Urban

The literal meaning of ‘urban’ comes from a Latin word called urbs meaning urbanus, ie, “city” or “town”, and has
been in use since 17th century.
The term city and town are often used synonymously and denote populations in a given area performing urban
functions, ie, non agriculture/non-primary sector activities
Central Business District (CBD)
Central Business District or CBD is generally the business and commercial center of the City.
It is the part of the city that most people go to work and shop, suggesting that it is a business hub of the city. This
is particularly seen in big metropolitan cities around the world where their CBDs are the most well-used part of
the city.
CBDs are the areas where big businesses and well-known companies are located inside the city, usually with
skyscraper based buildings in world commercial and business hubs such as London and New York. These areas are
of prime importance and part of high value real estate.
Major transport routes pass through these areas of high importance and high concentration
Each CBD is unique in terms of their spatial shape. Terms such as the financial district, downtown, and city center
are sometimes used to refer to the CBD
History Of The CBD: In ancient cities, the CBDs developed from market squares.
During market days, consumers, merchants, and farmers would meet at the center of the city to
conduct their businesses and buy goods.
Slowly, the market place would grow and become proper urban centers. As the city grew and
developed, an area would be designated as the CBD where commercial and retail took place.
In most cases, the CBD would be restricted to the oldest part of the city or near major transportation
routes such as railroad or highway.
With time, the CBD evolved into a financial center and also a center for government and other
important offices.
In the early 20th century, cities in America and Europe had CBDs that were primarily retail and
commercial centers.
However, by the mid-20th century, the CBDs had expanded to include office spaces and commercial
businesses. Skyscrapers replaced the old buildings.
CBDs Today: By the end of the 20th century, the urban area considered as the CBD had become
generally diverse and a metropolitan area.
CBDs have the highest concentration of land use with different specialist areas. The region is not only
a retail and commercial center but also residential, entertainment, medical, government, cultural,
and financial center.
The combination of the residential area and shopping malls have given CBDs new life. One can now
shop, be entertained, eat, and sleep within the CBD.
Some of the CBDs across the world operate 24 hours, with nightlife commonly characterized by
entertainment. However, they are still far more populated during the day.
The largest CBDs are located in big cities of a country, mostly the capital and largest cities
Currently, the CBDs have become less important and multiple business districts with diverse
economic activities are spread across many locations in a large city
 Characteristics of a CBD:
1. Exceptionally high land price & property values because this area under prime real estate. The prices are
amongst the highest in the city because of their commercial values.
2. CBDs are the areas with large footfall and focal point. This large footfall is due to number of reasons like
accessibility & the service being offered by business districts.
3. Many large cities might have multiple business districts and all of them functioning and serving something
different.
4. “Central” Business District, might not always be “centrally” located. Their location is highly influenced by
multiple factors, major transport routes but not always.
5. There will be lack of open and green spaces. This is attributed to high land prices.
6. Rents are exceptionally high, this makes high density of offices too along with high worker’s density. This is
primary reason of having skyscrapers & tall buildings in these areas.
7. There will be high end shops and services available since such kind of commercial activities can afford to pay
a high rent demanded in a CBD.
Nodes
A village, town, or city needs one or more focal points, depending on size. Traditionally these were the
downtowns. Now most regions are multi-centric (sometimes called polycentric). It's actually fine to have more
than one center in a large city, but sound urban design principles would describe a hierarchy of centers. The
downtown/CBD should the king of the hill.
Node is simply a term for the idea of an activity center or an area where traffic, money, information, or other
flows come together. There can be employment centers, shopping centers, entertainment centers, or multi-
function activity centers.
Each center or node should exude a strong sense of place.
So cultivating a dynamic and exciting community center or hierarchy of centers, that most people can "read"
intuitively, is perhaps the most important of the urban design principles.
When applied to a city or town, "legible" means that people from the same culture have an intuitive sense of
what is coming next and how to navigate; thus we say that they can read their surroundings.
Suburban
The word suburban is an adjective relating to a smaller residential community apart from a main city. This
residential area usually has a lower population density than inner city areas.
