approach:

Chauncy D. Harris classified the US cities in 1930. He was able to identify qualitatively dominant function out of Multifunctional character of cities. He used employment and occupational data reduced to percentages to indicate cut off points for urban activities ranging in importance. His classification is based on the fact that some activity groups employ many more persons than other do.

Functional Classification of Cities of USA – by Harris

1.      Manufacturing Cities – Manufacturing Sub types

a.       Employment in manufacturing equal to 74% of total employment in manufacturing combined with retailing and wholesaling.

b.      Manufacturing and mechanical industry contain atleast 45 % of gainful workers (Occupation) example: - Detroit, New York, North California.

2.      Manufacturing Cities – Manufacturing Sub types

a.       Atleast 60% of the total employment in manufacturing, retailing and wholesaling, together.

b.      Manufacturing and mechanical industry contain between 30% and 45% of gainful workers. Example: - Buffalo, Philedelhia, Rochester.

3.      Retail Centres

a.       Atleast 50% of the total employment in manufacturing, retailing and wholesaling, together.

b.      Atleast 2.2 times of wholesaling alone. Example: Tulsa, Wichita, Shreveport.

4.      Diversified Cities

a.       Employment in manufacturing, wholesaling and retailing is less than 60%, 20% and 50% respectively, of the total employment in these activities.

b.      Manufacturing and mechanical industry contain between 25% and 35% of gainful workers. Example: - Boston, Kansas city, Los Angeles.

5.      Wholesale Centre

a.       Employment in wholesale is atleast 20% of total employment in manufacturing , retailing and wholesaling, together.

b.      Atleast as much as 45% is in retailing alone. Example:- California, Denver.

6.      Transport Centres

a.       Transport and Communication is atleast 11% of gainful workers ad workers in transport and communication equal atleast 1/3 the number in manufacturing and mechanical.

b.      Atleast 2/3 the number in trade. Example :- New Orleans

7.      Mining Towns

Extraction of minerals account for more than 15% of gainful workers (for cities of population more than 25,000) Example:- Minnesota , Michigan.

8.      University Towns

Enrolment in colleges (University, Technical Institutions, Liberal arts colleges and Teacher’s Colleges) . Atleast 25% of population of the city. Example:- Florida, Manhattan, Utah.

9.      Resort and Retirement Towns

Cities with low percentage of population. Example: Resorts: Atlantic City, Miami.   Retirement towns: Fort Collins, Colorado

Carter labelled Harris’s classifications as subjective because the decisions of the cut off points seem to be personal one and were set by simple means.

Multiple Function Approach:

Howard Nelson based his classification on major industry groups as listed in 1950 census of population. Nelson identified 9 activity groups:-

1.      Manufacturing

2.      Retail trade

3.      Professional Science

4.      Transport and Communication

5.      Personal science

6.      Public Administration

7.      Wholesale Trade

8.      Finances, Insurance and Real estate

9.      Mining

For each activity group, average population of labour force engaged in that activity was determined. Standard Deviation was calculated to determine Functional specialization of an individual city in a given industry group. 4 degrees of variation from the mean were recognized and the towns grouped in their appropriate categories.

Nelson computed 3 Standard Deviations - +1 Standard Deviation, +2 Standard Deviation and +3 Standard Deviation. For each activity group, since he was concerned with levels of employment that were unusually high in order to identify functional emphasis in a chosen city. The chosen city might be in 1, 2 or 3 standard deviation above the employment in a given industry group. If deviation is positive from the mean is:

v Within 1sd for all functions- DIVERSIFIED TOWN

v More than 1sd for 1function- UNIFUNCTIONAL TOWN

v More than 1sd for 2 functions- BIFUNCTIONAL TOWNS

v More than 2sd for a function- HIGHLY SPECIALIZED.

In Nelson`s Method the ordering of towns according to functions (distinctive function) does not actually bring out the real scenario of classification of the economic activity. As far as degree of specialization is concerned, the method focuses more on whether the town is unifunctional, bifunctional or diversified, rather than bringing out which function actually predominates.

Functional Classification of Indian Cities

The main scope of information on this aspect is the Indian Census. It adopted this typology from old US classification of economic activities. It is called STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION.

PRIMARY ACTIVITIES

1.      Cultivation

2.      Agricultural Labourers

3.      Forestry, fishing, Plantations and mining and quarrying etc.

SECONDARY ACTIVITIES

4.      Household Industry

5.      Manufacturing other than household industry

TERTIARY ACTIVITIES

6.      Construction

7.      Trade and commerce

8.      Transport Storage and Communication

9.      Services

Amrit Lal’s Classification of Indian Towns

Amrit lal’s classification is a Multi-functional classification as he compares the percentage of workers in every type of economic activity in a city to the national average for the respective activities. He calculated a LOCATIONAL QUOTIENT for each economic activity in every town and uses it to define the functional categories.

