chapter 8 urban profile - office of the chief town … the census 1981, nenmara, pattambi and...

URBAN PROFILE District Spatial Plan - Palakkad5454

Department of Town & Country Planning, Kerala


The trend of urbanization of Palakkad District isassessed and is compared with the level ofUrbanization of the State so as to ascertain the positionof the District in the State scenario and is detailed in

this chapter.

8.1 TREND OF URBANIZATION –KERALAAt the turn of the 20th century, Kerala had a

population of 63.96 Lakhs, of which 59.42 Lakhs werein rural areas. This constituted 92.89 per cent of thetotal population of the state. At the end of the 20th

century the total population in Kerala has increased to3.18 Crores (31838619) of which rural population was2.35 Crores. This means that the rural populationconstitutes about 74 % of the total population as on2001. The population figures of the State as per census2001 are shown in the table 8.1.

Table.8.1: Population figures (2001) of Keralaat a glance

Source: census 2001, Provisional totals,

Table 8.2: Trends of population growth ofKerala - 1981-2001

Source: census 2001, Provisional totals, p 106

Chapter 8URBAN PROFILE

There is an increase of about 400% in the total

population of Kerala within a century. During thisperiod rural population has increased by 300 %. Ruralpopulation content in Kerala has declined from 92.89%to 74% of the total population within a century. This isan indication on the trend of urbanization in Kerala

that has happened in a century.

There is a steady decline in the populationgrowth rate over the last three decades. Populationgrowth rate reduced from 19.24% in 1981 to 9.24% in2001. During the period 1981-91 population of 36.45Lakhs were added to the previous decades population,whereas during the period 1991-2001, population ofonly 27.4 Lakhs were added.

The growth rate of urban population of Keralaover the last three decades shows that it is in a transitionphase. Over the last two decades (1971-81 and 1981-91) growth rate in urban population was on the rise,37.64% in 1981 and 60.97% in 1991. But the urbanpopulation growth rate has drastically declined to 7.64%in 2001 with a decrease of 87.5% over the precedingdecadal urban population growth rate.

Table 8.3: Trends in urbanisation of Kerala - 1981-2001

2001

Person Males Females Growth rate

Total 31838619 15468664 16369955 9.42

Rural 23571484 11450785 12120699 10.05

Urban 8267135 4017879 4249256 7.64

Year Total population Growth rate of

total population

Growth rate in urban

population

1981 25453680 19.24 37.64

1991 29098518 14.32 60.97

2001 31838619 9.42 7.64

Year Total

population

Total urban

population

Percentage

of urban

population

Growth rate

of total

population

Growth rate

in urban

population

1981 25453680 4771275 18.74 19.24 37.64

1991 29098518 7680294 26.39 14.32 60.97

2001 31838619 8267135 25.97 9.42 7.64

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 7

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

District Spatial Plan - Palakkad URBAN PROFILE

Department of Town & Country Planning, KeralaDepartment of Town & Country Planning, Kerala

5555

Fig 8.1: Census urban area of the District

Table 8.5 Existing urban population of Palakkad

The table 8.5 Shows the existing urbanpopulation of the district.

Table 8.4 District wise percentage of urban population

At the same time the growth rate in totalpopulation has d ecreased from 14.32 % to 9.42%with a decrease rate of 34.2%.

8.2 URBAN AREAS IN PALAKKAD DISTRICT

As per the 2001 census, the population ofPalakkad district is 2,617,072, which constitutes about8.22 % of the total population of the State. In the totalpopulation of the Palakkad district, 356,575 is urbanpopulation, ie 13.6 % of the total population of theDistrict is in the urban areas of the District. There arefour Municipalities viz, Palakkad, Chittur-Thathamangalam, Shornur and Ottappalam, in theDistrict. In addition there is one census town in thedistrict namely Puthunagaram.The urban areas ofPalakkad District are shown in the figure 8.1.

8.3 URBAN POPULATION CONTENT

The process of urbanization of an area can be

assessed in relation to its urban population content.

The urban population content of Kerala state is 26%,

whereas that of the District is 13.6%. On comparing

the urban content of all the 14 District of the State, it

can be seen from table 8.4 that Palakkad District is

positioned in the 10th rank. This shows that the process

of urbanization is rather very slow in Palakkad District.

