Growth of Urban Settlements in India

Urbanization: Meaning and Dimensions

Sociology Optional Notes {PDF}

Complete Notes Package (Paper I & II) | 1000+ Pages | Instant Download

Discounted Price | Buy Now @ ₹600 →

• Urbanization is the movement of people from village to town or city, where economic activity centres on non-agricultural occupations such as trade, manufacturing, industry, and management.
• Sociologists generally analyse urbanisation along three dimensions: the demographic-spatial (the shift of population from rural to urban areas, rising population density, and changing land use from agricultural to non-agricultural purposes), the economic (the pull of diverse urban economic opportunity against the push of rural poverty, agricultural backwardness, and the destruction of cottage industry), and the socio-cultural (the emerging heterogeneity of urban areas, historically the meeting point of races and cultures).

Urbanization in Ancient and Medieval India

• Political and demographic factors: early Indian urbanisation was closely tied to the rise and fall of the political regimes that sponsored it. As Sabarwal puts it, town composition was built around the ruler, his kinsmen, and followers, whose interests centred on the agricultural surplus they could extract from the surrounding countryside; fortification walls and ditches were a defining physical feature, and town planning provided for caste-segregated wards alongside zones for manufacturing, commerce, trade, religion, recreation, administration, and justice.
• Economic factors: despite shifting political and religious fortunes, traditional urban economic institutions showed real stability — merchants and craftsmen organised into guilds called shreni (based on a single caste’s occupation) and puga (spanning different castes and occupations), which Rao shows performed banking, trading, manufacturing, and even limited judicial functions.
• Religious and socio-cultural factors: traditional urban authorities patronised particular religions or sects — Pataliputra reflected Brahminical Hindu civilisation under Chandragupta Maurya, while Buddhism flourished under Ashoka, and Islamic civilisation was concretised in the imperial capitals of Delhi, Lucknow, and Hyderabad. Ray notes that each ethnic or religious group, and each caste and occupational guild, was governed by its own customary laws sanctioned by political authority.

Urbanization under Colonial Rule

• European trading posts, established from the seventeenth century for commerce, grew into full port-cum-trading centres; as British power consolidated in the nineteenth century, Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras became political as much as economic centres, with new technology — telegraph, railways, advanced roads and waterways — widening both the economic opportunity structure and people’s social horizons.
• Even as urbanisation grew, the countryside suffered the gradual destruction of cottage and small industry, pushing displaced artisans and labourers toward the cities; the late nineteenth century in particular saw large-scale migration of rural labour from Bihar and the eastern United Provinces toward the jute mills of Calcutta and other industrial centres.
• The spread of education changed urban institutional life as educated people entered the bureaucracy and took up work as teachers, journalists, and lawyers, bringing a new worldview — but it was overwhelmingly upper-caste and upper-class people who were positioned to seize these new opportunities for occupational and social mobility.

Defining and Measuring Urban India

• India defines a town, statistically, through four criteria: a minimum population of 5,000, at least 75% of the working population in non-agricultural occupations, a density of at least 1,000 persons per square mile, and the presence of features such as industrial areas, large housing settlements, or civic amenities.
• The pace of India’s urbanisation has accelerated steadily across the twentieth and twenty-first centuries: from just 10.8% of the population living in cities at the 1901 Census, to 17.3% in 1951, 27.81% in 2001, and 31.16% at the 2011 Census — the country’s most recent, since the 2027 Census will be the first to be conducted after a 16-year gap.
• Urban India today defies classification by a single activity: historical cities (Delhi, Calcutta, Banaras, Lucknow), industrial cities (Ghaziabad, Kanpur, Jamshedpur, Bhilai), religious cities (Mathura, Haridwar, Madurai, Allahabad), and cities built around specific industries such as film (Bombay, Madras) all coexist within the same urban system.

