442
M. Goswami and S. Nautiyal
whereas there has been an increase in agricultural labourers. The selected settlements
have 4.6% of its total population involved in doing agriculture. More than 72% of
the studied population belongs to schedule tribe; whereas 100% of the low urban
area sample is schedule tribe. 77% of the studied population is below poverty level.
Percentage of below poverty level households in villages of medium urban area is
low in comparison to rest of the villages.
4 Results and Discussion
4.1 Peri-urban-Rural Interface in Indian Context
(a) Unplanned growth and dynamic land use change
Ravetz et al. (2013) explains peri-urbanization in terms of differential industrialization; in developed and old industrial countries, peri-urban zone functions as social,
economic and spatial change, whereas in developing countries it is a zone of chaotic
urbanization leading to sprawl. It has a higher dependence on rural activities for
wealth and employment (in agriculture, mining and fisheries) in developing countries than developed countries (Lynch 2004), thereby exerting a greater pressure on
the biophysical landscape. Simon (2008) analysed the key peri-urban interface issues
in poor and middle-income countries pertaining to both biophysical and socioeconomic landscape change. The major concerns listed include the rate and scale of
land use and land cover change, loss of agricultural land, intensive market-oriented
farming of high value crops, unsustainable use and depletion of both renewable and
non-renewable resources, detrimental health and environmental impacts of wastes,
particularly landfills.
India’s urban development is not uniform throughout the states; half of the
urban population is concentrated in six developed states (Kundu 2011). Massive
peri-urbanization happens when a country approaches towards the advance stages
of development. India has experienced early suburbanization and stagnancy in
metropolitan areas is partially due to the push of firms and workforce out of the
city core, which is facilitated by land management practices (World Bank 2013) and
environmental policy. As a result, there is proliferation of industries, expansion of
urban areas with conversion of agricultural land (Pandey and Seto 2015; Moghadam
and Helbich 2013; Mallupattu et al. 2013; Fazal 2000) and change in the livelihood
patterns of peri-urban communities (Narain 2009). In Indian context, before the era
of extensive LULC research, detailed studies were conducted with special reference
to the urban growth or economic development. In the study landscape the land use
land cover change has been found as extensive where percentage of area under all the
natural land use land cover classes have decreased from 2001 to 2011 whereas the
built-up land has increased from 9 to 25% during this period (Goswami et al. 2018).
M. Goswami and S. Nautiyal
whereas there has been an increase in agricultural labourers. The selected settlements
have 4.6% of its total population involved in doing agriculture. More than 72% of
the studied population belongs to schedule tribe; whereas 100% of the low urban
area sample is schedule tribe. 77% of the studied population is below poverty level.
Percentage of below poverty level households in villages of medium urban area is
low in comparison to rest of the villages.
4 Results and Discussion
4.1 Peri-urban-Rural Interface in Indian Context
(a) Unplanned growth and dynamic land use change
Ravetz et al. (2013) explains peri-urbanization in terms of differential industrialization; in developed and old industrial countries, peri-urban zone functions as social,
economic and spatial change, whereas in developing countries it is a zone of chaotic
urbanization leading to sprawl. It has a higher dependence on rural activities for
wealth and employment (in agriculture, mining and fisheries) in developing countries than developed countries (Lynch 2004), thereby exerting a greater pressure on
the biophysical landscape. Simon (2008) analysed the key peri-urban interface issues
in poor and middle-income countries pertaining to both biophysical and socioeconomic landscape change. The major concerns listed include the rate and scale of
land use and land cover change, loss of agricultural land, intensive market-oriented
farming of high value crops, unsustainable use and depletion of both renewable and
non-renewable resources, detrimental health and environmental impacts of wastes,
particularly landfills.
India’s urban development is not uniform throughout the states; half of the
urban population is concentrated in six developed states (Kundu 2011). Massive
peri-urbanization happens when a country approaches towards the advance stages
of development. India has experienced early suburbanization and stagnancy in
metropolitan areas is partially due to the push of firms and workforce out of the
city core, which is facilitated by land management practices (World Bank 2013) and
environmental policy. As a result, there is proliferation of industries, expansion of
urban areas with conversion of agricultural land (Pandey and Seto 2015; Moghadam
and Helbich 2013; Mallupattu et al. 2013; Fazal 2000) and change in the livelihood
patterns of peri-urban communities (Narain 2009). In Indian context, before the era
of extensive LULC research, detailed studies were conducted with special reference
to the urban growth or economic development. In the study landscape the land use
land cover change has been found as extensive where percentage of area under all the
natural land use land cover classes have decreased from 2001 to 2011 whereas the
built-up land has increased from 9 to 25% during this period (Goswami et al. 2018).