District Population 2001 Urban

Content Rank 2001 Urban Rural Total % Urban

Kannur 1212898 1196058 2408956 50.3 1

Ernakulam 1477085 1628713 3105798 47.6 2

Kozhikode 1101157 1777974 2879131 38.2 3

Thiruvananthapuram 1091661 2142695 3234356 33.8 4

Alappuzha 621457 1487703 2109160 29.5 5

Thrissur 839433 2134799 2974232 28.2 6

Kasargod 233700 970378 1204078 19.4 7

Kollam 465978 2119230 2585208 18.0 8

Kottayam 299808 1653838 1953646 15.3 9

Palakkad 356575 2260907 2617482 13.6 10

Pathanamthitta 123798 1110218 1234016 10.0 11

Malappuram 356170 3269301 3625471 9.8 12

Idukki 57593 1071628 1129221 5.1 13

Wayanad 29612 751007 780619 3.8 14

Sl no Name of local body Total population 1 Palakkad 111245 2 Shornur 35120 3 Ottappalam 37541 4 Chittur Thathamangalam 30407 1 Pudunagaram 13984

8.4DECADAL VARIATION IN URBANPOPULATION CONTENT VS URBAN AREA

The decadal variation in the urban content ofthe Palakkad District is described in table 8.6. Thefigures show that urban content of the population hasincreased from 12.70% to 13.60% over a period of 4decades. It is to be noted that the variation during thedecade is not uniform.




Fig 8.2.Extent of urban area of the DistrictTable : 8.6 Decadal variations in the UrbanPopulation of Palakkad District from 1971 to2001

The results show that the Urban population inPalakkad has increased by 77% in the last four decades,where as the District population has increased by 54%.The actual growth during 1981 to 1991 in the Urbanpopulation is now reached 59% and in the last decadethe Urban population has increased by 8.33% .

The urban population percentage in PalakkadDistrict is only 13.86% in 2001 where as the Indian andKerala urban population is almost double at 27.78 and

25.96 percent respectively.

The Census 1971, classified the urban areas ofPalakkad as Municipalities, Non-Municipalities andStandard Urban Areas. Palakkad and Chittur-Thathamangalam were classified as Municiplaities andNemmara, Shornur, Ottappalam, Pattambi, HemambikaNagar and Mannarkkad were classified as Non-Municipalities. The total Urban area in 1971 was 116.32Sq.KM.

In the Census 1981, Nenmara, Pattambi andMannarkkad lost their status as Non-Municipalities. Theclassification as Standard Urban Area was avoided by

introducing new term-Urban agglomeration.

Hemambika Nagar was renamed as Palghat RailwayColony and was clubbed with Palghat Municipality asUrban Out-growth to form Palghat U.A. The total Urban

area in 1981 was 94.60 Sq.KM.

In the Census 1991, Mannarkad is classified as

Municipality with an area bigger than Palakkad UA. A

new term- Census Town was introduced. Koduvayur-

CT & Puthunagaram-CT as part of Chittur-

Thathamangalam UA and Puthupariyaram-CT &

Marutharode-CT as part of Palakkad UA was includedin the new classification. The total Urban area in 1991was 221.85 Sq.KM.

In the Census 2001, the Urban status in the

previous Census continued in all urban areas except in

the caseof Mannarkkad. Mannarkkad was de-classifeid

as per new classification standards. The total Urban area

in 2001 is 158.47 Sq.KM. A detailed study of the changes in extent of

Urban areas in the last four decade will reveal that the

The Urban population in Palakkad hasincreased by 67% in the last four decades, where as theDistrict population has increased by 55%. An 81%growth during 1981 to 1991 is recorded in the urbanpopulation and in the last decade the urban populationhas decreased by 5%. In 1991 Mannarkkad Panchayatwas upgraded to municipal town status and thendegraded to the previous status. The change in urbanpopulation due to inclusion and exclusion ofMannarkkad Urban area is to be studied before arrivingat any conclusion.

Year Total Population Urban Population Percent of Urban

Population

1971 1,685,347 214,079 12.7

1981 2,044,399 206,669 10.1 1991 2,383,235 374,577 15.7 2001 2,617,482 356,575 13.6

Table : 8.7 Decadal variation in the UrbanPopulation of Palakkad District from 1971 to2001excluding the population of MannarkkadUrban area/Panchayat in 1991.

Year Total Population Urban

Population

Percentage of Urban

Population 1971 1,685,347 214,079 12.7 1981 2,044,399 206,669 10.1 1991 2,383,235 329,155 13.81 2001 2,617,482 356,575 13.62



5757

area have changed drastically due to the urbanclassification standards adopted from time to time bythe Census Authority.

A study of the variation of population in theUrban areas which was included in the last four censuscan give us an almost clear picture of Urban growth inthe District. Hence, we are considering Palakkad,Shornur, Ottappalam and Chittur-ThathamangalamMunicipalities for detailed study.

