Status Paper

About the author:
Dr. Vishal Narain is an Associate Professor in the School of Public Policy and
Governance at the Management Development Institute, Gurgaon. He holds a PhD
from Wageningen University, the Netherlands. His research spans a wide range of
subjects in the realm of water policy and institutions, local governance and peri-
urban issues. He is the author of 'Institutions, technology and water control: water
users' associations and irrigation management reform in two large-scale systems in
India’ published by Orient Longman. He is involved in the research component, and is
responsible for lending the entire knowledge support
Pooja Anand did her graduation in Mass Communications & Journalism and then
Masters in Political Science from Hyderabad Central University, Hyderabad, India. She
has been involved with the peri urban project particularly in undertaking the scoping
studies in different cities in India.
Dr. Poulomi Banerjee is a senior fellow in south Asia Consortium for Interdisciplinary
Water Resources Studies, Hyderabad SaciWATERs. She holds a PhD on watershed
management from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Prior joining to
SaciWATERs she was working as a researcher in water resource and policy division
(WRPM) of The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), New Delhi. She has worked
extensively in the arena of water supply and sanitation, natural resource
management, climate change, agriculture, governance and policy issues for the past
seven years. She looks into the peri-urban and the study of disappearing lakes
projects in SaciWATERs.
Citation: Narain, V., Anand, P. and Banerjee, P. 2013. 'Periurbanization in India: A

review of the literature and evidence’, Report for the project – Rural to Urban
Transitions and the Peri-urban Interface. SaciWATERs. India
First published in 2013

© SaciWATERs 2013
For further information please contact:
B- 87, 3rd Avenue, Sainikpuri, Secunderabad - 500 094, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Phone: +91 40 27116721
Attribution: You must attribute the work in the manner specified.

Non-commercial: You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
No Derivative Works: You may not alter, transfer, or build on this work.
1 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

1. Introduction
This paper provides an overview of the periurbanization process in India. It draws on two
components; namely, a literature review around periurbanization processes1 and second, on semi
structured interviews with key stakeholders in five major Indian cities, namely, Chennai,
Ahmedabad, Patna, Guwahati and Chandigarh. These five cities were chosen in order to
understand the diverse nature of urbanization and periurbanization processes. They are located in
different parts of the country with different underlying agro-ecological contexts. Chennai, located
in the Southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu presents the case of a city expanding along a coast-line;
while the Union Territory of Chandigarh, located in the North, is expanding into the foot-hills of the
Shivaliks. Ahmedabad, in the Western Indian state of Gujarat, presents threats to the riverine eco-
system. Patna is the administrative capital of the East Indian state of Bihar, located in the alluvial
plains, while Guwahati is located in the North-Eastern state of Assam. Figure 1 below shows the
location of the five cities on the map of India.
Figure 1: Five cities visited for the periurban study
1
Though the focus is on the Indian literature, an effort is made to place in the context of the larger
international literature on periurban issues.
In these five cities, semi-structured interviews were held with key representatives from the
Government, NGOs (Non-Government Organizations), academics, researchers and students
working on periurban issues. They were interviewed regarding the driversshaping the urbanization
process in these cities, the major environmental challenges confronting periurban contexts,
emerging governance and institutional issues, as well as some recent initiatives to address these
concerns. A snowball sampling technique was followed to selected the interviewees; after an initial
selection of respondents, further leads were obtained to interview other relevant informants.
The organization of the paper is as follows. The following section - section 2- presents an overview
of conceptual issues in defining and characterizing periurban. Section 3 presents a discussion of the
factors that shape periurbanization processes, i.e. the socio-economic drivers of periurbanization.
Section 4 presents the major environmental and natural resource challenges that are confronted in
periurban contexts, as well as their implications for health and human well-being. Section 5
concludes the paper by discussing major governance issues and policy options advocated to deal
with periurban problems, as well as the practical constraints in implementing them.
2. Conceptualising, identifying and characterising the periurban
This section of the paper examines some of the debates surrounding the definition,
conceptualization and characterization of ‘periurban’. The recurring ideas in this body of work are
the futility of place-based definitions of periurban as well as the emergence of this concept to
straddle the traditional rural-urban dichotomy in the development literature and in conventional
planning approaches. One of the important functions that the concept seems to perform is to defy
the bracketing of all social and economic life as being either ‘rural’ or ‘urban’. It seems that in the
ultimate analysis what may count is not so much a consensus meaning of the word periurban, but
rather an understanding that rural and urban are sheer points along a continuum and that they are
labels or constructs that are closely related. Understanding and appreciating the flows of goods,
services and resources across the rural and urban is essential not only for understanding periurban
livelihoods – as widely argued in the periurban literature - but also for appreciating development
processes in general.
Another – and closely related - theme in this body of work is that process or concept-based
definitions of periurban seem to be more relevant than place-based definitions around
geographically demarcated boundaries. It is easier to identify periurban areas by features and
processes than to look at fixed geographical distances or boundaries from the city; periurban
locations are areas of intense land use change, social and economic heterogeneity, contested
natural resource use and occupational diversification.
These features were found to be present and common in the periurban locations visited around all
the five cities for this study, though their extent varied depending on the nature and scale of
changes witnessed. In all the five cities, it was difficult to demarcate a uniform distance from the
core of the city that we could call periurban; it was at best a transition zone from the city core to
the peripheral areas characterised by mixed and changing land use, often led by a real estate or IT
(information technology) boom. There were important land use changes - creating new pressures
on natural resources as well as potential for conflict - driven largely by real estate and policies for
special economic zones. These received a further boost from the development of transportation
corridors that facilitated migration as well as daily movement of people from the adjoining towns
and villages. However, since many of these changes were unplanned, they resulted in several
environmental and natural resource management problems arising mainly from the expansion of

these cities beyond their carrying capacity. A practical relevance of this concept thus is that that it
helps us understand how the ecological foot-print2 of cities is borne, straddling the rural-urban
divide. Though there were important governance challenges, we notice several responses from
civil society and non-government organizations in addressing them.
Defining periurban
There is no single satisfactory definition of the word ‘peri-urban’ and different definitions are
understood to apply in different circumstances (Brook and Purusthothoman et al. 2003). However,
broadly speaking, the word has come to be used in three different ways, namely, to denote a
place, a concept or a process (Narain and Nischal, 2007). As a place, it refers to rural fringe areas
surrounding cities. The terms used to describe such locations are periurban settlements, rural-
urban fringe, urban outgrowth or hinterland. Since they bear the spillover of urban expansion,
they are considered to be an extension of the main city.‘... for many purposes, it is important to
consider the periurban zone as an extension of the city rather than as an entirely separate area.
Conversely, the periurban zone should also be considered as part of the adjacent rural area for
purposes of a holistic approach to rural research and development since there are two-way
influences and interactions (Simon and Mc Gregor et al., 2006: 9-10)’.
Place-based definitions of peri-urban however are questioned by many periurban scholars; they
see the emphasis as not simply on a geographical space but focus instead on underlying features
and processes. ‘….it appears that no single definition will fit all circumstances and situations unless
couched in broad and functional terms, rather than attempting to set discrete spatial limits (Simon
and McGregor et al., 2006: 10)'. Iacquinta and Drescher (2000), for instance,question the tendency
to define periurbanin terms of geographicallocation of a place vis a vis urban
centers,butratherunderpintheimportanceoftheunderlyinginstitutionalcontexts.This means that
proximity to the towns in itself does not define periurban; rather it is the co-existence of both rural
and urban characteristics, rural-urban linkages and the flows of goods and services between
them.This view is echoed by Bowyer- Bower (2006) who reiterates that what constitutes the peri
urban is where rural and urban land uses co-exist, which may be in continuous or fragmented units
in any one area; further this juxtaposition of the rural and urban land uses can geographically
occur anywhere - in the core of the city, at its periphery or in a village (emphasis added). A UNFPA
report (UNFPA, 2007) suggests that the varied processes of peri-urbanization defy a simple
definition or quantification, but that there must be opportunities for more social and sustainable
uses of peri-urban space.3
2
Ecological foot-print is a measure of the resource consumption (Rees, 1992). Cities have a metabolism, that
draws on resources from the periphery and throws back wastes into it.
3
That space-based definitions of periurban can be problematic is clearly brought out by the case of
Chandigarh. In fact, we can define periurban differently for Chandigarh, depending upon what we take as the
reference point or bench- mark for ‘urban’. Within the U.T (Union Territory) of Chandigarh, there are both
rural and urban demarcated areas.The area comprising the urban designated areas of Chandigarh along with
the Mani Majra village – that provided land for the construction of the city’s new residential areas, the IT
(Information Technology) park and special economic zone - constitute the UA(Urban Agglomeration) of
Chandigarh.In other words, if we consider as “urban”, only the urban designated areas of the U.T. of
Chandigarh, Mani Majra would be considered as part of the periurban. Conceptually, this makes sense since
Mani Majra has provided land and other resources for the expansion of the capital city, including providing
land for several residential areas, as well as the modern IT Park. If however we consider the UT of Chandigarh
as a whole, then the periurban parts are the expanding frontiers of the city in the direction of the adjoining
towns of Panchkula, Pinjore/Kalka and Mohali.Thus, a frame of reference is very important in definingwhat
constitutes periurban.

