Counter Urbanization as a Phase within the Urbanization Process
Van Den Berg(1982) noted that there are phases to migration in the urbanization process, who suggested a four phase model of urban development. They divided the settlement system in the urbanization process into phases depending on the stage of the migration process between the urban core, fringe, hinterland and rural areas. They then divided this migration process into four stages –
- Urbanization,
- Suburbanization,
- Deurbanization
- Reurbanization.
In these four stages, the urbanization process first begins with the fast expansion of cities with industrial development in a primarily agricultural area. The surplus agricultural labour thus flows towards urban areas followed by the centralization of residence within urban areas. Industrial labour requires centralized localization and tends to take in rural migrants, while in rural areas primarily agricultural labour tends to be more dispersed or more sporadically scattered.
This initial process is followed by a process of suburbanization when the migration pattern shifts to a spatial spread of the urbanization process from the urban core to peripheral suburban areas. This may be the result of individual choices which due to the availability of modern amenities move towards a preference for residence in these suburban localities, breaking the tight movement towards centralization.
The next shift brings us to the focal point of our discussion – deurbanization, or counter urbanization which is a shift in population migration and agglomeration from the urban core and suburban areas out to the rural areas and hinterlands (S. Hosszu, 2009). Many causes can be attributed to this, such as overpopulation or dense populations in urban areas, overcrowding in commutes, urban amenities being available in these areas such as through online shopping, greater peace and safety in these areas, rising real estate and residential costs in urban areas, deeply congested and traffic ridden urban areas, industrial meltdowns or shifts, opportunities for people to work from home, etc.
These and many factors can influence people to move out of populated urban areas and migrate towards rural areas and hinterlands. This phenomenon is called counter urbanization.
The fourth stage in Van Den Berg’s analysis is re-urbanization which occurs mostly in the most developed regions of the world. Re-urbanization is the movement of populations from rural areas back to urban areas implying a re-structuring of the cities, and can be observed in Nordic countries. Counter urbanization and re-urbanization are rare in most developing countries and it is only in the most developed countries that these can be observed more frequently.
Debating Counter Urbanization
Having said that counter urbanization is a rare phenomenon within developing countries, one of which is India, the question to ask is whether India needs more counter urbanization as opposed to urbanization. Although India is heavily and increasingly becoming incredibly urbanized, with the Indian economy heavily dependent on urban areas as centres for commerce, and the lack of a proper finance infrastructure hampering the availability of modern living in rural areas, would counter urbanization in this scenario be a good thing?
Although greater movement of populations from crowded urban areas to rural areas in India should sound like a good idea, counter urbanization can have certain effects in terms of changed living conditions and habitation.
Counter urbanization can turn villages in rural areas to suburbanize, forming what can be called suburbanized villages. There can also be a loss of agricultural land due to a sizeable number of houses being built on green fields. Rural areas can thus become more congested and polluted, taking away the charm and purity of the countryside.
Gradually with the passage of time rural ideologies can come up and dominate aspects of life in a counter urbanized locality, such as community ideas predominating employment opportunities in these areas. In this scenario, other economic interests and activities such as foreign entities might find it difficult to operate or local erstwhile small businesses might rise or become threatened. The way of life based on traditions will mutate to evolve into something different.
However, counter urbanization can lead to many positively beneficial effects as well, such as quality of housing and modern amenities improving in rural areas. These homes can offer people the option of a countryside home away from the hectic and pollution-ridden life in urban areas. The depopulation of cities can on the other hand act to increase quality of life in these cities and overall pollution levels could decrease. Transportation and connectivity via electricity lines for example could improve between urban and rural areas, bring the overall fruits of modern amenities becoming available in rural areas as well along with inter-connecting populations overall.
Contrary to what one might assume, the percentages of populations migrating from rural to urban areas in India is lower than in other countries with similar GDPs.
The India Human Development Survey in 2005 reported an annual rural to urban migration rate of 6.8 per cent in India. The Indian Demographic and Health Survey reported this figure at 5.3 per cent. The Demographic and Health Survey figure for Brazil in comparison is much higher – 13.9 per cent (Munshi & Rosenzweig, 2016). However, given that total population combined with overall population growth in India report astronomical figures compared to most other nations, even slight figures in percentages of rural to urban migration can have massive impacts in terms of overpopulation in Indian cities.
Excess migration of people from rural to urban areas in India leading to overpopulation in Indian cities can present immense problems. People living in congested areas in Indian cities can have problems in living conditions due to inadequate housing.