Methodology:

Loactional Quotient for city A in industry I:

=            Percentage of all workers in city A in Industry I

        Median Percentage of all workers in Industry I in all cities

If Locational Quotient = 1 , then city A has Normal Specilalization or Concentration of that Industry and if Locational Quotient is more than 1, then city A has extraordinary specialization of that Industry.

The Locational Quotient is multiplied by 100 (Locational Quotient * 100)

Range

Specialization

Locational Quotient

90 – 109

Normal

Locational Quotient

More than 110

Significant

Cities with significant specialization i.e. more than 110 Locational Quotient is divided into following categories according to Locational Quotient value.

Range

Class

Locational Quotient

Over 170

A

Locational Quotient

150 – 169

B

Locational Quotient

130 – 149

C

Locational Quotient

110 - 129

D

Classification: Amrit Lal divided Indian cities into 5 major and 3 minor categories.

Major

Minor

1.

Manufacturing

Wholesale trade

2.

Transport

Finance, Insurance and real estate

3.

Retail Trade

Education

4.

Public Administration

5.

Other Professional services

Functional Classification by Asok Mitra

A thorough classification of all urban places in India was attempted by Asok Mitra, a former Registrar General of Census and a noted authority on population statistics in India. He grouped 7 Industrial categories of workers (excluded category I and II) into 3 broad groups to derive 3 major functional types:

A.    Manufacturing Town :

III. Forestry, Fishing, Plantation, Mining and Quarrying etc.

IV. Household Industry

V.   Manufacturing other than household industry

VI. Construction

Percentage of workers in A – ( III. , IV. , V. , VI. ) is greater than percentage of workers in B – ( VII. , VIII. ) put together or percentage of workers in C – ( IX )

B.     Trade and Transport Town:

VII. Trade and Commerce

VIII. Transport , Storage and Communication

Percentage of workers in B – ( VII. and VIII. together ) is greater than C – ( IX ) or A - ( III. , IV. , V. , VI. ) together.

C.    Service Town :

IX. Services

Percentage of workers in C – ( IX ) is greater than B –( VII. and VIII. together ) or A - ( III. , IV. , V. , VI. ) together.

Manufacturing and Trade and Transport town were further sub-classified as :

A.    Manufacturing Town

1)      Mining or Plantation Town - Percentage of workers in III is greater than 10% or more than IV. , V., or VI.

2)      Artisan town - Percentage of workers in IV. Is greater than 10% or more than III. , V., or VI.

3)      Manufacturing Town - Percentage of workers in V. Is greater than 10% or more than III. , V. , or VI

4)      Construction Town - Percentage of workers in VI. is greater than 10% or more than III. , IV. , or V.

B.     Trade and transport Towns

5)      Trading Town - Percentage of workers in VII is greater than 10% or more than VIII.

6)      Transport Town - Percentage of workers in VIII. is greater than 10% or more than VII.

Methodology

Triangular Method:

In all 7 towns were recognized. The degree of specialization in each of the 3 basic groups was identified on the basis of Triangular Method.

In this method, the number of workers in each of the three groups is expressed as a percentage of the total, thus, the values for all 3 groups would add up to 100. The values of the 3 groups are then plotted on a triangular graph, represented by an Equilateral triangle. Thus, each town or city may be plotted as appoint within the Equilateral Triangle, where the perpendiculars drawn to each of the 3 sides of the triangle are directly proportional to the percentage of workers in each of the three groups.

The In centre of the Equilateral Triangle represents a town in which the percentage of workers in each of the three groups is exactly 33 ¹/₃. Such a town has obviously no Functional Specialization. Asok Mitra drew three circles with radius of 6 2/3, 11 2/3 and 16 2/3 units from the in centre to differentiate four levels of specialization.

He designed the degrees of specialization as follows:

Degree of Specialization

Code

Location in Triangle

        I.

Functions Highly diversified

FDH

Within 1^st Circle

     II.

Functions Moderately diversified

FMD

Between 1^st and 2^nd Circle

III.

Predominant Function Accentuated

PFA

Between 2^nd and 3^rd Circle

IV.

Predominant Function highly Accentuated

PFHA

Outside 3^rd circle but within the field.

Hence to calculate the degree of specialization Value of each three groups are expressed as a percentage to the total (III to IX), adding up to 100. Then these values are plotted on the triangle.