Throughout the developing world scholars have attempted toanalyze peri-urban areas in an effort
to define ‘mixed’ rural–urban interfaces, and to construct a new rurality which undermines the
notion of rural livelihoods being separate from urban. The peri-urban is portrayed as a space in
itself, but one that envelopes dynamic interactions between the population and the landscape and
their associated land uses and livelihoods. It supports a vibrant flow of agricultural goods and
ecological services both within periurban zones and between peri-urban and urban core areas, but
also potentially among more traditional rural communities (Lerner et al., 2011).
‘Periurban’ has thus come to serve as a term to denote the intermediary zone between the ‘rural’
and the ‘urban’, that is, a geographical space where the rural meets the urban. This is echoed in
terms that have similar connotations in other languages. The nearest equivalent to the term peri-
urban in Dutch is halfstedig, meaning semi-urban; in German it is urban landlichen zonen (urban
rural zones); and in Afrikaans it is buitestedelik (outer city or beyond the city).In East Asia the term
often used is 'desakota' (city village) (Simon andMcGregor et al., 2006; McGee, 1991), highlighting
the periurban to meana space where both rural and urban features co-exist.
The futility of place based definitions comes out further when we consider that even ‘rural’ and
‘urban’ constitute fluid spaces, open to redefinition and reconstitution. Shenk (2005) emphasises
that the peri urban cannot be understood based on the traditional dichotomy of urban and rural,
moreso because these spaces themselves are fluid and with geographically shifting boundaries.
The urban fringes expand and shrink geographically, ‘eating’ their way into the countryside, while
they are swallowed by the expanding urban core area. 4 Hence, Shenk suggests ‘the concept of a
two-fold dynamism in a “rolling” fringe’. Simon (2008) asserts that the classic urban-rural
dichotomy no longer exists and the peri-urban area is now a recognized entity for both study and
4
For instance, urban areas in India are defined as follows, as per theCensus of India 2011:
1. All places with a municipality, corporation, cantonment board or notified town area committee, etc.
2. All other places which satisfy the following criteria:
i)A minimum population of 5,000;
ii)At least 75 per cent of the male main working population engagedin non-agricultural pursuits; and
iii) A density of population of at least 400 persons per sq. km.
All areas which are not categorized as urban areas are considered as Rural Areas.
The first category of urban units is known as Statutory Towns. These towns are notified under law by the
concerned State/UT Governmentand have local bodies like municipal corporations, municipalities, municipal
committees, etc., irrespective of their demographic characteristics as reckoned on 31st December 2009. The
second category of Towns (as in item 2 above) are known as Census Towns.
The census also defines an Urban Agglomeration (UA), which is perhaps what comes closest to the notion of
periurban:An 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. An Urban Agglomeration must consist of at least a statutory town, and its total population (i.e. all the
constituents put together) should not be less than 20,000.

policy planning. Despite social and economic factors that are different in the peri-urban regions
across the world, there are enough common causes and concerns that warrant a common
approach to a study of the peri-urban areas and addressing the problems typical to them.
For these reasons some scholars (see, for instance, Brook et al. 2003) argue that peri-urban is
better understood as a process, rather than a fixed geographical place. In this sense, it represents
the two-way flows of goods and services between villages and urban centres and the transition
from rural to urban. More broadly, it could be understood as a concept that describes an interface
between three systems, namely, the agricultural system, the urban system, and the natural
resource system (Allen, 2003). In this sense, it serves as an analytic construct to study rural-urban
relationships (Narain, 2009a); many scholars characterise it therefore as a periurban interface(PUI)
(Allen, 2003; Brook and Purushotthoman et al, 2003).
The significance of the concept of periurban may therefore lie much more in the fact that it raises
a fundamental question about the relevance of the rural-urban dichotomy – common in
development studies and in government planning machinery – rather than as a tool to help
demarcate certain geographical regions. As Simon and McGregor et al (2006) note, rapid urban
population growth and expansion of the built-up area, technological change, global economic
restructuring and the impact of externally driven macro-economic adjustment policies have
combined to alter the interface between ‘urban’ and ‘rural’ quite profoundly in many places.
Though the terms ‘rural’ and ‘urban’ are still used colloquially as mutually exclusive terms, and
most people have clear mental conceptions of some ideal-type landscape corresponding to each,
this simple dichotomy has long ceased to have much meaning in practice or for policy-making
purposes in many parts of the global south, where the distinction between rural and urban tends
to get blurred, as urbanization advances. A focus on conceptual distinctions is thus understood to
be more appropriate for examining the continuum between the poles of urban and rural and
understanding the dynamics of change as they characterise urbanization processes.
Periurban as spaces of social and institutional transition
Periurban areas are characterised by not only geographical, but also social and institutional
transition. Socially, periurban areas are dynamic in nature, wherein social forms are constantly
created, modified and discarded (Iaquinta and Drescher 2000). They are understood to be areas of
social compression or intensification where the density of social forms, types and meanings
increases, fomenting conflict and resolution. On account of land use change and the diversity of
economic interests that this engenders, social groups tend to be heterogeneous and in constant
transition (Allen 2003). Small farmers, informal settlers, industrial entrepreneurs and urban middle
class commuters may all co-exist in the same territory, though with different and competing
interests, practices and perceptions.
Much of the social dynamism and flux comes from the presence of migrants and new settlers.
These social changes and transitions further have spin-off effects in terms of the range of
economic activities that they foster.Periurban settlements often draw migrant labor that seeks
employment in adjacent towns and cities, adding to the heterogeneity of the population. It is also
common for relatives of periurban dwellers to migrate to the periurban settlements in search of
better living conditions, amenities or jobs in adjoining towns. In periurban Faridabad and Gurgaon
districts of the NorthWest Indian state of Haryana, for instance, the influx of migrant labor in
periurban settlements was found to have altered the social composition of the periurban
settlements (Narain and Nischal 2007; Narain 2009a).This, in turn, lead to a demand for rented
accommodation in these settlements and renting out of accommodation emerged as a major new
economic activity.

Migration processes have played an important role in the emergence of UAs (Urban
Agglomerations) around large cities like Delhi as well (Kundu, 2008). Migration was found to be an
important feature as well as driver of the periurbanization processes in all five cities visited for this
project, namely, Chennai, Chandigarh, Ahmedabad, Patna and Guwahati. Many of these migrants
engaged in construction and other economic activities that had come to take shape in the
emerging cities.
An important observation made on migration in the periurban literature is that rural out-migrants
do not generally directly go to large cities (Iaquinta and Drescher, 2000). Instead, a series of moves
is involved, called step migration, wherein rural migrants move first to villages or small towns and
successively to more urban environments.In a study on patterns of maternal mobility in Kenya,
Molyneux and Mung’ala –Oderaet al. (2002) found that most rural to urban migrants were familiar
with urban environments before moving and having moved, continued to maintain strong ties.
Institutionally, too, periurban areas are in transition as rural governance bodies may become
defunct, without being replaced by urban governance bodies. Periurban areas lie outside the legal
jurisdiction of the cities and sometimes even outside the legal jurisdictions of municipal
boundaries (Shaw, 2005). This can contribute to the challenge and complexity of addressing
periurban as a policy space, as many subjects requiring attention may fall within the jurisdiction of
neither urban nor of rural governments. For instance, in a study of Hubli-Dharwad in South India,
the idea of a sewage treatment plant was dropped, as it was not clear – who – the urban or the
rural government would pay for it (Brook et al, 2003). Conflicts may also arise between rural and
urban governments over issues of land acquisition for urban expansion, as witnessed in Gurgaon
(Narain, 2009a) or between rural and urban claimants over resources like land and water as
witnessed both in Chennai and Gurgaon (Janakarajan 2009, Narain 2009a).
Contested natural resource use
With the onset of urbanization, periurban areas grow in importance. This is because they provide
the much needed land and water for urban expansion, while receiving much of the urban wastes.
Since they involve resource reallocations across uses, they are fertile grounds for studying
questions of justice and equity, as well as raise fundamental questions about the politics of urban
expansion and planning. As they represent a transition from rural to urban, a study of periurban
areas gives insight into the nature of urbanization processes, as well as who the gainers and losers
in this process are.
Periurban areas perform different functions for several people (Douglas, 2006) - for the poor, they
serve as places where it is easier to build shelters and to occupy land for agriculture; for industry,
they serve as sources of materials essential for urban life such as water, bricks or clay; for the
middle class, a place for houses ina rural setting with recreational facilities; for local governments,
sites for discarding urban wastes;for conservationists, the site of valuable protected areas;for
education and human well-being, the place of first urban contact with major areas of natural
vegetation and biodiversity. For these reasons, a periurban location soon becomes a 'contested
space (Douglas 2006: Pg 20)’. Such competing interestsexert pressure on the natural resources of
the region, often leading to rural-urban conflicts around natural resources such as land and water.
5
These in turn can have important equity effects, further triggering off social and economic
changes like migration. Janakarajan (2009) describes how water moving out from the villages to
the city in periurban Chennai triggered off migration by farmers into the city, further stressing the
already overstretched infrastructure.
5
See also Du Pont (2005), Du Pont (2007) andRuet and Gambiez et al (2007).
Diversity of economic activities and the role of periurban agriculture
Peri-urban areas encompass a wide range of economic activities, including farming, husbandry and
cottage industries, together with industrial expansion, land speculation, residential
suburbanization and waste disposal (Tacoli, 2006). They fulfil other key functions for urban areas
as well, ranging from the supply of food, energy, water, building materials and other essentials, to
the provision of ecological services such as wildlife corridors, microclimates and buffer areas
against flooding. This involves a complex readjustment of social and ecological systems as they
become absorbed into the urban economy.
Peri urban agriculture is in particular an essential feature of the peri urban context and is an
important facet of rural urban relationships. It involves processes both of the rural-urban flows of
water – as it is carried out often using urban wastewater, and land use change.
The emergence of the periurban interface creates important changes in livelihood opportunities
and options, affecting the scale and pattern of agricultural activities. However, the nature and
direction of these changes is hard to predict and depends on local contexts. Changes in livelihoods
can be complex and generalizations difficult, unless the understanding of these generalizations is
rooted in very local contexts. In the Hubli-Dharwad region in South India, for instance, the creation
of urban markets combined with the availability of irrigation created an opportunity for farmers to
raise cash crops (Brook and Purushothoman et al., 2003). As agricultural workers commuted to the
cities for work, there occurred a shift to the less labour-intensive crops such as mango cultivation.
Dairying turned out to be an important livelihood for periurban landless near the city; buffalo
numbers increased over the previous decade, particularly in the landless households. In contrast,
in periurban Gurgaon, farmers moved increasingly from commercial to subsistence farming as they
were left progressively with smaller parcels of land, in the face of land acquisition (Narain, 2009a).
While urbanization processes can engender transformations in agricultural practices, their

