RURAL-URBAN CONTINUUM

RURAL-URBAN CONTINUUM

SAROJ KUMAR SAMAL

DIRECTOR,SAROJ SAMAL'S IAS,DELHI

Generally, it seems that the social life in countryside moves and develops in
a rural setting just as social life in the city area moves and develops in an urban
setting. While comparing and contrasting between the two societies, i. e. rural and
urban, it has to be kept in mind that both the societies are the parts of the same
human society. They share many life are quite visible and in urban societies also
some basic features of rural life are prevalent. There is no clear cut demarcation
between the two. In this context MacIver has rightly remarked that “between the
two there is no sharp demarcation to tell where the city ends and country
begins.” It is presumed that a town starts where a village ends. But such a notion
is not at all scientifically true. It is in fact, a difficult task to demarcate and distinguish
the two communities. The dichotomy between “Rural” and ‘Urban’ is more a
theoretical concept than “a division based upon the facts of community of life”.
Often the dichotomy between rural and urban community is substituted by ruralurban
continuum. Such explanations are given due to many factors that prohibit
any concrete distinction between the two.
1. Lack of universal definition of Village and Town :
There is no universal definition which can distinguish between a town and
a village. It is very difficult to give a comprehensive definition of rural and
urban society. As Bergel has rightly pointed out “everybody seems to know
what a city is but no one has given a satisfactory definition.” Some thinkers
are of the opinion that there are some important characteristics which can
determine whether a particular area is town or village. These important
determinants are population, mode of life and mode of occupation, Let us examine
these conditions in detail.
An area to be called a town must possesses a sizable population. According
to the demographic structure, the number of population needed for an area to be
called urban varies from country to country. In America a town must possess 2500
population, in France 2000 and Japan 30,000. The census authority of Government
of India, lays down that a town or municipality area or notified area council must
not possess population less than 5000. But such a definition is too loose to
distinguish between town and village. Because there are some villages in India
where population exceeds 20,000 and on the other hand there are some railway
towns where population is below 5000. For example, Bhuban—a village of Orissa,
has approximately 35,000 population and the village itself has a notified area council:
There are also number of villages in U. P., and Punjab where population exceeds
20,000.
Some are of the opinion that ‘mode of life’ is one of the important criteria for
determining an urban urea. The patterns of urban living is closely associated with
transportation, communication, electricity, palacial buildings etc. But a closer
examination of the facts reveal that these facilities are not the adequate criteria to
distinguish between the rural and urban life. For example, if the palacial buildings
are constructed thirty miles away from the Bombay city, it cannot be called a
town. If the atmosphere of a village is created in the heart of a town, the town
can’t be called a village.
Some other scholars take the “mode of occupation” as a criterian to
distinguish between town and village. In village the predominant mode of occupation
is agriculture whereas in the town the important mode of occupation is industrial.
But it is found that with the impact of industrialization and new industrial policy of
government, industries are no more confined only to urban centres. A number of
industries are gradually growing up in rural areas. Hence, it cannot be strictly held
that the occupation in rural area is only agriculture. In this way all such attempts to
distinguish between a rural and urban society has failed due to the over laping
nature of both the societies