There can be problems such as pollutions, causing sanitation crises. The traditional way of living can also gradually become eroded, particularly due to the largely educated masses living in urban areas, turning rural areas into parochial backwaters. This rapid urbanization can also deemphasize the agricultural sector, with the economy paying more focused attention on other sectors of the economy in comparison to the agricultural sector (UPSC, 2014).
In India, although the rates of annual migration from rural to urban areas i.e., urbanization is less than in many other countries, the trend definitely is towards urbanization given how especially finance in India hinges towards urban centres of commerce.
In this counter urbanization might be a welcome development in terms of achieving a balance in between the flight of populations from rural areas to urban areas. Without counter urbanization and some semblance of suburbanization in rural areas, it can become very difficult for rural areas to gain access to modern amenities such as electricity, transportation networks and clean water.
Although counter urbanization is not without negative effects, a move towards counter urbanization, if not too degrading to rural lifestyles and environments, might be a great boon to overall rural development.
Receive Daily Updates
Recent Posts
Petrol in India is cheaper than in countries like Hong Kong, Germany and the UK but costlier than in China, Brazil, Japan, the US, Russia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, a Bank of Baroda Economics Research report showed.
Rising fuel prices in India have led to considerable debate on which government, state or central, should be lowering their taxes to keep prices under control.
The rise in fuel prices is mainly due to the global price of crude oil (raw material for making petrol and diesel) going up. Further, a stronger dollar has added to the cost of crude oil.
Amongst comparable countries (per capita wise), prices in India are higher than those in Vietnam, Kenya, Ukraine, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Venezuela. Countries that are major oil producers have much lower prices.
In the report, the Philippines has a comparable petrol price but has a per capita income higher than India by over 50 per cent.
Countries which have a lower per capita income like Kenya, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and Venezuela have much lower prices of petrol and hence are impacted less than India.
“Therefore there is still a strong case for the government to consider lowering the taxes on fuel to protect the interest of the people,” the report argued.
India is the world’s third-biggest oil consuming and importing nation. It imports 85 per cent of its oil needs and so prices retail fuel at import parity rates.
With the global surge in energy prices, the cost of producing petrol, diesel and other petroleum products also went up for oil companies in India.
They raised petrol and diesel prices by Rs 10 a litre in just over a fortnight beginning March 22 but hit a pause button soon after as the move faced criticism and the opposition parties asked the government to cut taxes instead.
India imports most of its oil from a group of countries called the ‘OPEC +’ (i.e, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Russia, etc), which produces 40% of the world’s crude oil.
As they have the power to dictate fuel supply and prices, their decision of limiting the global supply reduces supply in India, thus raising prices
The government charges about 167% tax (excise) on petrol and 129% on diesel as compared to US (20%), UK (62%), Italy and Germany (65%).
The abominable excise duty is 2/3rd of the cost, and the base price, dealer commission and freight form the rest.
Here is an approximate break-up (in Rs):
a)Base Price | 39 |
b)Freight | 0.34 |
c) Price Charged to Dealers = (a+b) | 39.34 |
d) Excise Duty | 40.17 |
e) Dealer Commission | 4.68 |
f) VAT | 25.35 |
g) Retail Selling Price | 109.54 |
Looked closely, much of the cost of petrol and diesel is due to higher tax rate by govt, specifically excise duty.
So the question is why government is not reducing the prices ?
India, being a developing country, it does require gigantic amount of funding for its infrastructure projects as well as welfare schemes.
However, we as a society is yet to be tax-compliant. Many people evade the direct tax and that’s the reason why govt’s hands are tied. Govt. needs the money to fund various programs and at the same time it is not generating enough revenue from direct taxes.
That’s the reason why, govt is bumping up its revenue through higher indirect taxes such as GST or excise duty as in the case of petrol and diesel.
Direct taxes are progressive as it taxes according to an individuals’ income however indirect tax such as excise duty or GST are regressive in the sense that the poorest of the poor and richest of the rich have to pay the same amount.
Does not matter, if you are an auto-driver or owner of a Mercedes, end of the day both pay the same price for petrol/diesel-that’s why it is regressive in nature.
But unlike direct tax where tax evasion is rampant, indirect tax can not be evaded due to their very nature and as long as huge no of Indians keep evading direct taxes, indirect tax such as excise duty will be difficult for the govt to reduce, because it may reduce the revenue and hamper may programs of the govt.