sustainability is often challenged by other uses, often those of more powerful interest groups.
Kundu and Konar et al. (2001) describe the process of the emergence of the periurban area
adjacent to Kolkata and the transformations in agricultural practices engendered by this. This
region was found topractice three productive activities namely pisciculture, vegetable and paddy
culture, utilizing the city's sewage and garbage. The periurban agriculture in the rural fringe area of
the city was traditionally confined to the production of rice, wheat, potato and vegetables like in
other rural areas of West Bengal. Subsequently, construction of new roads and railway tracks
opened up the possibilities of transportation of the area's produce to the urban market. Garbage
farming (sewage fed agriculture), and sewage fed aquaculture emerged as the major forms of
cultivation. Garbage scavenging also emerged as a source of livelihood for a small but significant
section of the population.6 More than fifty per cent of the work force was reported to be directly
engaged in the sewage fed agriculture (rice and vegetables) in the waste recycling region. These
activities co-existed with other activities; a good number of people were found to be engaged in
ancillary activities such as transportation, packaging and wholesale retail of the produce for their
livelihood. While most environmentalists would opt for the continuance of the bheris (fish farms)
in the region, land developers were bidding higher prices for turning these bheries into a concrete
jungle to cater to the housing needs of the metropolis.
Periurban livelihoods : across rural and urban spaces
6
However, despite proximity to the city market, the local farmers were reluctant to sell their produce directly
to urban markets due to problems relating to transportation(Kunduand Konar et al., 2001). Besides, farmers
received too little a price for their efforts.
Peri-urban areas are characterized by a mixture of land uses associated with a range of urban and
rural livelihoods. Settlements are generally inhabited by communities of different economic status
relating to land prices, which are affected by location in relation to the city, and which are
considerably higher than in rural areas (Parkinson and Tayler, 2003).
A distinguishing characteristic of periurban livelihoods is the role of both rural and urban resources
in maintaining household security (Baker and Wallevik, 2003). Periurban households draw their
income both from agricultural activities as well as casual or regular employment in the
neighbouring cities. Further, inequalities tend to exist widely as the elite are able to pre-empt both
urban and rural resources for accumulation while the not-so-well off negotiate and struggle for
survival (Tacoli, 2003).
Processes of “periurbanisation” distribute risks and opportunities unequally. The urbanization and
expansion processes underway and the diversity in access to resources such as land and water can
create wide disparities within periurban contexts. For instance, in periurban Gurgaon, farmers who
had their agricultural holdings geographically dispersed suffered less from the risks of land
acquisition than did farmers whose lands were geographically concentrated (Narain, 2009a).
Further, farmers were found to be able to gain from diversity in sources of irrigation depending
upon the location of their fields. Farmers with lands lying adjacent to sewerage canals were able to
gain from sewerage irrigation, while others had tostay content with others sources, predominantly
tubewells.
Multiple income generation and the involvement of children in economic activities are largely
strategies of poor periurban women who do not have access to sufficient cash to guarantee access
to the basic needs of life (Brook and Purushothaman et al., 2003). In some studies on livelihoods in
the periurban interface, migration is shown to provide a socially acceptable alternative for young
women who try to escape from familial and community control (Tacoli, 2002). Remittances are
anotheressential aspect of periurban livelihood strategies. Sending remittances is perceived as a
moral obligation, as well as a way to maintain claims on assets in home areas.
Rural-urban links: essential in supporting periurban livelihoods
An understanding of the periurban interface requires an understanding of these linkages and flows
of goods and services between towns and rural areas. These linkages tend to be mutually
supportive and cyclical. They also perform important functions in terms of maintaining the social
bonds between migrants and residents. For instance, migrant networks have been reported to
perform important functions in facilitating migration and in channeling support to the wider home
community (Tacoli, 2002).
Tacoli (1998) notes that the flows and links between rural and urban areas, their scale and
strength, in turn,are determined by the nature of economic, social and cultural transformations
(Tacoli, 1998). These can bedivided further into three broad categories: the global, the national
and the local levels. At the global level, the liberalization of trade and production has changed or
reshaped rural-urban interlinkages in most regions. At the national level, macroeconomic policies
linked to reform and adjustment have an impact on rural-urban interactions. At the local level,
the nature and scope of rural-urban interactions is influenced by several factors, ranging from
geographical and demographic characteristics, to farming systems, and to the availability of
roads and transport networks linking local settlements to a number of urban centres where
markets and services are located.
The spatial dynamism in periurban

The concept ofaperi-urban zone or interface cannot be a static one, that would refer to distinct
and fixed boundaries, but should on the contrary be understood as a dynamic concept. Peri-urban
zones undergo a continuous evolution. Very often villages get reclassified as towns, and towns as
cities. As aptly underlined by Hans Schenk who draws on the Asian experience, they expand and
shrink geographically, ‘eating’ their way into the countryside, while they are swallowed by the
expanding urban core area. Some authors therefore refer to the peri-urban interface as ‘a region
of change’ (DFID, 1999 cited in Rohilla, 2005). Lintelo et al (2001) refertothe demographic and
economic expansion of cities, through processes such as migration and industrialization that tend
to be accompanied by spatial expansion, resulting in encroachments by cities upon adjacent peri-
urban areas. At the same time, they suggest that areas that were earlier distant from the city and
rural in character will subsequently start falling within the cities’ reach or band of influence and
typically, increased interaction with and access to the city economy, in terms of capital, labour
(public and private) goods and services will subsequently trigger the transformation of the rural to
peri-urban areas. The rural-peri-urban- continuum itself is thus dynamic in nature and the changes
tend to be more marked around cities that are rapidly urbanizing or growing both economically
and spatially, as compared to slower-growing or stagnant urban cores.
3. Socio-economic drivers of Peri Urban
Urban transition in India reflects a metropolitan region, comprising UAs (Urban Agglomerations) or
cities and their outgrowths (Kumar, 2001). The spilling over of population from India’s major cities
into these areas has occurred since the 1990s, sustained by a middle class housing demand that
has caused the population to move to the outskirts of the city where land is cheaper (Shaw, 2005).
Typically, rapid population growth in the main city results in increased demand for land and higher
housing costs which in turn result in the outward movement of people from the main city to the
city fringes, where they look for cheaper accommodation and residential land (Kumar, 2001). This
phenomenon is now happening in several metropolises in India.
Increases in urban population and the need for better connectivity to cities, in turn,fuel the growth
of urban related infrastructure. This drives up land prices and changes land use patterns. As a
consequence, land in the periurban areas gradually becomes monetized (Brook et al., 2003;
Kumar, 2001). This process of periurbanization is witnessed conspicuously in major Indian cities
where a real estate boom has transformed the pace of development. There has been a massive
land acquisition process; land has been acquired by the state and private corporations for several
industrial, residential and recreation purposes, changing land use away from agriculture and allied
activities.
Other factors contributing to the growth of UAs in India are the process of industrial
decentralisation and the imposition of stricter policies forreducing pollution in major cities in order
to comply with global requirements. The failure of the state executive and legislature to effect
changes in the urban environment, coupled with the increasing pressures of investment agencies,
Multi National Companies (MNCs) and Trans National Corporations (TNCs) has resulted in
peripheral areas facing the brunt of relocation of polluting industries. The Supreme Court of India
has often issued directives for the closure of hazardous polluting industries in the urban core areas
and their relocation in periphery areas, preferably in the extended metropolitan zones or the peri-
urban regions (Kumar 2001). Neo-liberal policies giving greater space to private enterprise and
large transnational corporations and policies for the creation of special economic zones have
clearly played an important role in the creation of periurban spaces (Shaw, 2005; Narain, 2007;
Reddy 2005; Keivaniet al, 2007).

Residential development
Residential development acts as a major driver of peri urbanization. The UNFPA’s Status of World
Population Report (UNFPA 2007) highlights the fact that change in the value systems in the people
residing in the urban areas to return to rural living and being close to nature was a part of the
search for better quality of life and this precipitated in the middle and upper middle classes
looking for residences in the peri urban spaces. Further, the intensive use of the automobile for
daily commuting was both a cause and a consequence of urban sprawl (Arbury, 2006). This pattern
of settlement spawned new locations for trade and services and this, in turn, further promoted
automobile use and outward city growth.
The above mentioned report points out that the suburban model of urban sprawl was closely
associated with lifestyle preferences and the widespread availability of the automobile in a
particular cultural setting. Housing, road-building and zoning policies, also inspired by suburban
ideals, combined to promote low-density housing. Further, catering to the needs of the suburban
population stimulated decentralization of economic activities and the diversification of outlying
areas (UNFPA, 2007). These value changes, and the greater availability of personal transport,
especially the automobile, are spreading cities outward (Monte Mor, 2006 cited in UNFPA, 2007).
Land speculation and Industrial Expansion
Another perspective- as noted above and relevant particularly to the context of India - is that peri-
urbanization is fuelled, in part, by land speculation, nurtured by the prospect of rapid urban
growth. Speculators hold on to land in and around the city, expecting land values to increase. They
do not bother renting, especially if they fear that users might gain some rights to continued use or
controlled rents. People who need land for residential or productive purposes must therefore find
land further from the centre (UNFPA, 2007). Changes in the structure and location of economic
activity contribute greatly to peri-urban growth. Better communications and transportation
networks make outlying areas increasingly accessible. Globalization encourages economies of
scale in production and distribution, which, in turn, encourage large facilities occupying large
tracts of land. Tacoli (1999) talks about a deconcentration and decentralization of production,
often found on the outskirts of the more dynamic cities, where growing workplaces and
workforces can no longer find space in city centres, making spill-over growth inevitable.In turn, the
periphery offers cheaper infrastructure, land and labour, which encourage further peri-
urbanization. Policies for setting up special economic zones and giving a boost to the outsourcing
industry have been very influential in shaping the periurbanization processes in the five cities that
were visited for this study. Industrial expansion played an important role especially in Ahmedabad,
giving rise to a range of supporting economic activities, while the IT boom was an important factor
shaping the expansion of Chennai and Chandigarh.
Availability of cheap labour and export driven policies
Peri-urbanization draws a migrant workforce and abruptly changes many rural residents’ economic
activity from agriculture to manufacturing and services. Such changes have been particularly
pronounced in East Asia, where agrarian villages have become leading edges of urban change (
Leaf, 2002 cited in UNFPA, 2007).In East Asia,the combination of ill-defined property rights,
export-driven policies and imperfect land markets has contributed to particularly rapid peri-urban
growth(Webster, 2002). The UNFPA report cited above uses the example of China and
demonstrates how in China, foreign investments have transformed rural economies and
communities, often triggering major changes in social structure and human-environment relations.

