Southern States, 5 UTs ahead in urbanisation

[Mr.S.Singh]

Is rapid urbanization necessarily a good thing ? Is'nt it another measure of the poverty and unemployment gap between the rural and urban populace in under developed countries ? Economic migration.. Correct me if im wrong but If you take developed countries in Europe or the America's there is'nt that much of a stark difference between the urban and rural.. Except for vast thinly populated countries like Australia or Canada where much of the land is not arable or habitable

urbanization rate of 10% or less is acceptable, as people come to cities for a better standard of living and increases their income. It also increases rapid industrialization as people work in factories, increasing skilled and semi-skilled laborers.

A draw back is abandoning agriculture and cattle practice

Normally people who move to cities do pitty work anyways, hence they end up increasing they standard of living

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

Chennai in itself have become so big that the city is becoming ever expanding. The people living in outskirts are not taken into consideration I think .
But still 4 point something urbanisation is acceptable for a already urbanised state like TN. TN have many urbanised regions like Coimbatore, Trichy, Namakkal, Sivakasi, etc. Its just needs one more centre near Kanyakumari .
IT park should be every city. And Kerala? Thats a tough nut to crack. 21 percent.. Is agriculture totally dying out there?

 

[Chronos]

Is rapid urbanization necessarily a good thing ? Is'nt it another measure of the poverty and unemployment gap between the rural and urban populace in under developed countries ? Economic migration.. Correct me if im wrong but If you take developed countries in Europe or the America's there is'nt that much of a stark difference between the urban and rural.. Except for vast thinly populated countries like Australia or Canada where much of the land is not arable or habitable

Except I think in Europe and the United States, the percentage of people in the cities are much higher, I think

Ideally, you should have rural centres becoming urban due to increasing industrial or commercial activities. I think that is the way it happened in western countries.

Chennai in itself have become so big that the city is becoming ever expanding. The people living in outskirts are not taken into consideration I think .
But still 4 point something urbanisation is acceptable for a already urbanised state like TN. TN have many urbanised regions like Coimbatore, Trichy, Namakkal, Sivakasi, etc. Its just needs one more centre near Kanyakumari .
IT park should be every city. And Kerala? Thats a tough nut to crack. 21 percent.. Is agriculture totally dying out there?

afraid so. But as I explained, can't let it get too much, or it might affect our second biggest cash cow of tourism.

 

[Edison Chen]

In 1960s, the US started "counter urbanization", this is another level. It's not always good to build huge metropolises, a rich countryside is the prove of rich.

 

[Chronos]

In 1960s, the US started "counter urbanization", this is another level. It's not always good to build huge metropolises, a rich countryside is the prove of rich.

you always need your second tier and third tier cities to take the weight off. And you are right about the country side.

but there also too many people doing farming, quite often lands that are pretty small.

 

[Edison Chen]

you always need your second tier and third tier cities to take the weight off. And you are right about the country side.

but there also too many people doing farming, quite often lands that are pretty small.

True, second or third tier cities have the function of reliving metropolises's burden, and thus they are under metropolises's radiation, they can become rich at the same time.

Doing farming is ok, you can build more higher, to save land.

 

[Foot12]

What about Maharashtra and Gujarat?
Aren't these states even doing better than south India?

 

[Chronos]

What about Maharashtra and Gujarat?
Aren't these states even doing better than south India?

"Among the major States, Tamil Nadu is the most urbanized state with 43.9 percent of the population living in urban areas followed by Maharashtra (42.4 percent) and Gujarat (37.4 percent). The proportion of urban population is the lowest in Himachal Pradesh with 9.8% followed by Bihar with 10.5 percent, Assam (12.7 percent) and Orissa (14.9 percent)."

that quoted figure is from the Ministry of Urban development.

 

[Foot12]

"Among the major States, Tamil Nadu is the most urbanized state with 43.9 percent of the population living in urban areas followed by Maharashtra (42.4 percent) and Gujarat (37.4 percent). The proportion of urban population is the lowest in Himachal Pradesh with 9.8% followed by Bihar with 10.5 percent, Assam (12.7 percent) and Orissa (14.9 percent)."

that quoted figure is from the Ministry of Urban development.

I see. Thanks for the info.
It seems that eastern India fails again.
Are Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Gujarat also the most developed regions of India in terms of income and education?

 

[Chronos]

I see. Thanks for the info.
It seems that eastern India fails again.
Are Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Gujarat also the most developed regions of India in terms of income and education?

Literacy rate rankings here

Literacy Rate in India- Indian Literacy Rate 2014- Literacy Rate of India

GDP ranking here

Top Ten States of India with Highest GDP Shares

In terms of GDP per capita, Punjab, Haryana, Gujarat and Maharashtra does well.

The eastern states have been neglected by the Indian government for a long time.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

I see. Thanks for the info.
It seems that eastern India fails again.
Are Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Gujarat also the most developed regions of India in terms of income and education?

Not exactly. Kerala, Karnataka also does very well.