Usually a major city or metropolitan area will have suburbs on the outskirts of a city.
Suburban areas are typically rural areas that have been developed outside of the central business district. The
term can also be used to describe neighborhoods within the city that have been developed away from the central
districts.
There are many different types of suburbs, including single-family homes, apartments, condominiums and
townhouses. Suburban areas often have more relaxed zoning laws and are usually serviced by private
transportation, such as buses and trains.
Some forms of outer suburb are even a separate residential community separated by a gate, and one might see a
stark distinction between those who live in fancy suburbs and the poverty-stricken inner city.
Peri Urban Areas
Peri-urban areas (also called rurban space, outskirts or the hinterland) are defined by the structure resulting from
the process of peri-urbanisation.
It can be described as the landscape interface between town and country, or also as the rural—urban transition
zone where urban and rural uses mix and often clash.
It can thus be viewed as a landscape type in its own right, one forged from an interaction of urban and rural land
use.
In general, the term refers to areas beyond the metropolitan fringe, at the interface between city and country but
within the economic and social catchment of a large metropolitan area. Several authors have tried to simplify the
definition by describing peri-urban areas as “areas on the urban periphery into which cities expand” or “which
cities influence”
Rural Urban Fringe
The rural-urban fringe is the boundary zone outside the urban area proper where rural and urban land uses
intermix.
It is the area where the city meets the countryside.
It is an area of transition from agricultural and other rural land uses to urban use.
Located well within the urban sphere of influence the fringe is characterized by a wide variety of land use
including dormitory settlements housing middle-income commuters who work in the central urban area.
Over time the characteristics of the fringe change from largely rural to largely urban.
Suburbanisation takes place at the municipal boundary of rural-urban fringe.
History of rural-urban fringe development:
There was widespread inner city development immediately post WW2. But this did not create enough housing
units for all those who needed them. Others were built on the edge of towns and cities. Most of the residential
growth is outwards into the suburbs. Population density is lower than that in the inner city, and the houses are
usually larger as the land is cheaper. As residential use started spreading to the suburbs, transportation network
developed, increasing the connectivity of the suburbs to the inner city. From the 1970s, out-of-town shopping
centers took advantage of lower land prices and more space. After that many companies moved their offices and
factories to the edge of the urban area for similar reasons, where they could take advantage of better transport
links as well. From the late 1970s, many cities have lost population to counter-urbanization – people leaving the
cities for a variety of reasons.
◦ People want a better quality of life in quieter, cleaner rural surrounding.
◦ More people are willing and able to travel further to work.
◦ Relocation of businesses to places with better transport links and cheaper building costs.
◦ Flexible working and new technology have increased part-time home working.
◦ Retired people leave the city where they once worked.
This has led to the smaller towns and villages in areas with excellent communication links to expand. In-filling is
building in gaps within the village or town boundary (known as the village/town envelope).
Increasing demand for land in the rural-urban fringe area because:
Land is cheaper – as the accessibility of the RUF is lower than that of the inner city areas and most of the people
have to travel to the inner city for work, fewer people are willing to live in the RUF. Thus the land prices are lower.
There is less traffic congestion and pollution – as the area is a new development in the outskirts, and the
population living in the area is lesser than the inner city, the traffic congestion and pollution levels are lesser.
There is easier access and a better road infrastructure – as it is a newer development with a lot of space available.
There is a more pleasant environment with more open space – the amount of open space decreases with time as
the extent of development increases, and so does the friendly environment.
Beneficial development in the rural-urban fringe area:
The rural-urban fringe is characterized by a mixture of land uses, most of which require large areas of land.
◦ Housing developments as urban sprawl continue
◦ Science and business parks
◦ Hypermarkets and superstores
◦ Retail parks and out of town shopping centers
◦ Office developments
◦ Hotels and conference centers
◦ Airport expansion
Rural-urban continuum
The term rural-urban continuum came into existence because of the fact that a marked difference between the
urban & rural character is not seen in the settlements abutting the city limits.
On one hand, they have characteristics of the city because of their closeness to it & on the other they cannot
deny their rural characteristics of largely unplanned development.
Some sociologists have used the concept of rural-urban continuum to stress the idea that there are no sharp