Slum Rehabilitation
Peri-urban areas often provide more accessible housing for poor residents and migrants in
informal and scattered settlements. There is a general competitionbetween the residents and the
poor settlements, while the latter tend to be more insecure and subject to removal, the residents
generally lack services and infrastructure. They compete with agriculture for space, and both can
be displaced by other economic uses. Land conversion, market opportunities, and rapid flows of
labour, goods, capital and wastes force land prices up (Allen et al., 1999). Peri-urbanization also
increases the cost of living for the original rural population (Rostam, 1997).
Weak Government Regulation
Since peri-urban areas are generally beyond or between legal and administrative boundaries of
central cities, the capacity of government authorities to regulate economic activityis particularly
weak (Parkinson and Tayler, 2003). As a result, the process of urbanization can be, to a great
extent, unplanned, informal and illegal, with frequent struggles over land use.
Looking at the factors driving periurbanization in the five cities visited for this study,the IT boom
clearly stands out particularly in Chennai and Chandigarh. IT enclaves along the Old
Mahabalipuram Roadin Chennai and Mani Majra in Chandigarh have been a new major claimant of
land and water, as have been gated communities, up-market medical facilities as well as new and
upcoming educational institutions. The development of transport corridors, roads and networks
has played a clear role in causing a concentration of population in these periurban zones.
The most interesting case of expansion is perhaps that ofChandigarh. The planning of the city of
Chandigarh started in the 1950s and most of it came to fruition in the 1960s. The Periphery
Controlled Area Act, 1952, recommended a wide green belt (initially of 8km which later increased
to 16 km) around the entire Union Territory of Chandigarh. The idea was to curtail further
expansion. This Act sought to regulate the development and prohibited establishment of any other
town or village and forbid commercial and industrial activities in the periphery zone. The idea was
that Chandigarh would always be surrounded by the country side.7 However, the provisions of this
Act were violated both by the state governments of Haryana and Punjab, as they sought to
develop Panchkula and Mohali, respectively.
The original plan prohibited any construction activity within 16 km of city limits. The State
Governments of Punjab and Haryana nevertheless created satellite townships within this
prohibited zone.Besides, a large cantonment was set up at Chandi Mandir and the Union Territory
Administration developed Mani Majra, a village just beyond the capital project area as a
residential complex. To the South of the city, the Government of Punjab created Sahibzaada Ajit
7
One of the main assets of Chandigarh has been the continuity of its green space. Chandigarh has been
considered to be a good example for other Indian cities that have been trying to struggle with how to attendto
their problems of urban sprawl; Chandigrah has a green corridor that runs through itsenvironmental length
with several supplemental green spaces around it. There are well-planned self-contained residential sectors
traversed by wide roads.The roads and pavements are adorned by plants, trees and vegetation – a different
species on each.

Singh Nagar, or SAS Nagar informally known by its old name, namely, Mohali. To the East of the
city lies Haryana’s newly created town of Punchkula.
As regards Chennai, it is basically a migrant city and there has been a cross-flow of people “in’’ and
“out’; the new migrants into Chennai chose to settle at the outskirts.What was once mainly a
centre for tourism and primarily a tourist road, the OMR (Old Mahabalipuram Road), was soon
engulfed by the IT industry. The IT boom converted this road into an IT corridor; it is now called
the IT expressway. Infrastructural and road development followed. Policies for Special Economic
Zones created an environment for urban expansion. There was a rise in the price of land and a real
estate boom ensued. Much of Chennai’s resulting urban expansion has been southwards. It is
bound on the East by the Bay of Bengal, and Northwards, it touches the boundary of Andhra
Pradesh. Thus, it is predominantly the South that has provided space for the city to grow. In this
context, the Old Mahabalipuram Road (OMR) has been the seat of urban expansion, expanding the
frontiers of the city towards the World Heritage site and tourist attraction of Mahabalipuram.
Parallel to this is the East-Coast Road that has also witnessed some development over recent
years.
Chennai has traditionally been an agglomeration of agriculture and fishing villages. With the
expansion of South Chennai as an IT corridor, the city has engulfed several such villages and
hamlets. This has in turn created several ecological and environmental challenges that the current
governance and administrative machinery is unable to cope with. Many of these problems have
resulted from the growth of the city beyond its carrying capacity and the disconnect between
urban and environmental planning.
In Patna, the improvement in the law and order situation and political stability has played a role in
giving a boost to real estate. In Guwahati, easier loans have encouraged people to invest in real
estate. Ahmedabad’s expansion has experienced more industry led growth rather than the IT led
growth witnessed in Chennai and Chandigarh. However, the relocation of slum populations in the
periurban areas of Ahmedabad has been an important issue to deal with. 8
4. Issues of natural resource depletion, environmental deterioration and

human health consequences
Improvements in the quality of life of urban systems are often made at the expense of extra-urban
or peri-urban areas, which are likely to bear a disproportionate share of environmental burdens
(Satterthwaite, 2006). Environmental transformations in the peri-urban to a large extent happen
due to pressures exerted by external and nearby systems (Allen, 1999).Among the pressures
exerted onperi urban systems are inadequate development processes, unequal distribution of
services and investments, the relationship between households’ assets and consumption, the
conditions ofthe natural environment, the inadequate localisation and functioning of economic
activities, the lack of provision of adequate services, the scale and nature of demographic growth
and theabsence of institutional management capacities. These pressures often result in:
• Environmental hazards threatening the quality of life, such as the depletion and degradation of
environmental resources and loss of agricultural land
• Ill-health and malnutrition for the poorest and other conditions derived from precarious living
environments
8
For a detailed review of the experience, see Mathur (2012).
• Other environmental hazards resulting fromthe disposal of wastes beyond the local and regional
absorptive capacities (Universities of Nottingham and Liverpool, 1999)
The aspect of environmental deterioration is elaborated in the work of Simon (2008)who

emphasises that the diverse urbanization and peri-urbanization processes have had diverse and
complex human consequences but the environmental implications of such processes are serious
and that urgent remediation and prevention are deemed essential. Levels of river, soil, and
groundwater contamination from often toxic waste are high, resulting in health problems and
severe agricultural contamination. Air pollution is chronic, not just in large cities, but also in peri-
urban and rural areas characterized by often (but by no means always) outdated technologies and
lack of controls. Simon points out that an encouraging sign is the awareness of the problem by
governments and a conversion of this concern into positive action.
A recent article in the Indian media (Jena 2012) talks about how India, like other Asian countries,
has focused its climate change adaptation strategies on rural and urban areas while neglecting the
urban fringes and how this climate change threatens the poor in the peri-urban. The article
underlines the notion that peri urban areas are places where nobody is incharge and it points out
that populations residing in peri-urban areas are most vulnerable to climate change because they
have neither the modern infrastructure nor clean water, and sanitation available in urban areas
nor the ecosystems that rural folks fall back on.
However, recent research in India has begun to draw attention to the vulnerability of the
periurban communities. Mukherjee’s (2001) focus on ‘social’ rather than the ‘scientiﬁc’ aspects of
air pollution in selected urban and peri-urban villages from the Indian cities of Varanasi and
Faridabad, located in the States of Uttar Pradesh and Haryana respectively, provides an alarming
and illustrative picture of the potentially irreversible peri-urban changes from the perspective of
poor farmers. However, she argues that that this ﬁeld still remains largely under researched;
hence caution must be applied when identifying causal factors, as many of the problems
encountered and attributed to air pollution such as ‘fruit drop’ can also be caused by irrigating
with contaminated water, particularly where farmers are abstracting from wastewater canals -a
common facet of periurban locations.
Many industries are located at the edge of the cities, in peri urban areas, because the waste they
produce rarely receives adequate treatment (Parkinson and Taylor, 2003). Community members
take advantage of the fact that in peri urban areas the regulatory capacity of the government is
weak, particularly in areas outside the municipal boundaries. A specific example in India of such
industrial contamination in the peri urban is provided in the Hubli- Dharwad case study by Brook
et al (2003) which found evidence of environmental degradation attributable to the influence of
the city. The examples cited are mining of clay in fields for making bricks (particularly prevalent in
Kelageri) and quarrying for building blocks and road stones (particularly in Mandihal). These
resulted in degradation of the top soil and loss of some land for farming. For periurban Faridabad,
Narain and Nischal (2007) note the negative effects of the close proximity of factories to the
periurban settlements resulting in contamination of local aquifers and disturbing noise from the
operation of the units.
On account of the availability of open space and good accessibility from urban areas, the PUI tends
to be the backyard of urban waste disposal, often surpassing the absorptive capacity of these
areas and imposing severe impacts on the health of the ecosystem and human population (Phillips
et al., 1999 cited in McGregor et al, 2006). Waste disposal and consequent contamination in peri-
urban areas are areas of specific concern. In particular, refuse dumps and sewage treatment plants
in the peri-urban areas pose problems for local residents. Rivers flowing through major urban
areas commonly emerge with a heavy pollution load and peri-urban residents downstream of
cities are thus forced to drink and utilize contaminated water (Simon, 2008). On account of all
these factors, not only does the environment deteriorate drastically but there are also severe long
term negative consequences in terms of health for the local peri urban residents.
Among the cities visited for his study, disposal of urban waste and the lack of landfill sites was
identified as an important periurban problem especially in Chennai, Guwahati and Patna. This
happens because modern industrial establishments and gated communities develop with out
planning the disposal of their wastes. With an IT corridor booming towards the South of Chennai,
there is a major sewage problem brimming. Though several sewage treatment plants have been
built, there is inadequate capacity to deal with sewerage. Even in the westward periurban area of
Chennai there is dumping of sludge from the new gated communities. New residential areas have
come up with reverse osmosis plants but with no concrete plans to dispose off the sludge. This
sludge is eventually disposed off into the wetlands.
Natural resource problems in peri-urban areas are not significantly different fromthose in the core
urban areas in terms of their causes and effects. However, it should be noted that there are
distinguishable patterns of activities. The final technical report on the natural resources
production systems in the peri urban by the Universities of Nottingham and Liverpool (1999)
highlights that a variety of infrastructural developments and activities are characteristically
situated within the periurban zone. Their location is dictated by a number of factors, notably the
amounts of land which they require, the price of land, pollution and safety considerations, location
of natural resources, and environmental benefits. Airports, reservoirs, drinking water and sewage
treatment plants, power stations, quarries and brickfields, industrial plants, golf (and certain
other) clubs and military installations all provide obvious examples. All of these developments
have biophysical impacts, which extend beyond their immediate boundaries.
Agriculture and Agricultural land in Peri Urban
One of the most conspicuous manifestations of urban expansion and its implications for natural
resource use is the irrevocable loss of agricultural land (Douglass, 1992 cited in Universities of
Nottingham and Liverpool Report, 1999). The reasons for this loss are multiple and varied ranging
across a wide spectrum. Some of the reasons include:
• The abandonment of farming on the urban periphery in the face of land purchases for
speculative purposes
• The occupation, often illegal, of land for temporary housing
Impacts on the remaining agricultural lands are likely to include:
• Productivity decline due to the heavy pollution of soil and water by industries
• Degraded soil quality because of the use of fertilisers, pesticides and insecticides
• Land degradation in the areas surrounding agricultural lands
On account of their proximity to urban areas, urban fringe areas where land use was
predominantly agricultural, become sites for rapid, unplanned urban development (Malaque
2007). Land use change is a basic driver of periurbanization processes and with it, emerge changes
in access to other natural resources such as water, engendering further socio-economic changes in
livelihoods, migration, social composition of the population, and posing new challenges for
governance and conflict resolution.