Spatial Patterns: Over-Urbanization and Sub-Urbanization

• Over-urbanization describes cities whose population growth has outstripped their administrative capacity to provide civic amenities, schooling, and hospitals — Bombay and Calcutta are classic examples.
• Sub-urbanization, closely related, describes the urbanisation of the rural areas surrounding an already-overcrowded city (Delhi is the standard example), marked by rising non-agricultural land use, the absorption of surrounding areas into municipal limits, and intensifying communication between the town and its hinterland.
• These spatial disparities stem from regional imbalance, uneven population concentration, and periodic changes to the census definition of “urban” itself.

Economic Aspects of Contemporary Urbanization

• Mill and Becker describe urbanisation as a natural and inevitable consequence of economic development, since development entails a large-scale shift of labour and other inputs out of the rural sector; the National Commission on Urbanization has similarly described Indian cities and towns as “the road to a better future” for millions of people despite their evident problems.
• New industrial townships built essentially from nothing — steel cities such as Jamshedpur (which drew large numbers of Santhal tribals into contact with a far wider Indian population), and, after Independence, Bhilai, Rourkela, and Durgapur — illustrate how industrial urbanisation can transform an entire region’s social profile; Srinivas notes that socio-economically backward areas have in this way become prosperous and cosmopolitan.
• Occupational diversification has, however, lagged badly behind urban population growth: the share of India’s labour force in agriculture remained essentially static (around 69.4%) between 1901 and 1971, and even as the urban population grew substantially, the urban manufacturing, construction, and service sectors did not absorb a correspondingly larger share of the workforce — indeed the urban primary sector (household industry, mining, fishing) grew while the secondary sector shrank, showing a large, unabsorbed rural-type occupational component persisting within urban India itself.
• Educated unemployment is a further, peculiar feature of Indian urbanisation: an estimated 46% of all educated unemployed people are concentrated in just the four major metropolitan cities.

Urbanization and Migration

• The Urban Commission of India considers rural-urban migration “of vital importance for the development of rural areas,” pointing out that it releases surplus rural labour while giving landless labourers, Harijans, and Adivasis access to constitutionally enshrined opportunities that rural areas cannot offer — cities, in Mehta’s words, remaining “havens of hope” for such migrants.
• India’s contemporary wave of urban-ward migration is of comparatively recent origin, beginning in the late 1930s; of total urban migrants, roughly 20% were displaced from Pakistan (Partition), 51% came from rural areas of the same state, and 25% from rural areas of other states — with the migrant stream predominantly male in character.
• Migration is driven both by push (rural unemployment, surplus labour) and pull (glamorous jobs, better housing, medical, educational, and communication facilities) factors — and crucially, industrialisation should not be assumed to be a prerequisite for urbanisation, since rural-to-urban migration often begins simply once agriculture reaches a relative saturation point, driven by an imbalanced land-to-population ratio in the countryside.

Ethnic and Caste Pluralism in Indian Cities

• N.K. Bose observes that migrants tend to cluster around people with whom they share linguistic, regional, local, or caste ties — a pattern Jagannath and Haklar’s study of Calcutta’s pavement-dwellers confirms, finding migrants retain close kinship and caste ties for both socialising and channelling information to and from the village, evidence of a durable cultural pluralism among urbanites.
• Srinivas describes many Indian towns as having a “mixed” character — capital cities, trade centres, and railway junctions combined — organised around a “core” area of old inhabitants (closely tied to language, caste, and religion) with newer immigrants settling at the fringe, Bombay being a commonly cited example.
• Lynch finds that in traditional cities like Agra, neighbourhoods (mohallas) have remained genuinely homogeneous by caste and religion — the untouchable Jatav caste concentrated in particular wards — though politicisation, education, and occupational diversification have begun to erode this pattern; D’Souza, by contrast, finds that in a planned city like Chandigarh, neighbourhoods were never organised around ethnicity or common interest at all, with religious activity, friendship, and educational ties routinely crossing neighbourhood lines.