breaking points to be found in the degree or quantity of rural-urban differences. The differences may arise due to
various factors. But the leading factor among them is migration. Although, the rapid process of urbanization
through the establishment of industries, urban traits and facilities has decreased the differences between villages
and cities, yet this continuum or loss of demarcation has proved problematic to planners & other civic
departments because these areas being near the city facilitate movement of people in & out of the city & hence
demand extension of facilities.
The notion of the rural-urban continuum evolved from the work of L.Wirth on the social distinctiveness of the
city. Societies at the rural end of the continuum are envisaged as being close-knit, rigidly stratified, highly stable,
integrating and homogenous in composition. Urban societies are supposed to be loose in association, unstable in
membership, characterized by great, social mobility and with a tendency for inter-individual contacts to occur
only in one situational context (e.g. workplace, kinship, recreation) whereas in rural societies contact would occur
in several different contexts.
The continuum has been seen both as a classificatory device and as marking a process of social change, the view
of the continuum as marking a method is criticised and discredited by the fact that social change can occur
without any growth of settlement or increase in population, e.g., through the replacement of an original rural
population by commuters.
Conurbation
A term coined by Patrick Geddes in 1915 to describe large-scale city regions such as Greater London, New
York/Boston, or the Ruhr. It is not a statistically based concept, but normally refers to one city or a conglomerate
of very large cities surrounded by extensive suburbs, which form a continuous urban and industrial built-up
environment. In most cases, transportation systems develop to link all districts within the conurbation, so as to
create a single urban labour-market or travel-to-work area. Alternative terms are urban agglomeration and, in the
United States, metropolitan area.
It is an extensive urban area resulting from the expansion of several cities or towns, a densely populated urban
area, usually a large city surrounded closely by smaller ones.
Urban Sprawl
Urban sprawl, also called sprawl or suburban sprawl, the rapid expansion of the geographic extent of cities and
towns, often characterized by low-density residential housing, single-use zoning, and increased reliance on the
private automobile for transportation.
Urban sprawl is caused in part by the need to accommodate a rising urban population; however, in many
metropolitan areas it results from a desire for increased living space and other residential amenities.
Urban sprawl has been correlated with increased energy use, pollution, and traffic congestion and a decline in
community distinctiveness and cohesiveness. In addition, by increasing the physical and environmental
“footprints” of metropolitan areas, the phenomenon leads to the destruction of wildlife habitat and to the
fragmentation of remaining natural areas.
Causes: There are many factors that contribute to urban sprawl. Population increases alone do not account for
increases in a metropolitan area’s urban extent. In many cases, urban sprawl has occurred in areas experiencing
population declines, and some areas with rising populations experience little urban sprawl, especially in
developing countries. Economic growth and globalization are often cited as the principal macroeconomic drivers
of urban sprawl; however, increased affluence, attractive land and housing prices, and the desire for larger homes
with more amenities (such as yards, household appliances, storage space, and privacy) play significant roles at the
level of the individual. Many experts also believe that weak planning laws and single-use zoning also contribute to
urban sprawl.
Ribbon Development
Refers to the building of houses along the routes of communications radiating from a human settlement. The
resulting linear settlements are clearly visible on land use maps and aerial photographs, giving cities and the
countryside a particular character.
Normally the very first ribbons are focused on roads. Following the Industrial Revolution, ribbon development
became prevalent along railway lines. However, the investment required to build train stations, the ensuing
attractiveness of easy rail access, and need for accompanying roads often led to new small settlements outside of
the center city. Ribbon developments yielded attractive home locations on isolated roads as increasing motor car
ownership meant that houses could be sold easily even if they were remote from workplaces and urban centres.
Developers were pleased to not have to construct additional roads, thereby saving money and plot space. Ribbon
developments also filed spaces at the interstice between urban areas, and resultingly appealed to potential
buyers needing to access one or more of these locations.
Ribbon developments were ultimately recognized as an inefficient use of resources, requiring bypass roads to be
built, and often served as a precursor to untrammelled urban sprawl. Urban sprawl/suburbanization of large areas
led to the introduction of green belt policies, new towns, planned suburbs and garden cities.