The appropriation of land for urban expansion has been a constant reality in the expansion process
of all major Indian cities (Shaw, 2005). Land acquisition for urban expansion has been noted to be
a cause of great dissent among periurban residents against urban authorities in periurban Gurgaon
(Narain, 2009a). Keivani et al (2007) note the significant impact of economic globalization on
peripheral land and the local economies of major cities of south India. In many cases there is an
expansion/ encroachment onto the peripheral land, and the restructuring of existing development
there. There is also a restructuring of the institutional set up and a new form of governance and a
rationalization of the planning framework and regulatory structures in tune with the location
requirements of transnational corporations. As illustrated in Bangalore, these cause not only
conflicts of interest between new demands of international capital and existing demands of local
firms and populations, but also conflicts between different tiers of administrative and governance
circuits as they vie for influence and areas of competence.
While there were positive aspects of the IT led growth in Bangalore by creating opportunities in
terms of IT support services and greater demand for a range of rental and owner-occupied housing
and small-scale commercial developments, the work of Keivani et al (2007) points out that urban
researchers and policymakers in Bangalore failed to identify mechanisms that optimized the
results for both the overall urban economy and local economic development. They suggest that
this was perhaps mainly because they were insulated from popular politics — working in
parastatal agencies away from elected councils and subject to little accountability. Over-
concentration on the needs of the trans-national and high-tech companies by and large may have
led to a neglect of such local considerations. There is thus an issue of governance. Similarly,
drawing on his research on land acquisition and land use change in North India,Shahab (2000)
makes a case for a stricter implementation of agricultural land conversion laws and greater
encouragement for farmers to remain in farming activities, since this would reduce the incentive
for rural to urban migration.
Land use change and periurban water insecurity
Water is a limited andimportant natural resource in most places, especially in the peri urban
locations due to the competing interests and claims on this resource by various actors and
agencies. With changing land use, pressures on water can come from many quarters; farmers and
periurban communities may loseaccess to water for irrigation as ground water is channelled
towards other competing uses like those for industrial units, farmhouses and recreational activities
(Narain 2012). Further, people’s access to water sources diminishes as the land on which they are
located is acquired for urban and residential purposes. Besides, factories are often located at the
village peripheries and they may pollute local water sources. The inhabitants of peri urban
settlements are often outside the ambit of organised sources of water supply as they lack tenurial
status. This makes them dependent on other (and often contaminated) sources of water (Kundu,
2008).
Rural-urban water conflicts have already begun to be noticed in Chennai (Janakarajan 2009) and
Gurgaon (Narain, 2009b). Janakarajan et al (2006) focus on water conflicts in the peri-urban areas
of Chennai city. The key idea that they develop in their work is that cities continue to expand at a
rapid rate and eat into resources (such as land and water) available inperi-urban areas. While land
in peri-urban villages is grabbed for urban housing, industrial establishments and for dumping
urban wastes (both solid and liquid), very little is ploughed back by way of developing these areas.
Despite the claims of public officials, recent studies show drinking water is not prioritised ahead of
industrial uses (Allen, 2006). The industrial activities reduce water availability for the poor and also
deteriorate thequality of water and the long-term sustainability of this resource.

Narain and Nischal (2007) note the changing locus of control over village water bodies such as
village ponds (Johads) as urban residents begin to take part in their auction. The periurban water
insecurity engendered by changing land use in periurban contexts affects the livelihood security of
periurban communities. The filling up of water bodies for urban expansion is reported from several
Indian cities such as Hyderabad (Prakashet al., 2011), Gurgaon (Narain 2009b) and Faridabad
(Narain and Nischal, 2007). This has implications for the livelihoods of those who depend on them
such as potters – who have been used to desilting the village ponds and dhobis or washerfolk who
depend on these sources for their water supply
Dumping of industrial and urban wastes into periurban water bodies was a common issue in
almost all locations visited for this study. Once again, problems related to water insecurity were
acute indeed in Chennai. Due to ground water extraction along the coast, the sea water enters and
mixes with the ground water, making it saline. Fresh water is thus lost and this process is
irreversible. Further, the building ofembankments and roads is often done without any regard to
the hydrology of the areas. Developments have taken place without regard to the carrying
capacity of the aquifers as well.Sandmining for urbanization was identified as another emerging
issue.
The dumping of industrial wastes along the coast-line was identified as an important issue, as was
encroachment of village ponds and water bodies. The filling up of water bodies and wetlands has
been an important means of urban expansion in Chennai and Guwahati contributing often to the
problem of urban flooding, that has emerged as a new concern in periurban areas. This has
disturbed eco-system resilience, just as the expansion of Chandigarh into the foot-hills of the
Siwaliks.
Water use and health in periurban contexts
Several health problems are caused due tolack of safe drinking water and sanitation in periurban
areas (Narain, 2012; Narain, 2013). The high incidence of waterborne diseases in peri-urban areas
is the result of poor access to water and unsafe hygienic conditions. Several waterborne diseases
such as cholera, diarrhoea, and gastroenteritis are known to be a common cause of poor health
and high morbidity. Sharma et al. (2007) note that cholera is endemic in Delhi and its peripheral
areas. Children below five constituted about 33 per cent of the cases in their study conducted
between 2003 and 2005. Certain vector borne diseases like malaria are on the rise due to certain
counter productive activities in the peri urban areas like the lack of proper sanitation and open
faecal matter (Konendijk 2004).
In his work on periurban Delhi, Kundu (2008) notes wide variations in access to water between the
core and the peripheral areas. In the absence of access to organised sources of drinking water
supply, a large number ofhouseholds in the peripheral areas depend upon hand pumps or
tubewells that are not safe sources of water. This explains the incidence of epidemics and a variety
of skin diseases in the peripheral towns, especially in the low income areas and slums. Microbial
contamination of groundwater is known to be widespread and even deeper layers of groundwater
may not be regarded free from disease-causing micro-organisms (Sharma et al., 2003).
Among the cities visited for this study, water related health problems were found to be
particularly conspicuous in Patna.Dumping of solid wastes and neglect of sewerage and sanitation
facilities were found to be associated with increased incidence of waterborne diseases.Dumping of
untreated wastes and open drainage has resulted in a preponderance of water borne diseases.
Diarrhoeal cases are very common in the fringes, particularly in slums and squatter settlements. A
study carried out by Nidan, an NGO,in association with WaterAid points out that most of the low

lying areas in outskirts are victims of malaria, conjunctivitis, worms and skin related diseases.
Primary health care facilitiesare extremely poor and inadequate.
Wastewater use, food security and health
Wastewater constitutes an important aspect of rural-urban flows that sustain periurban

