There is considerable variation in spatial pat­terns of urbanization in the country . Goa is the most urbanised state of India, in terms of percentage of people living in urban centers. Four union territories (Delhi, Chandigarh, Pondicherry, and Lakshadweep) and four states (Mizoram, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and Goa) have over 40 percent of their population living in urban centers.

Similarly in industrially developed states of southern India like Gujarat, and Karnataka and agriculturally rich state of Punjab the share of urban population to total population is between 30 and 40 per cent. On the other hand Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Assam, Bihar and Orissa are the least ur­banised states of the country where percentage share of urban population to total population is less than 15 per cent (cf. India 27.78 percent).

Maximum concentration of the country’s ur­ban population is noticed in Maharashtra (14.36 per cent), followed by Uttar Pradesh (12.07 per cent), Tamil Nadu (9.61 per cent), West Bengal (7.84pel cent) and Andhra Pradesh (7.27 per cent) which together contribute more than half (51%) of the! country’s total urban population. Similarly states like Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Karnataka, Delhi and Rajasthan (each accounting for 4-7 per cent of India’s urban population) together house about 28| per cent of the country’s total urban inhabitants.

These 10 states collectively share 80 per cent of India’s urban population. States like Sikkim. Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Mizoram, Tripura, Himachal Pradesh, Goa, Manipur and Meghalaya together provide less than 1.5 per cent of India’s total urban population. Among the union territories Delhi, Chandigarh and Pondicherry are of some significance which together shelter 5 per cent of the country’s urban population (Delhi 4.51 per cent). Some of the typical features of Indian urbanization are as follows:

ADVERTISEMENTS:

1. India has a long history of urbanization dat­ing back to the Indus valley civilization (3,000 BC).

2. Urbanization in India during the 20th cen­tury is associated with a particular theme in each decade: 1901-11 famine and plague; 1911-21 influenza epidemic; 1921-31 agri­cultural depression; 1931-41 world war; 1941- 51 partition; 1951-61 planned development; 1961 -71 new urbanization in backward areas and concentrated urban growth around big cities; 1971-81 decentralised urban growth; and 1981-91 decelerated rural-urban migra­tion and declining rate of natural increase.

3. The Indian urbanization is of subsistence type whereby rural illiterate and semi-liter­ate workers swarm into the cities to seek employment. This badly affects the quality of the urban life creating slums and squatter settlements.

4. The Indian urbanization has poly-metropoli­tan effect in which four premier cities- Mumbai, Kolkata, Delhi and Chennai-play dominant role.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

5. The big cities of India are experiencing ex­plosive population growth while the small towns are stagnating. While in 1901, 48.73 per cent of the country’s urban population was living in towns having a population of less than 20,000 each, in 1991 only 10.66 per cent of the country’s urban population re­sided in such towns whose number rose to 2,108. On the other hand the share of class I cities in the country’s urban population in­creased from 22.93 per cent (number 25) in 1901 to 65.2 per cent (number 300) in 1991.

6. The Indian urban system is not integrated both functionally and spatially. Hence, there are breaks and imbalances in urban hierarchy and rural-urban profile. The apex of the sys­tem is lopsided, the urban rural sub-standard and the intermediary link through the market town weak.

7. The Indian urban centers are growing more on the basis of tertiary sector rather than on the basis of secondary sector. It is only in recent years that some efforts are being made to create proper industrial base at the district level.

8. The western and southern parts of the coun­try are more urbanised than their eastern and northern counterparts due to differential re­source potential and history of urban devel­opment (Chandna, 1992, pp. 275-276).