Categorization of urban areas
A hamlet is a type of settlement. The definition of hamlet varies by country. It usually refers to a small settlement,
with a small population which is usually under 100, in a rural area, or a component of a larger settlement or
municipality.
A village is a clustered human settlement or community, larger than a hamlet but smaller than a town, with a
population ranging from a few hundred to a few thousand.
A town is a human settlement larger than a village but smaller than a city. The size definition for what constitutes
a "town" varies considerably in different parts of the world
A city is a large and permanent human settlement
A metropolis is a large city or urban area which is a significant economic, political, and cultural center for a
country or region, and an important hub for regional or international connections, commerce, and
communications
Mumford’s classification of cities
Lewis Mumford (1938) an American historian, sociologist, philosopher of technology, and literary critic suggested
six stages of development of cities. Mumford was influenced by the work of Scottish theorist Sir Patrick Geddes.
His six stages of development of cities are:
Eopolis: The beginning of urbanisation of course is rooted in the rural scene. Men used to be involved in hunting.
As they slowly learned, they became producers and settled in village. They also indulged in fishing and mining. At
this juncture of time depending upon their religion, they set up a temple, cathedral or mosque. Subsequently, a
market also developed.
Polis: As more and more villages developed many found that they have certain things common with their
neighbour’s. The settlements slowly developed into a brotherhood of traders and became richer because of
accumulation of wealth from nearby villages. The religious establishments extend further and so does the market
squares. There was a social stratification according to which people belonging to the higher hierarchy occupy
central place while the others spread outwardly such that the people of lower level took peripheral places.
Mumford’s classification of cities
Metropolis: Small towns and villages in a region come together as a single entity. The entity is the city which has a
compact site, good water and food supply, ample land etc. This becomes metropolis, the mother of city. As the
city streamlines its production, a surplus occurs. The surplus at this stage is characterized by the specialization of
trades.
Megalopolis: The stage is marked by more diversity of cultures. There is migration from all around. Indifference
between the people increases. There is also a class struggle. Further developments are hence down wards. The
city begins to decline.
Tyrannopolis: The economic and social scene slowly metamorphoses into more or less parasitic state. This stage
of the development of city is marked by the indifference. People are involved in pomp and pleasure. This is what
happened towards the end of Roman era. The environment of the city deteriorates and people flee towards the
countryside. The commercial activities are marked by booms and slumps.
Necropolis: The city decays further. The civilization follows a downward trend. War, famine and diseases erupt
and lead the city towards destruction. The cultural institutions also erode greatly
Classification of Urban places on the
basis of Functions
Urban centers are numerous, and these vary in their functions, location, size, and in their social composition,
culture, and heritage also. It is therefore meaningful to classify towns into categories for a better understanding
of their role in the regional and national context.
There are several methods, ways, and means to classify urban centers. The site and situation of towns,
population, size, and functions, their social and cultural environment, etc., are some of the recognized bases to
put them into groups. Out of all these bases of classification, the variable of ‘function’ is widely accepted and
reliable too. ‘Reliable’ in the sense that urban place itself is defined as a unit characterized by non-agricultural
activities.
Non-agricultural activities here, include administrative, industrial, commercial, cultural, etc. It is a rare instance
that an urban place is ‘mono-activity’ center. Often towns develop diversified activities and are known to possess
multifarious functions like economic, administrative, and cultural. Nearly all towns are supposed to provide
various services like health, education, municipal (water, electricity, sanitation), transportation, and marketing.
A. Aurousseau’s Attempt: In 1921, M. Aurousseau classified towns into six classes with twenty-eight subtypes.
The six classes were administrative, defense, culture, production-towns, communication, and recreation.
This list is quite comprehensive and has sometimes been found useful. His classification though a simple one,
however, suffers from the defect of over-generalization. Moreover, some of the classes are specific to a particular
country at a particular time only. To classify a town into one major category the cut-off point of one class has
been decided by the arbitrary percentage, and therefore it is subjective. Economic activities too are neglected.
These are important in the sense that a town also caters to the need of people residing outside its municipal
