Urbanization in Mountain Areas of India
Urbanization has had a significant impact on global environmental change in recent decades, especially in developing countries, urban growth has been rapid, but mostly unsystematic, unplanned, and unregulated.
It is important to note that the mountain ranges and hill areas of India play an important role in determining the climate and physiography of the country and are prime determinants of the socio-economic development of plain areas as these areas are where rivers originate, which have enabled India to sustain its economic position as an economic power by providing protection and climate control.
Table 1: The hill ranges of India Include.
Hill Ranges | States |
Eastern Ghats | Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, West Bengal |
Western Ghats | Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, Goa, Maharashtra |
Cardamom and Anaimalai Hills | Kerala And Tamil Nadu |
Nilgiri Hills | Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Karnataka |
Palani Hills | Tamil Nadu |
Garo, Khasi and Jaintia Hills | Meghalaya |
Western Himalaya | Jammu And Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand |
Eastern Himalaya | Assam, Darjeeling |
Source: Compiled by SPA-EIACP PC , Hill Area Development Programme.
The Himalaya is among the most marginalized mountain regions in the world, as well as one of the most tectonically active and densely populated. Recent years have also seen rapid urbanization in areas that are relatively less accessible. As a result of improved road connectivity, publicity, and marketing for newly developed tourist destinations, domestic and international tourism have increased significantly.
A lack of a policy for urban land use, economic globalization, and the gradual shift from primary resource development practices to secondary and tertiary sectors are among the contributing factors.
Consequently, urban settlements in the mountain areas have developed in size, area, and complexity, leading to the expansion of urban processes (expansion of urban land use within surrounding agriculture, forests, and rural environments), as well as increased intensities of urban land use within towns (i.e., an increase in covered areas, an increase in building density, and an increase in population density).
Urban areas in high mountains are becoming centers of growth by creating employment opportunities, offering diverse socioeconomic services, and building infrastructure; and contributing to the development of their vast hinterlands through the trickledown effect; on the other hand, urban sprawl disrupts ecosystem services in fragile mountains.
As a result of rapid and unplanned urbanization, hydrological regimes in Himalayan watersheds have been disturbed, ground water recharge has been reduced, and water supplies for drinking, sanitation, and crop production have decreased. Forests and biodiversity have been depleted, natural hazards and disasters have been increased in urban areas and peri-urban zones, and mountain dwellers are more vulnerable to water, food, livelihoods, and health issues.
Table 2: Hill Districts of India (As per the criteria of National Building Code, 2016)
Sl.no. | State | State Total Population | No. of Hill District in the State | Total Population of Hill District | % of population In Hill District in the State |
1 | Jammu and Kashmir | 1,22,58,829 | 20 | 1,22,58,829 | 100.00% |
2 | Ladhak UT | | 2 | | |
2 | Himachal Pradesh | 68,64,602 | 12 | 68,56,509 | 99.88% |
3 | Uttarakhand | 1,00,86,292 | 12 | 84,37,390 | 83.65% |
4 | Sikkim | 6,10,577 | 4 | 6,10,577 | 100.00% |
5 | Nagaland | 19,78,502 | 10 | 15,99,691 | 80.85% |
6 | Manipur | 27,21,556 | 9 | 27,21,556 | 100.00% |
7 | Tripura | 36,73,917 | 8 | 36,73,917 | 100.00% |
8 | Arunachal Pradesh | 15,87,562 | 20 | 15,87,562 | 100.00% |
9 | Mizoram | 10,97,206 | 8 | 10,97,206 | 100.00% |
10 | Meghalaya | 20,12,211 | 11 | 20,12,211 | 100.00% |
11 | Assam | 3,12,05,576 | 3 | 11,70,415 | 3.75% |
12 | West Bengal | 9,12,76,115 | 1 | 18,46,823 | 2.02% |
13 | Maharashtra | 11,23,74,333 | 10 | 4,01,79,742 | 35.76% |
14 | Tamil Nadu | 7,21,47,030 | 3 | 47,74,978 | 6.62% |
15 | Karnataka | 6,10,95,297 | 16 | 4,55,01,923 | 74.48% |
16 | Kerala | 3,34,06,061 | 3 | 47,36,328 | 14.18% |
17 | Andhra Pradesh | 8,45,80,777 | 2 | 84,64,653 | 10.01% |
18 | Odisha | 4,19,74,218 | 4 | 52,10,312 | 12.41% |
19 | Chhattisgarh | 2,55,45,198 | 5 | 54,23,491 | 21.23% |
20 | Telangana | 3,51,93,978 | 1 | 2446265 | 6.95% |
21 | Jharkhand | 3,29,88,134 | 3 | 44,01,256 | 13.34% |
22 | Rajasthan | 6,85,48,437 | 2 | 3565120 | 5.20% |
23 | Madhya Pradesh | 7,26,26,809 | 3 | 4370808 | 6.02% |
Based on 2011 Census Data |
Source: Compiled by SPA-EIACP Programme centre.
