Transitional Peri-urban Landscape …
445
to agricultural (20.15%) and barren land (30.33%) in the first decade of the study
(1991–2001); again in the later decade (2001–2011), conversion from barren land
to agricultural and built-up classes accounts more than 21% (Goswami et al. 2018).
The agricultural practices have been driven by market demands to feed the growing
urban population, thereby replacing the traditional crop varieties and subsistence
village farming with cash crops. Despite of increase in agricultural land area and
market demand, the contribution from agricultural production towards household
income has not increased. Agricultural livelihood as primary source of income for
the households has decreased among the surveyed population in the landscape, i.e.
from 22% in 1990s to 7%in 2010s.
(e) Undefined boundary and governance
The doomed state of environment in peri-urban areas is explained as a result of
official neglect and non-recognition to award urban civic status by Saxena and Sharma
(2015). Marshal and Randhawa (2014) attribute the poor state of peri-urban areas to
institutional obscurity, unplanned growth, lack of infrastructure and environmental
degradation. The World Bank report (Urbanization Beyond Municipal Boundary
2013) looks at the role of public policy in potential productivity gains of urbanization
with an emphasis on land management policy. It suggests that integrated improvement
of land policy, infrastructure and connectivity can help in obtaining optimum benefits
from the expanding urban areas in India.
In Indian context, the assumption is that the peri-urban areas formation is related
to ‘push factors’, such as a deteriorating environment, creating a strong influence on
these areas beyond the traditional city limits (Thirumurthy 2005). Peri-urban boundary is forever shifting, followed by extending urban areas engulfing the interface in
route (Dutta 2012), affect social systems and agricultural land of rural communities
near urban agglomerations (Bryant 1992; Antrop 2000). The fringe villages of urban
areas try to retain their characteristics, yet, react to urban situation by altering their
socio-ecological and cultural structures.
Ramachandra (2012), Ramachandra and Aithal (2013), Reddy and Reddy (2007),
Goel (2011), Hackenbroch and Woiwode (2016), Vij and Narain (2016), Dupont
(2007), Narain and Nischal (2007), Narain (2009) and Dutta (2012) studied periurban areas in different Indian context. Those studies include the spatio-temporal
dynamics of urbanizing landscape, top down policy and planning focus, population
dynamics, urban edge expansion and envelopment at the cost of permanent crops
and pastures, material and service flow livelihood enhancement etc. The available
studies reiterate the need of integration of various sectors and advocate for bottom up
approach for urban expansion planning where the opinions of various stakeholders
would be accounted.
445
to agricultural (20.15%) and barren land (30.33%) in the first decade of the study
(1991–2001); again in the later decade (2001–2011), conversion from barren land
to agricultural and built-up classes accounts more than 21% (Goswami et al. 2018).
The agricultural practices have been driven by market demands to feed the growing
urban population, thereby replacing the traditional crop varieties and subsistence
village farming with cash crops. Despite of increase in agricultural land area and
market demand, the contribution from agricultural production towards household
income has not increased. Agricultural livelihood as primary source of income for
the households has decreased among the surveyed population in the landscape, i.e.
from 22% in 1990s to 7%in 2010s.
(e) Undefined boundary and governance
The doomed state of environment in peri-urban areas is explained as a result of
official neglect and non-recognition to award urban civic status by Saxena and Sharma
(2015). Marshal and Randhawa (2014) attribute the poor state of peri-urban areas to
institutional obscurity, unplanned growth, lack of infrastructure and environmental
degradation. The World Bank report (Urbanization Beyond Municipal Boundary
2013) looks at the role of public policy in potential productivity gains of urbanization
with an emphasis on land management policy. It suggests that integrated improvement
of land policy, infrastructure and connectivity can help in obtaining optimum benefits
from the expanding urban areas in India.
In Indian context, the assumption is that the peri-urban areas formation is related
to ‘push factors’, such as a deteriorating environment, creating a strong influence on
these areas beyond the traditional city limits (Thirumurthy 2005). Peri-urban boundary is forever shifting, followed by extending urban areas engulfing the interface in
route (Dutta 2012), affect social systems and agricultural land of rural communities
near urban agglomerations (Bryant 1992; Antrop 2000). The fringe villages of urban
areas try to retain their characteristics, yet, react to urban situation by altering their
socio-ecological and cultural structures.
Ramachandra (2012), Ramachandra and Aithal (2013), Reddy and Reddy (2007),
Goel (2011), Hackenbroch and Woiwode (2016), Vij and Narain (2016), Dupont
(2007), Narain and Nischal (2007), Narain (2009) and Dutta (2012) studied periurban areas in different Indian context. Those studies include the spatio-temporal
dynamics of urbanizing landscape, top down policy and planning focus, population
dynamics, urban edge expansion and envelopment at the cost of permanent crops
and pastures, material and service flow livelihood enhancement etc. The available
studies reiterate the need of integration of various sectors and advocate for bottom up
approach for urban expansion planning where the opinions of various stakeholders
would be accounted.