limits. Various classes of functions as suggested by Aurousseau create confusion in the sense that both functional
and locational characteristics are mixed; for example, under the communication-class group of towns performing
the function of ‘transfer of goods’ are put. Towns with tidal-limit, fall-line towns, bridgehead towns point out
attributes of location in the performance of their function. It is thus doubtful that such towns are exclusively
communicational, and not locational. Similarly, pilgrimage centers are cultural towns, but these equally are
significant in their geographical location on mountainous terrain, in valleys, or on banks of rivers.
In spite of all these critics, Aurousseau’s classification marks a significant stage and provides a springboard for
sophisticated methods. It is actually a comprehensive scheme bringing together polygonal functional urban
activities to classify urban centers.
B. Harris’s Classification: Chauncy D. Harris remedied the deficiencies of the former subjective and judgment-
based classifications In his paper ‘A Functional Classification of Cities in the United States (1943)’, he was able to
identify quantitatively dominant function out of multifunctional character of cities. He devised a scale of
reference from his study of 984 towns (population more than 10,000) in the United States based on the data
provided by the 1930 Census. He used two sets of information – i) employment and ii) occupational figures
reduced to percentages to indicate cut-off points for urban activities varying in importance.
He identified nine principal categories of towns – manufacturing (M), retailing (R), diversified (D), wholesaling
(W), transportation (T), mining (S), educational (E), resort or retirement (X) and others (P).
Harris’s classification suffers from some defects and is not universally viable. He used metropolitan districts as
functional units because the industry-group data such as those published now were not available during that
time. Consequently, the number of cities which were too small to have metropolitan districts were left
unclassified.
Carter (1975) labeled Harris’s classification as subjective because the decisions to access or delete with a
minimum number or cut-off points seem to be a personal one and were set by simple empirical means.
Under the class of ‘Transport and Communications’, workers engaged in telephone and telegraph services were
omitted, which was nothing more than a subjective decision
C. Howard Nelson’s Classification : Nelson through his classification removed the shortcomings of the earlier
classifications by using a stated procedure that could be objectively checked by other workers. He decided to base
his method of classification entirely upon major industry groups as listed in the 1950 Census of Population for
standard metropolitan areas, urbanized areas, and urban places of 10,000 or more population.
He omitted the little significance groups like agriculture and construction, and finally, arrived at the nine activity
groups manufacturing; mining retail; wholesale; personal service; professional services; public
administration;transport and communication; finance, insurance, real estate.
The problem of city specialization, and also the degree of specialization above the average was solved by giving
margins of the different degrees to different size classes. He did find a definite tendency for the percentages
employed in some activities to vary with city size.Nelson has not only functionally classified the cities but also
taken the functional hierarchy for each function. According to Nelson, the city can be specialized in more than
one activity and to varying degrees.
Criticism: Nelson was criticized by some British Urban geographers especially Moser and Scott who said that this
scheme of classification is applicable only for a particular point of time. After few years, there may be a change in
occupation statistics. But, a simple change in occupational statistics can’t change the genetic factors of the town.
D. Ashok Mitra’s Classification of Indian Cities: Ashok Mitra, a former Registrar General of the Census of India,
attempted a comprehensive classification of all Indian Cities. He divided the city function into nine groups.
The groups are: I – Cultivation II – Agriculture Labour III – Mining, Fishing, Forestry and Livestock IV – Household
Industry V – Manufacturing VI – Construction VII – Trade & Commerce VIII – Transportation & Communication
IX – Services
He ignored the first two groups as they are related to villages and grouped the seven industrial categories of
workers into three broad groups:
Manufacturing Town (percentage of workers in III, IV, V, and VI put together is greater than the percentage in VII
+ VIII or in IX). i.e. (III+IV+V+VI) > (VII + VIII) or IX.
Trade and Transport Town (percentage of workers in VII + VIII is greater than IX or in III + IV + V and VI put
together). i.e. (VII + VIII) > IX or (III+IV+V+VI).
Service Town (where a percentage of workers in IX is greater than workers in III + IV+V+VI or percentage in VII +
VIII). i.e. (IX) > (III + IV+V+VI) or (VII + VIII)
International Context in Defining Urban
The definition of an urban area or a city changes from time to time and place to place. The United Nations has
recommended that places with more than 20,000 inhabitants living close together are urban.