livelihoods. It has been noted that wastewater has a high potential for reuse in agriculture
(Winrock International India-International Water Management Institute [WII-IWMI] 2006). It offers
an opportunity for increasing food and environmental security while preventing direct pollution of
rivers and surface water. This practice conserves a significant proportion of the river basin waters
and disposes off municipal wastewater in a low-cost, sanitary manner. Besides, wastewater
production is continuous, making it a reliable and demand-based source of water available to
farmers whenever they need it, unlike canal irrigation (IWMI 2003). It also allows farmers to grow
crops that are more sensitive to water stress, such as vegetables. The nutrients present in
wastewater are an added benefit, saving farmers money (in terms of chemical fertilisers) and
increasing crop yields. Though wastewater use in agriculture is an age-old practice, there is
understood to be not enough systematic information on it, particularly on issues such as farmers’
needs and preferences and health and environmental risks (WII-IWMI 2006).
The use of wastewater is an important aspect of irrigation in periurban agriculture, enhancing local
food and livelihood security. Food security and income generation are secured through
biodiversity of crops and despite the multifarious adaptations and advantages there is also a risk
involved especially when using waste water for irrigation; this could be hazardous for health
(Jacobi 2009). Plant samples of crops grown under sewage-irrigated fields in a periurban area near
Vadodara city in the western Indian state of Gujarat were collected to determine the composition
of trace elements and also for the assessment of the contamination of heavy metals in relation to
tube well water irrigated fields of adjoining areas (Patel et al., 2008). The findings of the results
emphasize the contamination of plant system in sewage irrigated periurban areas, especially with
heavy metals, viz. Lead, Nickel and Cobalt.In their study in South India, Brook et al (2003) note that
sewage irrigation was a lifeline for vegetable producers but resulted in what farmers referred to as
soil sickness, leading to poor crop growth, low seed germination and lower water infiltration rates
into the soil. Furthermore, the attraction of pests resulted in excessive use of pesticides which
further contaminated vegetables used by urban consumers. Likewise, Kaur and Rani (2006)
observed that chromium concentrations in the wastewater used for irrigation inAlipur and
Shahdara blocks of peri-urban Delhi were far above the maximum permissible limit of one ppm
(parts per million). Available manganese concentrations in the soil sampled at Kanjhawala,
western Najafgarh and Alipur peri-urban regions in Delhi were also observed to be above
maximum permissible limit of 10 ppm.
A study by Rattan et al. (2005) focused on peri-urban agricultural lands under the Keshopur
Effluent Irrigation Scheme in Delhi where various cereals, millets, vegetables and fodder crops are
grown. Their study found that sewage effluents contained higher amounts of phosphorus,
potassium, sulphur, zinc, copper, iron, manganese and nickel compared to groundwater. Risk
assessment of metal contents in some vegetable crops grown in such contaminated soil indicated
that these vegetables could be consumed safely by humans.
To check their heavy metal content, Singh and Kumar (2006) studied samples of vegetables like
spinach and okra and samples of irrigated water and soil collected from five peri-urban sites in
Delhi. While the presence of heavy metals in the soil was below the maximum prescribed limit
byWHO, the metal load was higher in the water and vegetable samples. The spinach and okra
samples showed zinc, lead and cadmium levels higher than the prescribed WHO limits. The level of
copper, however, was within safe limits.It was observed that metal contamination was higher in
spinach than in okra. A study done by Jacobi (2009) in peri urban Hyderabad, suggests that
industrial and domestic effluents be segregated and only the latter be used for irrigation purposes.
5. Periurban as a policy space: prescriptions for reform
The periurban interface has been described as a ‘space crying out for attention’ (Brook and
Purushothoman et al., 2003: 134). Given the unique characteristics of the periurban interface,
developing policy options for sustainable periurban settlements is achallenging task indeed.
Scholars and researchers of the periurban interface make several suggestions for management of
periurban settlements. Policy prescriptions focus on improving the access of periurban dwellers
to a wide range of assets, improving transportation and connectivity, involving both rural and
urban governments at the local level, and most importantly, overcoming the rural urban
dichotomy in planning for development. Given the huge diversity in periurban settings, a strong
case is made for adecentralized approach that is driven by local demands and priorities in which
both urban and rural specialists need to work with each other. It is argued that this requires the
straddling of the rural-urban divide, that has been normally ignored by policy-makers and calls
for interventions rooted in local contexts while avoiding generalizations (Tacoli, 2003; Brooke et
al. 2003; Simon 2008; Allen 2003; Jacobi 2009).
Livelihoods and occupational diversification
Given the wide diversity in the occupational structure and in economic activity in periurban
contexts, Tacoli (1992) argues that an important ingredient of policy interventions for periurban
areas should be interventions aimed at protecting livelihoods and facilitating occupational
diversification.Such interventions should aim at improving access to a wide range of assets with
the aim of expanding livelihood options, rather than assume that agriculture is the best, or
indeed the preferred activity for rural residents and that urban residents’ reliance on rural
resources is limited to backyard farming for household consumption. This recommendation is
based on the premise that periurban livelihoods are constructed both across rural and urban
resources and spaces.
Further, it is important that policy interventions concentrate on improving access to assets with
the aim of expanding livelihood options, rather than assuming that households are spatially
homogeneous and that individuals engage in one type of activity only (Tacoli, 2003).The
assumption of rural households and communities as relatively stable units of production and
consumption are no longer valid in many locations, and this needs to be taken into account in
the formulation and implementation of rural development initiatives. In fact, one of the reasons
for the failure of policies that, since the 1960s, have attempted to draw upon rural-urban
linkages to promote regional development, Tacoli argues, is that they were based on
assumptions that did not necessarily reflect the real circumstances of specific locations and the
people living and working there.
Transport and access to markets
Since periurban settlements are located away from the city core, they often receive less
attention and priority. Transport authorities often focus on the widening of highways, acquisition
of new lands for this purpose and the development of link roads connecting major cities.
Connecting roads to periurban villages typically receive lesser attention. On the other hand, it
has been argued that given the dependence of periurban residents on linkages with urban
centres, policies that improve access to towns and cities need a clear emphasis. In periurban
research in Faridabad district of Haryana, the improvement of roads was cited by residents as a
top priority (Narain and Nischal 2007). Further, the demand for periurban transport was found to
be gendered. Men could often get a lift on a bicycle or bike to the point where connecting
transportation was obtained for the highway, while women were forced to walk.
This calls for a focus on improving and meeting local transportation needs more effectively.
Often this entails the creation of some intermediary form of transport that connects the village
to the city centre, or to the main highways. An important dimension of periurban transport as
seen both in Faridabad and Gurgaon districts was the reliance on semi-public transport such as
auto-rickshaws, that rose in popularity on account of the poor reliability of public buses (Narain
and Nischal 2007; Narain 2009a). However, this form of transport remains unorganized, and a
common problem faced by periurban residents is that of cramped vehicles, uncertain timing and
overcharging by the vehicle operators.
High transport costs are often identified as bottlenecks in shaping access to markets (Tacoli,
2002). Improved roads greatly enhance rural-urban linkages by increasing the value-added and
marketability of certain kinds of rural produce such as citrus fruits, tobacco, and timber.
Improvements in rural-urban links would also increase accessibility to urban social services, such
as medical facilities and secondary schools for rural people. During the construction of
transportation infrastructure, however, authorities need to pay heed to the livelihoods of
periurban population that may be affected through road construction, as demonstrated in the
work of Brook and Purushothoman et al. (2003) in the Hubli-Dharwad region in South India.The
construction of highways is often at the expense of farmers’ agricultural lands, and their access
routes to fields and places of work get disrupted, as witnessed in research in periurban Gurgaon
(Narain 2007).
Agriculture and access to assets
While agricultural production is assumed to benefit from proximity to urban markets and the
development of infrastructure and transport, the degree to which households can take
advantage of this proximity depends on their physical, human and financial resources as well as
their social capital and their access to markets. Within specific regional contexts, while there is
potential for rural-urban linkages to contribute to poverty reduction, it is argued that this will
only occur in a climate in which policies, social relations, institutions and incentives allow an
equitable access to the assets necessary to support sustainable livelihoods (Tacoli, 1998).
Public participation and institutional contexts
Given the patterns of flows of goods and services between rural areas and urban centres, there
are implications for patterns of control over resources. Households who stay behind in rural
areas often have little say in the managementof local resourcesas control remains with the
migrant members (Tacoli, 1998). This is particularly the case for women although it is also
mediated by a range of factors such as culturally-specific gender roles and relations, gender
divisions of labor within households, land tenure and women's workloads. This should be taken
into account when targeting extension messages in periurban settlements, so that assumptions
are not made about who controls resources.
Drawing on their study in South India, Rengasamy and Devaramanet al.(2002) argue that it is also
important that any definition of target groups for specific policies correctly reflects the some
times wide variations within these groups in terms of their needs and priorities.This means

understanding the characteristics of the livelihoods of different groups (including those not
specifically targeted by the initiative but likely to be affected by it), the direct and indirect
impacts of the policy initiative on their livelihoods, and incorporating the policy elements which
address potential negative impacts on specific groups. Drawing on his study in Hyderabad in
South India, Kennedy (2005) notes that the regional policies in Hyderabad have been successful
in many respects, attracting private firms both domestic and international and creating wealth
and employment. At the same time, they have raised important questions with regard
togovernance. Private sector actors have emerged on the scene but locally elected
representatives have been largely excluded from the policy process, as have civil society groups,
learning about major decisions only after the fact. Large tracts of peri-urban space are being
transformed into special purpose enclaves, governed by specific regulatory frameworks. By
subdividing peri-urban spaces and increasing spatial differentiation, such policies appear to
weaken prospects for governance institutions at the metropolitan scale.
One key question that Kennedy raises here is the extent to which such top-down decision-making,
in conjunction with regulatory tools that carve out selected areas for development within largely
undeveloped peri-urban spaces, are effectively weakening prospects for participatory urban
governance at the metropolitan scale. Local actors are conspicuously absent from the policy
process. Governance continues to be characterised by centralised political institutions (Kennedy,
2005).
Policy in practice: bottlenecks to developing and implementing policy options for the periurban
interface
While scholars and researchers have presented several prescriptions for dealing with the
management of periurban areas, in practice, these prescriptions are difficult to implement. This
section of the paper examines some of the practical challenges in addressing periurban problems
from a perspective of governance.
First, the co-existence ofinterests, groups, activities and institutions as diverse as thosedescribed
in the preceding sections of this paper poses practical problems in developing policy options for
the periurban interface; this is aggravated by the fact that geographically, the boundaries of
periurban keep shifting as rural activities and processes are replaced by urban activities and
processes.At the same time, the very nature, pace and location of the periurban interface makes
it difficult to bring it under direct means of control and regulation, both for urban as well as for
rural authorities. For instance, from our study of Chennai city in this project, we know that what
were once considered as periurban areas are now brought into the fold of the Chennai Municipal
Corporation.
An understanding of what constitutes the periurban interface is further complicated by the

ambiguity in definitions of urban and rural itself (Tacoli, 1998). What is defined as an urban
centre may vary from one country to another. Further, households may not be purely “rural” or
“urban”. They could be multi-spatial, with some members residing in rural areas and some in
towns, as well as engaging in agriculture within urban areas. As noted earlier in this paper,
conventional approaches to planning take a limited focus of either planning for urban or planning
for rural areas; in practice, populations and activities described either as rural or urban are more
closely linked both across sectors and space than is usually thought.
There are also important issues related to definition and concepts of the periurban, which is
perhaps an important reason why periurban does not receive the attention of policy-makers. As
an example, the Indian census had no concept of periurban for a long time (Kundu and Konaret

