Q1. Critically analyse whether the current Census definition of ‘urban’ in India adequately captures the realities of changing settlement patterns. Suggest alternative approaches for a more inclusive urban classification.
Analytical Focus for Answer (AFfA):
- Explain the existing Census definition (2011) – statutory towns and census towns with criteria of population ≥5,000, 75% male workforce in non-agriculture, density ≥400/sq km.
- Highlight limitations – outdated male-centric criterion, administrative lag, exclusion of peri-urban areas, rural governance of urbanized spaces.
- Discuss implications – misclassification, undercounting of urban population, weak infrastructure and service delivery.
- Mention data evidence – West Bengal case (251 census towns still under rural governance in 2011).
- Evaluate alternatives – gender-inclusive workforce, density-based, economic and land-use parameters, night-time light intensity, UN DEGURBA approach.
- Conclude with policy need for a dynamic, multi-criteria definition to ensure accurate planning and governance.
Model Answer
India’s definition of “urban” under the Census framework has remained largely unchanged since 1961. As per the 2011 Census, a settlement is termed urban if it is a statutory town or meets specific demographic and occupational criteria. However, this rigid definition overlooks India’s evolving spatial and economic landscape, where urban traits increasingly permeate rural regions. Retaining such a definition for Census 2027 risks serious misclassification, undercounting, and exclusion of growing settlements from formal governance and development mechanisms.
Body
Limitations of the Current Definition:
- Outdated criteria: The definition relies on a male-centric occupational threshold (75% of male workers in non-agricultural work), ignoring the expanding participation of women and the gig workforce.
- Static population benchmark: A minimum population of 5,000 and density of 400 persons/sq km fails to capture newer, denser clusters emerging near existing cities.
- Administrative inertia: Many census towns function like urban areas but remain under rural governance, leading to service and infrastructure deficits.
- Case evidence: West Bengal’s 251 census towns (2001–2011) continued under panchayat rule, illustrating the governance lag between demographic transition and statutory recognition.
- Conceptual flaw: The binary rural–urban classification ignores peri-urban and transitional settlements that form an expanding spectrum of urbanization.
Implications of Retaining the Old Definition:
- Misclassification: Leads to undercounting of urban population—studies suggest India’s actual urbanization may be 35–57%, not the official 31%.
- Governance gaps: Excluded settlements lack access to municipal finance, planning frameworks, and infrastructure funds.
- Social bias: The male workforce criterion undervalues women’s unpaid and informal work, reinforcing gender bias in data.
Alternative Approaches for Inclusive Classification:
- Gender-Inclusive Workforce Criterion: Replace male-only indicators with total workforce participation.
- Population and Density-Based Models: Adopt multi-tiered classification like the U.S. model or follow Ghana’s population threshold approach.
- Economic and Land-Use Parameters: Base classification on current economic activities, commuting patterns, and service-sector employment.
- Technological Indicators: Use night-time light intensity to map real-time urban spread and economic density.
- UN DEGURBA Framework: Classify settlements along a continuum of seven categories, acknowledging peri-urban and semi-dense clusters.
- Dynamic Multi-Criteria Model: Introduce automatic triggers for administrative upgrade once defined criteria are met.
Conclusion
India’s urban identity can no longer be determined by colonial-era parameters. A dynamic, evidence-based and gender-sensitive redefinition of “urban” is essential to capture the reality of hybrid settlements, ensure proper governance, and guide infrastructure investment. A modern classification framework will not only improve data accuracy but also strengthen policy delivery for an increasingly urbanizing India.
Q2. Examine the structural weaknesses in India’s urban governance system despite the constitutional framework provided by the 74th Amendment Act.
Analytical Focus for Answer (AFfA):
- Briefly state the intent of the 74th Amendment (1992) – democratic decentralization and empowerment of Urban Local Bodies (ULBs).
- Discuss major weaknesses – fragmented institutional structure, limited devolution of functions and finances, state dominance.
- Mention financial constraints – weak property tax systems, dependency on state/central grants.
- Note capacity deficits – shortage of technical staff, lack of accountability.
- End with reform imperatives – full devolution, metropolitan-level coordination, participatory planning, and fiscal innovation.
Model Answer
Introduction
The 74th Constitutional Amendment Act (1992) was a landmark step toward democratic decentralization, aiming to empower Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) through devolution of powers, functions, and finances. Yet, three decades later, India’s urban governance continues to grapple with weak autonomy, poor financial capacity, and fragmented institutional authority, rendering the constitutional promise largely unfulfilled.
Body
Institutional and Administrative Weaknesses:
- Fragmented governance: Multiple agencies and overlapping jurisdictions create coordination failures in key sectors like water, sanitation, and transport.
- Weak devolution: Most states have not fully transferred the 18 functional items listed in the Twelfth Schedule, reducing ULBs to implementers rather than decision-makers.
- Limited authority: State governments retain control over major urban functions through parastatal bodies and development authorities.
Financial Constraints:
- Fiscal dependence: ULBs face chronic fiscal dependence on higher tiers due to limited own-source revenue.
- Weak property tax & instruments: Property tax collection is inefficient, and innovative instruments like municipal bonds remain underutilized.
- Low creditworthiness: Low creditworthiness prevents access to long-term capital for infrastructure.
Capacity and Participation Deficits:
- Professional gaps: Lack of professional expertise in planning, finance, and environmental management undermines effective functioning.
- Low participation & transparency: Low citizen participation and weak transparency mechanisms dilute accountability.
Consequences:
- Governance shortfalls: Resulting governance gaps manifest as unplanned urban growth, inequity, and service delivery failures across Indian cities.
Conclusion
India’s urban governance remains structurally constrained by state dominance, weak fiscal autonomy, and limited local capacity. To realize the vision of the 74th Amendment, there is a pressing need for genuine devolution, empowered metropolitan governance, and participatory decision-making that places citizens and ULBs at the core of urban transformation.