Family, Marriage, and Kinship in Urban India

• Urban caste norms have grown more flexible around mate selection, with greater free mixing of young men and women and voluntary associations actively encouraging inter-caste marriage — yet joint families persist in cities too, documented among groups such as the Khatris of Delhi and the Chettiars of Madras, undercutting the easy assumption that urbanisation mechanically produces nuclear families and weakens family ties.
• Studies by K.M. Kapadia, I.P. Desai, A.M. Shah, and R. Mukherjee find no reliable correlation between urbanisation and separate nuclear households; Milton Singer’s case study of nineteen outstanding Madras business families shows a modified version of the traditional joint family remaining fully consistent with urban, industrial life, while I.P. Desai documents wider kin networks still being actively mobilised for serious illness, hospital access, or educational and economic advancement.
• Real change has nonetheless occurred: family size has diminished with growing awareness of family planning, several traditional family functions (education, recreation) have been relegated to other institutions, and women’s growing workforce participation has brought a degree of relative equality in status and rights.
• Attitudes toward marriage have shifted too — a rising age at marriage, simplified rituals, and a growing incidence of court marriages all point to marriage’s gradual separation from its sacred, religious framing — even as arranged marriage, endogamy, and dowry remain the general urban preference, and rising dowry deaths point to the darker side of this same continuity.

Caste and Class in Urban India

• Harold Gould’s study of Lucknow’s rickshaw-pullers finds a dichotomy between workplace and domestic life — occupational conduct follows secular rules, but caste identity remains paramount in personal and family matters such as marriage.
• M.S.A. Rao shows caste persisting in cities but in organisationally altered form: modern industry, professional growth, and new occupational categories have produced a new class structure and new status groups, while India’s electoral democracy has reshaped the older distribution of power and elite formation.
• Andre Beteille observes that higher caste no longer reliably implies higher class in urban India, a disharmony most visible precisely where new job opportunities have opened fastest — even so, caste has not disappeared: caste associations (the Gujarat Bania Sabha, the Kshatriya Mahasabha, the Jatav Mahasabha of Agra) continue to secure educational, occupational, and political advantage for their members, functioning much like trade unions — though Leach observes that once a caste organises itself this way, it starts behaving competitively, and effectively becomes a class group.
• Everyday behavioural markers of caste ideology have weakened in cities — rules of commensality carry little weight when one may not know or care about a neighbour’s caste — but caste remains significant in family and marriage matters, now weighed alongside education and occupation rather than displacing them; Sylvia Vatuk’s study of Meerut finds no marked change at all in traditional kinship organisation among the city’s poorer sections, evidence of real continuity between the urban poor and the surrounding countryside rather than sharp rural-urban discontinuity.

Status of Women in Urban India

• Urban women are, by most indicators, better off than their rural counterparts: comparatively more educated (54% literate against 25.1% in rural areas per the 1991 Census), more liberal, more aware of their rights, and marrying at a later average age — though the urban labour market remains structurally discriminatory, clustering women into low-status, low-paid occupations such as teaching, nursing, social work, and clerical work, with career continuity assumed for men but not for women.
• Divorce and remarriage, though still exceptional, are genuinely new urban phenomena, alongside rising political participation — urban women contest elections and hold political office at growing rates — even as, per Margaret Cormack’s study, many educated urban women continue to want both new opportunities and old securities: willing to attend college and mix socially with men, while still expecting their parents to arrange their eventual marriage.

Contemporary Urban Development Policy

• The Smart Cities Mission, covering 100 cities, formally concluded in March 2025, though the Special Purpose Vehicles it created continue to operate their Integrated Command and Control Centres under an annual maintenance cycle.
• AMRUT 2.0, running from 2021–22 to 2025–26 with a central outlay of ₹66,750 crore against a total estimated cost of ₹2.99 lakh crore, has expanded coverage from AMRUT 1.0’s 500 cities to roughly 4,900 towns, targeting universal water and sewerage coverage for over 10.5 crore urban residents — a scale of ambition that reflects how far urban infrastructure planning has shifted from the flagship-city model of Smart Cities toward broad-based small-town coverage.