al., 2001). Town groups, urban outgrowths, and urban agglomerations have been accepted
concepts to denote core-periphery relationships.
Drawing on their work in the Hubli-Dharwad region in South India, Halkatti and Purushothoman
et al. (2003) argue that frequent interventions by urban institutions and visits by politicians and
government generate patron-client attitudes in periurban villages. Since their natural resources
are controlled by urban or rural institutions, natural resource management is much more difficult
to organise. Further, options for earning incomes in the city year-round and consequent
migration is an incentive for people to seek opportunities, but can also be a disincentive for self-
help and for investing in their own villages. Thus, whilst multifaceted solutions are possible in
peri-urban areas, drawing on both rural and urban opportunities, mobilization of the community
is often more difficult.
Devising and implementing policy interventions for the periurban interface can be further
complicated by inherent tensions between peri-urban dwellers and municipalities. These
tensions concern changes in land-use, the management of waste from the urban centres and
that of water resources; since these issues are likely to become increasingly central, mechanisms
for inter-local government negotiation need to be developed (Tacoli, 2002). Residents of
periurban Gurgaon, for instance, were found to harbour feelings of resentment against urban
planning and development authorities for forced acquisitions of land, delayed compensation and
their inability to participate in the opportunities thrown up by the rapidly growing and expanding
Gurgaon city (Narain, 2009a). In fact, periurban residents in one of the villages filed a case
against HUDA- the Haryana Urban Development Authority - when the payment for their land
acquisition was delayed.
The relationship between elected local governments and traditional authorities can be quite
critical; this is especially where there are tensions between the statutory rights system of land
tenure and the customary system (Bah and Salmana et al., 2003; Tacoli, 2002). In periurban
areas, these are underpinned by informal land markets and the resulting conflict of interest
between traditional chiefs who attempt to retain control, including over private sales of land
under customary tenure, and elected governments whose responsibilities include the provision
of infrastructure for which access to land is essential. The potential for conflict is particularly
higher in areas with low levels of social and political cohesion (Tacoli, 2002). Tensions between
rural and periurban communes and urban municipalities also concern changes in land use, and
the management of water resources and of domestic and industrial waste from the urban center
(Bah and Salmana 2003).
Finally, developing interventions for the periurban interface requires both urban and rural
authorities to collaborate, for which there may be no precedent. An example is sewage flowing
into periurban areas, which is partly the responsibility of the urban government and partly of the
rural government. As noted earlier in the paper, in the Participatory Action Planning Project
undertaken by Halkatti and Purushothoman et al. (2003) in the Hubli-Dharwad region in South
India, the solution of a sewage treatment plant had to be dropped as it was not clear who –the
urban or the rural government- would pay for it. Similarly, in research in periurban Gurgaon and
Faridabad in the North-West Indian state of Haryana, the interaction between the village
Panchayats – the unit of village level governance and the urban municipalities and planning
authorities was found to be conspicuous by its absence (Narain and Nischal 2007; Narain 2009a).
HUDA, the Haryana Urban Development Authority, defines its mandate narrowly in terms of
developing urban Haryana. However, it has thus far evolved no mechanism for dealing with the
rural consequences of this activity, apart from financial compensation of villagers whose lands
are acquired.

Tacoli (2002) notes that improving synergies between between local governments, NGOs, local
civil society and the private sector can play an important role in supporting the positive aspects
of rural-urban interactions while reducing their negative impacts. In particular, local
governments can play an important role in supporting positive rural-urban linkagesand while
local decision-making, supported by adequate resources, can facilitate this, wider issues such as
land tenure systems, institutional structures of markets and broader national development
strategies are likely to affect local initiative (Tacoli, 2003).
In the Indian context, an important thrust in the report of the Rural Urban Relationship
Committee (1966), was to explore inter-institutional problems to deal with rural-urban
interactive growth; essentially the committee recommended urban development in the twilight
zone of rural urban interaction. The 74th Amendment to the Constitution of India provides for
the creation of District Planning Committees and Municipal Planning Committees for effective
integration of rural and urban planning and spatial and economic development for the entire
district (Brook and Purushothoman, 2003).9 There is a need for creating such organizations on a
larger scale to integrate and address the concerns of the periurban interface.
References
Ahmed, N and Sohail, M. 2003. ‘Alternate water supply arrangements in peri-urban localities:
awami (people’s ) tanks in Orangi township, Karachi’, Environment & Urbanization, 15(2): 33-42.
Allen, A., N. da Silva, and E. Corubolo. (1999), “Environmental Problems and Opportunities of the
Peri-urban Interface and Their Impact upon the Poor,” p. 1. Draft for Discussion. London: Peri-
urban Interface Project, Development Planning Unit, University College London.
Allen, A. (2003), “Environmental Planning and Management of the Peri-urban Interface”,

Environment & Urbanization, Vol 15, No 1, April, pages 135 – 147.
Allen,A.2006.Understandingenvironmentalchangeinthecontextofrural-urbaninteractionsin
D.McGregor, D.Simon and D.Thompson, eds. The periurban interface: approaches to sustainable
natural and human resource use. Earthscan VA, USA, pages 30-43.
Allen, A., Dávila, J. D., & Hofmann, P. (2006). So close the city, so far from the pipes. London:
University College London, Development Planning Unit.
www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu/pui/publications/DPU%20PUI%20WSS%20Brochure.pdf.
Arbury, J. n.d. “From Urban Sprawl to Compact City: An Analysis of Urban Growth Management in
Auckland.” Master’s Thesis. Auckland, New Zealand: University of Auckland. Website:
http://portal.jarbury.net/thesis.pdf
Brook, R, S. Purushothoman and C. Hunshal (eds) (2003), Changing Frontiers: The Peri-urban
Interface Hubli–Dharwad, India, Books for Change, Bangalore, 146 pages.
Brook, R., Purushothaman, S. and Hunshal, C (eds). 2003. Changing frontiers: The periurban
interface Hubli-Dharwad India. Bangalore: Books for change.
9
In the study of the Hubli-Dharwad Area, conducted by Brook and Purushothoman et al., (2003),the Hubli-
Dharawad Urban development Authority was found to focus purely on physical planningrather than taking a
broader holistic approach.
Dahiya, B. 2003. ‘Hard struggle and soft gains: environmental management, civil society and
governance in Pammal, South India’, Environment & Urbanization, 15(1): 91-100.
David. S, D.McGregorandD. Thompson,(2006),“Contemporaryperspectivesonthe

periurbanzonesofcitiesindevelopingareas'inD.McGregor,DSimonandD.Thompson, (eds).The
periurban interface: approaches to sustainable natural and human resource use. Earthscan VA,
USA.
David, S. (2008), “Urban Environments: Issues on the Peri-Urban Fringe”, Annual Review of
Environment and Resources, Vol 33, July, pages 167 – 185.
Douglas, I. (2006), “Peri-urban ecosystems and societies:transitional zones and contrasting

values”,in D.McGregor, D.Simon and D.Thompson, e(ds). The periurban interface: approaches to
sustainable natural and human resource use. Earthscan VA, USA.
Dayaratne, R. and Samarawickrama, R. 2003. ‘Empowering Communities in the perurban areas of

Colombo’, Environment & Urbanization, 15(1): 101-110.
Dupont V (2005), “Peri – Urban Dynamics: Population, Habitat and Environment on the
peripheries of large Indian Metropolises A review of concepts and general issues”, Publication of
the French Research Institutes in India, Vol 14.
Dupont, V. 2007. Conflicting stakes and governance in the peripheries of large Indian
metropolises- An introduction. Cities, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 89-94
CGIAR,2009.(http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/health/wastew/hyderabad_declaration.htm, accessed
on April 3, 2009)
Fazal, S. (2000), “Urban expansion and loss of agricultural land - a GIS based study of Saharanpur
City, India”, Environment and Urbanization, Vol 12, No 2, October, pages 133 – 149.
Feenstra, S, Hussain R and van der Hoek, W. 2000. ‘Health risks of irrigation with untreated urban
wastewater in the Southern Punjab, Pakistan’. Lahore: Institute of Public Health, Lahore and IWMI
Pakistan Program. 13 pp.
Halkatti,M., Purushothaman,S. and Brook, R. 2003. ‘Participatory Action Planning in the periurban
interface: the twin city experience – Hubli-Dharwad, India’, Environment & Urbanization, 15(1):
149-158.
Iaquinta, D.L. andDrescher, A. W. 2000. ‘Defining periurban: understanding rural-urban linkages

and their connection to institutional contexts’, Paper presented at the Tenth World Congress of
the International Rural Sociology Association, Rio de Janeiro, August 1, 2000.
International Water Management Institute, 2006. ‘Recycling realities: managing health risks to
make wastewater an asset’, Water Policy Briefing, Issue 17. IWMI and Global Water Partnership,
February 2006.7 pp.
International Water Management Institute, 2003. ‘Confronting the realities of wastewater use in
agriculture’,Water Policy Briefing, Issue 9. 7 pp.
Jacobi, J, A.W. Drescher, P.H. Amerasinghe, P.Weckenbrock (2009),“Agricultural Biodiversity

Strengthening Livelihoods in Periurban Hyderabad, India”, Urban Agriculture magazine, No 22,
June.
Janakarajan, S., M. Llorente, and M.-H. Zérah,Urban water conflicts in Indian cities. Man-made
scarcity as a critical factor, in Urban Water Conflicts. An analysis of the origins and nature of
water-related unrest and conflicts in the urban context, B. Barraqué and A. Tejada Guilbert,
Editors. 2006, UNESCO: Paris. p. 91-111.
Jena, M (2012) “Climate Change Threatens the Poor in Cities Analysis”. Inter Press Service (online)
27 March. Available at http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=107212.
Kaufmann, Daniel, Kraay, Aart and Mastruzzi, Massimo, Governance Matters VIII: Aggregate and
Individual Governance Indicators, 1996-2008 (June 29, 2009). World Bank Policy Research
Working Paper No. 4978. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1424591
Keivani, R and M. Mattingly (2007), “The Interface of Globalization and Peripheral Land in the
Cities of the South: Implications for Urban Governance and Local Economic Development”,
International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Vol 31, No 2, June, pages 459 – 474.
Kennedy, L (2005), “Regional industrial policies driving peri-urban dynamics in Hyderabad, India”,
CNRS, Centre d’E´tudes de l’Inde et de l’Asie du Sud (CNRS-EHESS), Vol. 24, No. 2, July, pages. 95–
109.
Khurana, C. (2010), “A slice of life in peri-urban India”, The Financial Express, [online], 13 May.
Available at http://www.financialexpress.com/news/a-slice-of-life-in-periurban-india/617982/0
Konijnendijk C Cecil, S. Sadio, T. B. Randrup, and J. Schipperijn (2004), “Urban and Peri-Urban
Forestry in a Development Context – Strategy and Implementation”, Journal of Arboriculture, Vol
30, No 05, September, pages 269 – 276.
Kumar, M.S. 2001. ‘Devouring agglomerations and their outgrowths in India: beyond the rural-
urban divide’, Paper prepared for the conference on Rural-urban encounters: managing the
environment of the periurban interface, Development Planning Unit, University College London, 9-
10 December, 2001.
Kundu, Amitabh. 2008. ‘Socio-economic segmentation, inequality in micro environment and

process of degradation peripheralization in New Delhi’, in A.L. Singh & S. Fazl (eds.) Urban
Environmental Management, pp. 45-75. Delhi: B.R. Publishing Corporation. Lerner, M, Amy and
Hallie Eakin(2011), “An obsolete dichotomy? Rethinking the rural–urban interface in terms of food
security and production in the global south”, The Geographical Journal, Vol. 177, No. 4, December,
pages 311–320.
Losada. H, H. Martínez, J. Vieyra, R. Pealing, R. Zavala and J. Cortés (1998), “Urban agriculture in
the metropolitan zone of Mexico City: changes over time in urban, suburban and peri-urban
areas”, Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 10, No. 2, October, pages 37-54.
Malaque III, R Isidoroand M Yokohari (2007), “Urbanization process and the changing agricultural
landscape pattern in the urban fringe of Metro Manila, Philippines”, Environment and
Urbanization, Vol 19, No 1, April, pages 191 – 206.
Marshall, F., Waldman, L., MacGregor, H., Mehta, L. and Randhawa, P. (2009) On the Edge of
Sustainability: Perspectives on Peri-urban Dynamics, STEPS Working Paper 35, Brighton: STEPS
Centre.