As a result of climate change, extreme weather events have become more frequent, severe, and intense, putting pressure on urban ecosystems. Though urban growth in the Himalaya cannot be stopped or reduced, it can be steered in a more sustainable manner through an integrated urban-rural land use plan, as in other parts of the world.
However, mountain regions have long been marginalized from the viewpoint of their sustainable development (ICIMOD, 2012). However, we are experiencing an emergence of responsiveness of the ecological significance of mountain systems and their environmental significance for the sustainability of global community, particularly after the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development – Rio Earth Summit in 1992 (UN, 2012). As a result, our understanding about the dilemmas of mountain ecosystems and approach to their development has undergone drastic changes, during the last two decades (ICIMOD, 2012).
Urban agglomerations account for more than half of the world's population (Bloom et al., 2010, Wanget al., 2012). A trend towards rapid urbanization is also increasingly impacting small and medium-sized towns, which receive less research attention (Bell and Jayne, 2009, Simon, 2007, Zérah and Denis, 2017).
Small towns are classified according to their population size, although no universal definition exists. In India, a town with fewer than 100,000 inhabitants are considered a small town (Shaw, 2013). Bell and Jayne (2009) also consider functional characteristics. In South Asia, towns have become primary poles of development as a result of their rapid growth (Mitra, Pandey, & Allen, 2016: 66).
There is also evidence that tourism contributes heavily to economic growth and urbanization in other Himalayan towns (e.g., Sundriyal, Shridhar, Madhwal, Pandey, & Sharma, 2018), however, it is often associated with adverse socio-ecological impacts.
In addition to tourism, urban lifestyles and consumption patterns are undergoing change. Local livelihoods and family structures are also changing (Dame, 2015).
Agrarian production has become less fundamental, and livelihoods have shifted to monetary income activities (Dame & Nüsser, 2011), leading to large unplanned urban expansion, especially for tourism.
It is also challenging to construct a dwelling on barren land due to the lack of suitable building sites. Indigent, new town dwellers build on alluvial fans near streams, which are prone to flooding.
Managing water and waste, controlling air pollution, and access to electricity are also grave challenges for urban development in the mountains.
Stakeholders must share responsibilities and plan for the risks associated with rapid urbanization. Urban planning is hindered by complex organizational structures and the ineffective administrative capacities of municipal corporations. A lack of involvement of different stakeholder groups in national-regional cooperation bears the risk of lacking local expertise and adaptations to local conditions.
Civil society participation would benefit from more detailed information on urban planning processes. Yet, the most important part of urban planning is executing and controlling existing regulations and those to come.
Sources
Anhorn, J., Lennartz, T., & Nüsser, M. (2015). Rapid urban growth and earthquake risk in Musikot, mid-western hills, Nepal. Erdkunde, 307-325.
Balk, D., Montgomery, M.R., McGranahan, G., Kim, D., Mara, V., Todd, M., Buettner, T., and Dorélien, A. (2009): Mapping Urban Settlements and the Risks of Climate Change in Africa, Asia and South. José Miguel Guzmán et al. (eds.): Population Dynamics and Climate Change. International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), London, 80–103.
Bloom, D. E., Canning, D., Fink, G., Khanna, T., & Salyer, P. (2010). Urban settlement: data, measures, and trends (No. 2010/12). WIDER Working Paper.
Dame J (2015). Ernährungssicherung im Hochgebirge. Akteure und ihr Handeln im Kontext des sozioökonomischen Wandels in Ladakh, Indien (Food security in high mountains. Actors and agency in a context of socio-economic change in Ladakh, India), Sttutgart
Haller, A. (2014). The “sowing of concrete”: Peri-urban smallholder perceptions of rural–urban land change in the Central Peruvian Andes. Land use policy, 38, 239-247.
Haigh, M. (2002): Headwater Control: Integrating Land and Livelihoods, Paper Presented at the International Conference on Sustainable Development of Headwater Resources. United Nation’s International University, Nairobi.
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) (2010): Mountains of the World—Ecosystem Services in a Time of Global and Climate Change: Seizing Opportunities—Meeting Challenges. Framework paper prepared for the Mountain Initiative of the Government of Nepal by ICIMOD and the Government of Nepal, Ministry of Environment.
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) (2012): Climate Change Challenges in the Mountains: Implication to Adaptation Needs of the Hindu Kush Himalayas. Hayama: Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, ICIMOD, Nepal.
Joshi, B. (2018). Recent trends of rural out-migration and its socio-economic and environmental impacts in Uttarakhand Himalaya. Journal of Urban and Regional Studies on Contemporary India, 4(2), 1-14.
Kummu, M., De Moel, H., Salvucci, G., Viviroli, D., Ward, P. J., & Varis, O. (2016). Over the hills and further away from coast: global geospatial patterns of human and environment over the 20th–21st centuries. Environmental Research Letters, 11(3), 034010.