Open Forum

New Delhi, 10 March 2016

Rurban Mission

HOPE NOT A MERE NAME CHANGE

By Dr S Saraswathi

(Former Director, ICSSR, New Delhi)

Yet another scheme named “Shyama Prasad Mukherji  Rurban  Mission”  was launched by the Prime Minister recently for developing initially 300 villages across the country as urban growth centres. An investment of over Rs.5,000 crore  is suggested  for this project, which aims at transforming  rural areas  as  “economically, socially, and physically sustainable spaces”.

The scheme was announced in Budget 2015-16 with the object of providing “integrated project based infrastructure in rural areas”.  Public-private partnership is envisaged in its operation.  It was inaugurated from Chhattisgarh – a State that badly needs this mission.

How far it is a new scheme and how much of it a name for urbanization process and its side effects  already  taking place  may be  relevant questions.  But, it is an indicator of Government’s  intention and  endeavour  to  close  the rural-urban gap.

Nearly four decades ago, in the Fourth Five Year Plan (1969-74), a vital strategy for rural development by name “growth centres”  was adopted for identifying existing and potential growth centres  for all-round development.  It was called Integrated Area Development with accent on bridging rural-urban divide – a crucial  aspect of development missed under the  Community Development  Programme  and National Extension Service of 1950s and 1960s.

Rurban  Mission  aims at creating   village clusters provided  with urban facilities  so as to   put a break on  migration from rural areas.  These clusters will be equipped to undertake 14 mandatory functions  which include providing and improving  skill training for economic activities,  agricultural services including agro-processing and  warehousing;  digital literacy;  sanitation;  piped water supply;  village streets and drains;  well-equipped health unit;   school and higher education facilities;  inter-village road connectivity;  public transport; waste management facility;  citizen-service facility for electronic delivery of services;  LPG gas connection, etc.

It  looks like rural counterpart  of  urban “smart city” project.  Indeed, smart cities without  smart villages can only widen rural-urban differences.  The proposed clusters  will be of smart villages. First experimented in Gujarat from 2011, it is being extended to the entire country and is expected that it would also  ease  pressure on cities  which are now unable to cope with unending streams of migrants from villages.

In a way, it is a version of PURA, the pet theme of Late President Abdul Kalam.   And  it is an improvement  as a  scheme of  the Government  with budgetary allocation  unlike PURA that depended much  on voluntary  support.

The Mission has three main objectives, viz., improving life of people in rural clusters; bridging rural-urban divide; and reducing distress migration from rural to urban areas. Migration in India, as census reports show,  is mostly from rural to rural areas – from small village to bigger village.  When this fails to meet the needs of the migrant,  city-ward movement takes place.   Nearly half the rural population,  according  to 2011 census, live in 1.2 lakh villages with a population ranging from 2,000 to about 10,000.  The number of big villages, i.e. those with over 10,000 population,   has been increasing due to internal migration.  But , corresponding physical development is not taking place.

The rate of urbanization in India is on the whole 31%, which is lower than in other BRIC (Brazil and China) countries.  Latin America is already the most urbanized region in the world, and by 2030, about 84 % of its residents are expected to be urban residents.  Urban population in Brazil has already exceeded 85% of the total.  It has led to growth of “shanty towns” called “favelas” around cities.  This rapid urbanization has caused tremendous problems in healthcare.

An NGO has commented that about 800 small towns in Argentina are at risk of vanishing.    In South-East Asia, especially in Indonesia, areas surrounding large cities where urban as well as agricultural land use forms co-exist are called “Desakota”. As many other developing countries are sailing in the same boat, we have much  to  learn from others and avoid failed experiments.

Rural-urban divide today is not as sharp as it used to be.  The number of statutory towns (notified by State governments), census towns (identified by census), urban agglomerations (contiguous urban spread), outgrowth (viable units like village or hamlet), one million plus cities are all increasing in number.  Satellite towns situated at some distance from a city, but linked with it by transport facilities for daily commuting have come up.  Suburban areas of metropolitan cities have acquired all the characteristics of cities retaining  their  own form of administration.  City limits are also expanding.

All these developments have  similar impact of  causing gradual disappearance  of  villages near big towns and cities in India.  Metropolises   and megapolises  have come up by swallowing nearby rural areas. In this situation, Rurban  Mission,  if implemented,  can   promote  development of villages with their own population.  It is a scheme for area-cum-population development.

Speaking on the Gujarat scheme, Narendra Modi once described this as “Aatma Gaav ki,  Suvidha Sheher ki” ( The soul is  of villages, facilities of cities).  Rhetoric indeed!  Whether the soul  is any different or will remain in its pristine purity, is open to debate.  In  anyway ,  urban facilities can no longer remain confined to urban areas in the current global economy and information society.

The number of people returning farming as their main occupation has been declining from census to census.   Between 2001 and 2011, the decline is from 103 million to 98 million.   Research studies also reveal the willingness of increasing number of people to give up farming  as  their main occupation.  

In cities like Delhi,  Mumbai,  Chennai  and Bangalore,  to mention a few,  the sight of people leaving farming  in their native villages and taking up  tertiary occupations, starting informal enterprises, and joining domestic  labour  force  is common  everywhere.    Cities have to depend on this group for many services,  and have to make all provisions for their  bare minimum comfortable living.

In several cases, migration is not restricted to nearby cities.  Construction industry,   industrial labour,  semi-skilled mechanical work, and  full-time domestic  labour,    are some jobs drawing large chunk of migrants leaving agricultural occupations is search of urban employment even outside their State causing drastic drop in rural population. 

According to an estimate made by the Ministry of Urban-Rural Development in China, 300 million people are likely to migrate from rural to urban areas  between 2010 and 2025.  Old villages are being demolished and new cities are being built to relocate villagers.  It is pursued as a way of integrating China’s population.

Similar process is going on silently in some parts of India.  It is aided by several schemes like Special Economic Zones, IT Corridors,  industrial complexes, real estate business, slum clearance and projects like “shelter for all”, and so on. They result in chaotic migrations that  upset urban life also.

Rurban  Mission must have a strong component to help agriculture and industries also so that with extension of urban facilities, rural based occupations will go on without interruption.    The Mission should simultaneously benefit rural and urban areas and lead to over-all regional growth.  The motto  “strengthen  rural areas, de-burden urban areas”  to achieve area-wise  balanced growth and development  has to  be scrupulously followed so that the Mission will not become a mere name change for “urban hinterland” or rural-urban fringe. ---INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)