Marshall, F, Agarwal, R, Lintelo, Dolf te, Bhupal, D S, Singh, R P B, Mukhejee, N, Sen C, Poole,N,
Agarwal, M, and Singh, S D. 2003. ‘Heavy metal contamination of vegetables in Delhi. Executive
Summary of Technical Report.’ March 2003. 10 pp
Mathur, N. 2012. On the Sabarmati Riverfront. Urban Planning as Totalitariam Governance in

Ahmedabad. Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. XLVII Nos. 47 and 48, pp.
Mukherjee, N, A. Ashgate, (2001), “Alternative perspectives on Livelihoods, Agriculture and Air

Polllution: Agriculture in Urban and Peri-urban areas in a developing country”.
Narain, V. 2009a. Expanding city, shrinking hinterland. Land Acquisition, transition and conflict in
periurban Gurgaon. Environment & Urbanization.
Narain, V. 2009b.. ‘Gone land, gone water. Crossing Fluid Boundaries in periurban Gurgaon and
Faridabad, India.’ South Asian Water Sudies 1(2).
Narain, V and Nischal, S. 2007. ‘The periurban interface in Shahpur Khurd and Karnera, India’,
Environment and Urbanization, 19(1): 261-273.
Narain, V. 2007. A tale of two villages: transition and conflict in peri-urban Gurgaon. MDI Working
Paper Series No.002. Gurgaon: Management Development Institute.
Narain, V. (2012), “Neglected Frontiers – Peri urban Water Use and Human Health in the National
Capital Region” In Prakash. A, Saravanan V.S, Chourney. J(eds), 2012, “Interlacing Water and
Human Health - Case studies from South Asia”, Water in South Asia, Vol 3, sage publications, New
Delhi, pages 360 – 380.
Parkinson, J. and Tayler, K. 2003. ‘Decentralised wastewater management in periurban areas in

low-income countries’, Environment & Urbanization, 15(1): 75-90.
Patel, K. C, Ramani, V. P, Patel, J. C (2008), “Trace and heavy metals composition in crops grown in
sewage irrigated periurban area of Vadodara, India”, Asian Journal of Environmental Science, Vol.
3, No. 1, pp. 39-44.
Rattan, R.K, Datta, S.P., Chhonkar, P.,K,. Suribabu, K. and Singh, A.K., 2005. ‘Long-term impact of
irrigation with sewage effluents on heavy metal content in soils, crops and groundwater- a case
study’, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 109(3-4): 310-332.
Rohilla, S.K., Datta, P.S. and Bansal, S.P. (1999). Delhi’s water and solid waste management:
emerging scenario.New Delhi: Vigyan PrasarPublications.
Rostam, K. (1997), “Industrial Expansion, Employment Changes and Urbanization in the Peri-urban
Areas of Klang-Langat Valley, Malaysia.” Asian Profile,Vol 25, No 4, pages 303-315.
Ruet, J ,Gambiez, M and Lacour, E. 2007. Private appropriation of resource: Impact of periurban
farmers selling water to Chennai Metropolitan Board. Cities, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 89-147
Schenk, H. (2005) “India’s Urban Fringe” In Dupont V(ed), “Peri – Urban Dynamics: Population,
Habitat and Environment on the peripheries of large Indian Metropolises A review of concepts and
general issues”, Publication of the French Research Institutes in India, Vol 14, pages 126 – 149.
Sharma, S, Singh I and Virdi, J.S. 2003. ‘Microbial contamination of various water sources in Delhi’,
Current Science, 84 (11): 1398-1399.
Sharma, N.C., Mandal, P.K., Dhillon, Rohini, and Jain, M., 2007. ‘Changing profile of Vibrio Cholerae
01, 0139 in Delhi and its periphery (2003-05)’, Indian Journal of Medical Research, May 2007.
Sharma, V.P. 2006. ‘Problems and realistic estimates of water related diseases.’ Paper presented
at the Conference on Health and Environment, New Delhi. March 24-25, 2006.
Singh, S and Kumar, M. 2006. ‘Heavy metal load of soil, water and vegetables in periurbanDelhi’,
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 120(1-3): 79-91.
Suresh Rohilla, S. (2005), “Defining ‘Peri-urban’ – A review”, In Dupont V(ed), “Peri – Urban
Dynamics: Population, Habitat and Environment on the peripheries of large Indian
Tacoli, C .2002. Changing rural-urban interactions in sub-Saharan Africa and their impact on
livelihoods: a summary. Working Paper 7. London: International Institute for Environment and
Development. 40 pp.
Tacoli, C. (1999), “Understanding the Opportunities and Constraints for Low-Income Groups in the
Peri-Urban Interface: The Contribution of Livelihood Frameworks,” p. 7. Draft for Discussion.
London: Peri-urban Interface Project, Development Planning Unit, University College London.
Tacoli, C. (2003), “The links between urban and rural development”, Environment and
Urbanization, Vol 15, No 1, April, pages 3–12.
Tacoli, C. 2006. ‘Editor's introduction’ in C. Tacoli e(d). The earthscan readerin rural-urban linkages,
London: Earthscan. International Institute for Environment and Development.
Te Lintelo, D., Marshall, F. and Bhupal, D. ( 2001) Peri-urban agriculture in Delhi India.
Agricultulture and Consumer Protection. Retrieved from
http://www.fao.org/docrep/004/y1931m/y1931m02.htm#TopOfPage.
The Nottingham and Liverpool Universities, 1999, “Literature Review on Peri-Urban Natural
Resource Conceptualisation and ManagementApproaches”, Peri-Urban Production
SystemsResearch, Natural Resources Systems Programme, DFID (Project No. R6949), Final
Technical Report, London, pages 74 – 85.
UNFPA (2007) State of World Population, 2007: Unleashing the Potential of Urban Growth, United
Nations Population Fund. Available at www.unfpa.org/swp/2007/presskit/pdf/sowp2007_eng.pdf
Webster, D. (2002), “On the Edge: Shaping the future of Peri-Urban East Asia”, Asia/Pacific
Research Center Discussion Paper. Stanford, California: Asia/Pacific Research Center, Stanford
University.
Winrock International India/ International Water Management Institute, 2006. ‘National

Workshop on urban wastewater: livelihood, health and environmental impacts in India’,
Proceedings. New Delhi: United Services Institution. January 31, 2006. 7 pp.


Status Paper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Status Paper

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Status Paper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

About the author:

Citation: Narain, V., Anand, P. and Banerjee, P. 2013. 'Periurbanization in India: A

First published in 2013

For further information please contact:

Attribution: You must attribute the work in the manner specified.

1 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

Figure 1: Five cities visited for the periurban study

2. Conceptualising, identifying and characterising the periurban

3 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

4 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

2. All other places which satisfy the following criteria:

i)A minimum population of 5,000;

iii) A density of population of at least 400 persons per sq. km.

5 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

Periurban as spaces of social and institutional transition

6 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

Contested natural resource use

While urbanization processes can engender transformations in agricultural practices, their

Periurban livelihoods : across rural and urban spaces

Rural-urban links: essential in supporting periurban livelihoods

The spatial dynamism in periurban

9 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

3. Socio-economic drivers of Peri Urban

10 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

Land speculation and Industrial Expansion

Availability of cheap labour and export driven policies

11 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

Weak Government Regulation

12 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

4. Issues of natural resource depletion, environmental deterioration and

The aspect of environmental deterioration is elaborated in the work of Simon (2008)who

Agriculture and Agricultural land in Peri Urban

• The occupation, often illegal, of land for temporary housing

Impacts on the remaining agricultural lands are likely to include:

• Land degradation in the areas surrounding agricultural lands

15 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

Land use change and periurban water insecurity

16 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

Water use and health in periurban contexts

17 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

Wastewater use, food security and health

Wastewater constitutes an important aspect of rural-urban flows that sustain periurban

5. Periurban as a policy space: prescriptions for reform

Livelihoods and occupational diversification

Transport and access to markets

Agriculture and access to assets

Public participation and institutional contexts

20 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

An understanding of what constitutes the periurban interface is further complicated by the

21 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

22 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence

Allen, A. (2003), “Environmental Planning and Management of the Peri-urban Interface”,

David. S, D.McGregorandD. Thompson,(2006),“Contemporaryperspectivesonthe

Douglas, I. (2006), “Peri-urban ecosystems and societies:transitional zones and contrasting

Dayaratne, R. and Samarawickrama, R. 2003. ‘Empowering Communities in the perurban areas of

Iaquinta, D.L. andDrescher, A. W. 2000. ‘Defining periurban: understanding rural-urban linkages

Jacobi, J, A.W. Drescher, P.H. Amerasinghe, P.Weckenbrock (2009),“Agricultural Biodiversity

Kundu, Amitabh. 2008. ‘Socio-economic segmentation, inequality in micro environment and

25 Periurbanization in India: A review of the literature and evidence