However, different countries compile their urban statistics still on the basis of different standards. These
differences make comparisons of urbanization levels difficult.
These difficulties are compounded by the fast growth of cities in the developing world, particularly South Asia.
Context: National and International
The census organizations of various countries classify their respective population into rural and urban population
on the basis of the definition of an urban center, which takes into account the local conditions.
It is difficult to standardize the definition of urban centers to make them universally applicable, because the
conditions prevailing in different countries are highly variable.
The United Nations (1958) has attempted to classify the various definitions used by different members countries
into five principal groups on the basis of various criteria used.
Group I consists of those countries which define an urban settlement on the basis of historical, political and
administrative status. Consequently, the centers of administration like shi and ku (in Japan), municipios, district,
communes, are treated as urban centers.
Group II consist of those countries, which use a numerical threshold population criterion to grant urban status to
a settlement. In the case of such countries, a specific minimum size of population is considered as the basis to
define an urban area. The countries falling in this category may not follow the standard threshold point of
population size, because the socio-economic and political conditions are likely to be different. Nevertheless, it
may be stressed that a country should not change the minimum qualifying size of population frequently so as to
maintain the comparability of international urban data.
Group III includes those countries, which grant urban status to their settlements, on the basis of local self-
government such as municipalities, borough, chartered town, etc. However, the terms used for local self-
government vary from country to country. In India, the terms used are Municipality, Municipal Council, Municipal
Corporation, Notified Area, Cantonment Board, etc.
Group IV includes those countries which grant urban status to their settlements on the basis of physical layout
and availability of amenities. For example, if the settlement has proper street pattern, contiguously aligned
buildings, public utility services like electricity, water supply, sewerage system, police station, school, health
center, post office, etc, it can be classified as urban settlement.
Group V includes those countries where a settlement is classified as urban on the basis of functions it performs,
that is to say, a specific minimum proportion of its workers are required to be engaged in non-agricultural
activities. In practice, however when it comes to defining an urban settlement, various countries have tried to
combine these different sets of criteria.
Group of Countries Criteria Examples
Group I Defines an urban settlement on the basis of Japan's Shi and ku
historical, political and administrative status.
Group II Uses a numerical threshold population criterion Nepal
to grant urban status to a settlement
Group III Grants urban status to their settlements, on the UK
basis of local self-government such as
municipalities, borough, chartered town.
Group IV Grants urban status to their settlements on the Sweden
basis of physical layout and availability of
amenities.
Group V Settlement is classified as urban on the basis of India
functions it performs.
 CLASSIFICATION OF URBAN AREAS
The Bureau of the Census defines urban as comprising all territory, population, and housing units located in
urbanized areas and in places of 2,500 or more inhabitants outside of UAs. The term urban refers to both
kinds of geographic entities. The terms urban, urbanized area, and rural are the Census Bureau’s
definitions; other Federal agencies, State agencies, local officials, and private groups may use these same
terms to identify areas based on different criteria
Statutory Towns and Census Towns
The Directorate of Census Operation classifies towns in India into two types.
Statutory Towns are notified under the law.
Census Towns can be villages which have urban characteristics.
The statutory towns are represented or recognized by the Municipal Corporations (Mahanagar Palika or Nagar
Nigam), Municipal Committee (Nagar Parishad) and Municipality or Nagar Panchayat. They also include other
urban areas such as cantonment boards, notified areas and tourist and pilgrim centers recognized by the
respective state governments. On the other hand, Census Towns are defined by the following criteria
i) A minimum population of 5,000
ii) At least 75 per cent of the male main working population engaged in nonagricultural pursuits; and
iii) A density of population of at least 400 persons per sq. km
Outgrowths and Urban Agglomeration
Urban Outgrowths, defined by the Census of India as, “a viable unit such as a village or part of a village
contiguous to a statutory town and possess the urban features in terms of infrastructure and amenities such as
pucca roads, electricity, tap water, drainage system, education institutions, post offices, medical facilities, banks,
etc
Urban agglomeration is a continuous urban spread constituting a town and its adjoining outgrowths (OGs), or two
or more physically contiguous towns together with or without outgrowths of such towns.