On the Basis of Degree of Specialisation

Functional Type

Function Highly Diversified            FHD

Function Moderately Diversified

FMD

Predominant Function Accentuated

PFA

Predominant Function Highly Accentuated

PFHA

Total

Manufacturing (A)

28

28

11

55

122

Trade and Transport (B)

67

46

24

11

148

Services (C)

24

16

6

20

66

Total

119

90

41

86

336

On the basis of these 3 functions, on the map of Maharashtra all these 3 were plotted for 336 towns by giving a clear overview of towns and their degree of specialisation.

Greater Mumbai with just 1 town performed highly diversified function with only manufacturing as its main area of specialisation. Thane the most urbanised district had 16 manufacturing towns, 4 in Trade and Transport and 3 in service. Districts like Osmanabad, Latur, Buldana and Akola had no manufacturing towns. The major functions were either Trade and Transport or Services, amongst which Trade and transport had the highest percentage. Chandrapur and Gadchiroli district have no towns engaged in Trade and Transport, they mainly are engaged in Manufacturing or Service.

Districts located near the sea enjoy the benefits of advantageous location because of port and huge supply of water to industries. Also huge labour force is cheaply and widely available because of migration due to many pull factors.

The towns are further classified into Diversified and Specialised.

Main Functional Types of Towns

Functional Type

Diversified Function

Predominant Function Accentuated

Total

Manufacturing (A)

56

66

122

Trade and Transport (B)

113

35

148

Services (C)

40

26

66

Total

209

127

336

Ashok Mitra classification on the whole brings out the major categories on the basis of broad economic activities. It succeeds in differentiating Manufacturing, Trading and Service cities.

Conclusion

It can be interpreted from the above data tables, that functional specialisation is lacking in Indian cities, specially seen in the study area of Maharashtra. There exists a system of diversified towns. With globalisation big cities are acquiring more and more service functions including financial and business services and therefore service component of the economy is increasing, but still service is not much specialised in the state. In Maharashtra maximum towns are specialised in Trade and transport with very few towns having it as predominant function.

Aurousseau’s Attempt:

Here some of the most significant classifications have been discussed. In 1921, M. Aurousseau classified towns into six classes:

administrative,

defence,

culture,

production-towns,

communication and

recreation.

His classification though a simple one, however, suffers from the defect of over-generalization. To classify a town into one major category, generally neglects the role of other classes. The cut-off point of one-class is decided by the arbitrary percentage, and therefore it is subjective.

Economic activities too are neglected. These are important in the sense that a town also caters for the need of people residing outside its municipal limits. Various classes of functions as suggested by Aurousseau create confusion in the sense that both functional and locational characteristics are mixed; for example, under communication-class group of towns performing function of ‘transfer of goods’ are put.

Towns with tidal-limit, fall-line-towns, bridgehead towns point out attribute of location in performance of their function. It is thus doubtful that such towns are exclusively communicational, and not locational. Similarly, pilgrimage centres are cultural towns, but these equally are significant in their geographical location on mountainous terrain, in valleys or on banks of rivers.

University-town is also a misnomer because this type of adjective cannot be its function but only a single quality among its overall urban milieu. But Anuousseau’s classification marks a significant stage and provides a springboard for sophisticated methods. It is actually a comprehensive scheme bringing together polygonal functional urban activities to classify urban centres.

Harris’s Classification:

Chauncy D. Harris remedied the deficiencies of the former subjective and common-sense-judgement-based classifications. He was able to identify quantitatively dominant function out of multifunctional character of cities. He used employment as well as occupational figures reduced to percentages to indicate cut-off points for urban activities varying in importance.

His classification is based on the fact that some activity-groups employ many more persons than others do. For example, USA’s 27 per cent employed persons of the total urban employment are in manufacturing, while wholesale trade has about 4 per cent. Thus, it is obvious that some functions should be assigned higher percentages than others. From analyzes, he was able to set up limits for each of his types as shown in the Table 9.1.

Harris’s classification suffers with some grave defects and cannot be universally viable. He used metropolitan districts as functional units because the industry-group data such as those published now were not then available when he did his research. Consequently, number of cities which were too small to have metropolitan districts were left unclassified. In his article referred here (Geo. Rev. Vol. 33, Table 1) he did not include a list of urban centres and the categories to which they belonged.

Carter labelled Harris’s classification as subjective because the decisions to access or delete with a minimum number or cut-off points seem to be a personal one and were set by simple empirical means. Under the class of ‘Transport and Communications’, workers engaged in telephone and telegraph services were omitted simply on empirical grounds which was nothing more than a subjective decision.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Duncan and Reiss tried to revise the problem of functional specialization by using the lowest value of supper decline or quantile groups. This revision is advantageous in the sense that it made an allowance for the different size-classes in the classification.