Sl No Types of Town 2001 2011 Change (%)

1 Statutory Towns 3799 4041 6.37
2 Census Towns 1362 3894 185.9
3 Urban Agglomeration s 384 475 23.7
4 Urban Outgrowths 962 981 1.95
Definition Criteria for Urban in Census
Sl No Census Year Definition Criteria for Urban
1 Before 1951 Every municipality of whatever size;
All civil lines (not included within municipal limits); and
Permanent habitations with continuous collection of houses of not less than
5,000 persons
Any other settlement declared by the respective State Census Superintendent
2 1961 All those places having urban local bodies e.g. Municipal Corporation,
Municipality, Notifies Area Committee and so on
All those places having:
1. Not less than 5000 population,
2. 2. A population density of 400 persons per square kilometre and
3. 3. 75 per cent of the workforce employed in the nonagriculture sector.
In addition to these, the Director of Census Operations, in consultation of the
state government and the Census Commissioner of India, has the power to
declare a settlement urban.
Definition Criteria for Urban in Census
Sl No Census Year Definition Criteria for Urban
3 1971 As above
4 1981 All the above criteria of 1961 with two additional changes:
I. Instead of 75% overall workforce, 75% male workforce engaged in non-
agriculture activities
II. II. Excluded the workers engaged in livestock, forestry, fishing, hunting and
plantation, orchards and allied activities
5 1991 onwards As above
Size classification of towns in India
The Census of India distinguishes between different classes of urban settlements on the basis of population.
Class I comprise cities with a population above 100,000 people and therefore include very large metropolitan
cities; the lowest category (class VI) comprises settlements below 5,000 people.
This distribution of urban settlements in different class sizes is mainly used to make comparisons of the evolution
of India’s demographic structure overtime.
However, it does not have administrative or governance implications.
Size Class Population No of Towns Share of Population

2001 2011 2001 2011

I 1 Lakh and above 393 505 68.67 60.4

II 50,000 to 99,999 401 605 9.67 11

III 20,000 to 49,999 1151 1905 12.23 15.4

IV 10,000 to 19,999 1344 2233 6.48 8.5

V 5,000 to 9,999 888 2187 2.36 4.2

VI Less than 5,000 191 498 0.23 0.5

Total 4368 7933 99.64 100

Source: Census 2011; Census, 2001, Provisional Population Table

There has been substantial increase in the number of towns during the last decade across all classes. This can be
attributed by increase in small and medium towns namely class III, IV and V towns in India. Though the number
of Class I towns has also increased, its share of the population has declined during the last censuses, though
there is an absolute increase in the population in India’s large class size towns.