Howard Nelson’s Classification:

Nelson further removed the shortcomings of the classifications of those of Harris and others by using a stated procedure that could be objectively checked by other workers. He decided to base his method of classification entirely upon major industry groups as listed in the 1950 Census of Population for standard metropolitan areas, urbanized areas and urban places of 10,000 or more population. He omitted the little significance groups like agriculture and construction, and finally, arrived at the nine activity groups.

The problem of city specialization, and also the degree of specialization above the average was solved by giving margins of different degree to different size classes. He did find a definite tendency for the percentages employed in some activities vary with city size. The question – ‘When is a city specialized?’ was solved by using a statistical technique – the Standard Deviation (SD).

A city can be specialized in more than one activity and to varying degrees. Thus he showed for each city all activities that qualified for plus 1, plus 2, or plus 3 SDs above the mean. Table 9.2 indicates averages and SD in percentages for selected nine activity groups (1950) as developed by Nelson.

Suppose, any city which is classified as Pf 2F, it means that it has 22.87 or more but less than 28.76 per cent of its labour-force employed in professional service and 4.44 or more but less than 5.69 per cent employed in finance, insurance and real estate. In short, the table indicates, the number of SDs shows the degree to which the urban centre stands out for the activity in question. A city which does not fall even under 1 SD, average in any activity appears as diversified D, in Nelson’s classification.

Conurbations and metropolitan regions;
example- agra to delhi and delhi to amritsar and dehradun
kolkata to naihati

urban sprawl;

Slums and associated problems;

A compact settlement of at least 20 households with a collection of poorly built tenements, mostly of temporary nature, crowded together usually with inadequate sanitary and drinking water facilities in unhygienic conditions

Causes-
rapid pop growth, unemployment in rural areas, migration, high land values in urban , shortage of cheap residential areas

17% of indian population lives in slums
Maharashtra, with an estimated 7723 slums, accounted for about 23% of all slums in urban India, followed by Andhra Pradesh, accounting for 13.5%, and West Bengal, which had a share of about 12%.

Town planning;

development of city centre- CBD
division of town into functional zones
green belt
urban decentralisation- satellite city
transport- outer ring roads, metro, pedestrianization, ‘Transit Oriented Development (TOD)’ which enables people to live within walking or cycling distance from transit corridors like the Metros, Monorail and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors,
rehab , redevelopment, and renewal
land use
open spaces- ensuring spaces for street vendors
separate areas for industries

‘National Transit Oriented Development Policy’ which will be discussed with the States and Union Territories at a National Workshop on Urban Development to be held Tuesday next week. This policy seeks to enhance the depth of understanding of States and UTs on TOD as a viable solution to many of the challenges like haphazard urban growth and sprawl, mobility, rapidly rising private vehicles on roads, pollution, housing choices etc.. This new urban design and planning in the form of TOD, is being incentivesed by the Ministry under two more initiatives viz., Metro Policy and Green Urban Mobility Scheme which also will be discussed with States and UTS for taking them on board.

Under TOD, city densification will be promoted along mass transit corridors through vertical construction by substantially enhancing FARs (Floor Area Ratio) backed by promotion of Non-motorised Transport Infrastructure for walking and cycling to transport stations, development of street networks in the influence zone of transit corridors, multi-modal integration, effective first and last mile connectivity through feeder services to enable people access public transit in 5 to 10 minutes from home and work places.

Dense living along transit corridors besides resulting in enhanced living and travel experience, will also improve ridership of mass transit systems. If properly executed, TOD could emerge as a means of financing mass transit project, for which the demand is growing.

TOD promotes integration of land use planning with transportation and infrastructure development to avoid long distance travel in cities through compact development as against the present pattern of unplanned and haphazard urban growth.

Under the new Metro Policy, TOD has been mandatory while under Green Urban Mobility Scheme, TOD has been made an essential reform and is given priority for receiving central assistance.

Example of town planning
Chandigarh- 30 sectors- 24 residential, 6 for others
17 is the CBD

Problems of urbanization and remedies.

Urban sprawl
overcrowding
housing
slum and squatter
transport

solution

Smart cities

AMRUT

HRIDAY- Heritage City Development and Augmentation Yojana

PMAY- Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (Urban)

geography optional

Saturday, 11 November 2017

Disaster management

Saturday, 4 November 2017

BOOK-LIST FOR GEOGRAPHY(OPTIONAL)

Thursday, 19 October 2017

SETTLEMENTS