It can be summarized that urban populationhas increased in the selected extent of urban area. Thisindicates that there is an increase in population in theselected urban areas during 1981-91. But after that(1991-2001) the population growth has declined and anegative growth in Chittur-Thathamangalam. This is anindication of the withdrawal of population from the

existing urban areas.

8.5 GROWTH RATE OF URBAN POPULATION

The graph below (see fig8.3) shows the decadal

variation in the urban population of Palakkad District

(for selected areas only) from 1971 to 2001.The total

Urban population of the District has increased from

214079 to 356575 in a period of four decades. The

variation during this period was not uniform.

Eventhough the growth rate of urban population

decreased slightly from 1971 to 1981, there was a

sudden growth during 1981 to 1991. However this

further reduced (even below the overall population

growth rate) in 2001.

F ig.8.4 depicts the growth rate of urban

population against the growth rate of population over

the last three decades in the District. When the

population growth rate of the District has declined from

16.70% to 9.83%, the urban population growth rate

has decreased from 59.27% to 8.33% during the same

period (1981-2001) indicating a possibility of out

migration of population from the urban areas of the

District.

Fig 8.4: Population GrowthRate of urban area in Comparisonwith that of the District

Fig 8.3: Total urban population (selected areas) during variousdecades

Analysing the above graph, we shall come to a

conclusion that there was in-migration to the urban

area during 1981-91 for better job opportunities and

living environment. But, during 1991-01 either the

additional job opportunities created was just enough

for the normal growth of population living inside the

urban areas or the extra work population were unable

to settle in the urban area due to lack of residential

facilities inside the urban area. The growth of urban

population of the State also shows the pattern of

shrinking of urban population growth rate during 1981

to 2001.

Table 8.8 compares the growth rate of urban

population of the State and the District. This shows that

there is a huge decline in the growth rate of urban

population of Kerala; more or less the same pattern is

seen here in Palakkad also.




Table 8.8 Growth rate of urban population –Comparison with state

Figure fig 8.5 depicts the population growth

rate of various local bodies of Palakkad district. It is

clear from the picture that the growth rate of

population of the urban area of Palakkad district

(Palakkad Municipality, Shornur Municipality

Ottappalam Municipality and Chittur –

Thathamangalam Municipality) is less than that of the

surrounding Panchayats indicating out migration of

people from the urban areas.

Fig 8.5: Growth rate of population- Local body wise variation

LSGS of the northern and southern highland of

the district shows lowest growth rate of <3%. Higher

growth rate of population (>13%) is seen in surrounding

local bodies of existing urban local bodies and in Grama

Panchayats in the north western region of the district.

Table 8.9 – Urban settlements in differentperiod of time

8.6 URBAN SETTLEMENTS – FROM 1971 TO 2001

The variation in the number of urbansettlements from 1971 to 2001 is given in table 8.9.

The number of urban settlements of the districtdecreased during 1971 – 1981. During 1981- 1991 thisincreased and again decreased during 1991-2001.

Census year

Total number of Urban area

Municipal Towns

Non municipal

towns

Urban out growth

Census Town

Total area

(sq km)

1971 8 2 6 0 0

116.32

1981 5 4 0 1 0

94.60

1991 10 5 0 1 4

221.85

2001 9 4 0 4 1

144.24

8.7 FUTURE URBANIZATION PROFILE OF THE DISTRICT

The analysis of the occupational structure ofthe District shows that the production sectors- i.e., theagriculture and industrial sector, shows declining trendin the district. The only sector, which shows growth, isthe service sector. More than 80% of the total urbanpopulation depend on the service sector for theirlivelihood. It is observed that rural area of the districtis also slowly withdrawing from the primary sector andstarted depending more on the service sector. Due tothis shift in the occupational structure, some of therural areas will be having more than 75% of the maleworkers in the non-agricultural category in the nearfuture and hence will fall in the category of censusurban. Hence there may be significant increase in theurban population as well as in the extent of urbanareas of the District in the future, though the urbanpopulation content of the existing urban areas show adecreasing trend. In the following paragraphs, thefuture urban local bodies are delineated based on the

1981-91 1991-01 Kerala 60.89 7.69 Palakkad 59.27 8.33



5959

Criteria-1: Census urban area

A study on the existing occupational structurein various settlements of the District will put light onthose settlements likely to become census urbanshortly. The workers of each settlement which areclassified in to four fold classification as per census2001 are divided in to the following nine categoriesbased on the workers classification in the 1991 census.

1. Main Cultivators2. Main Agricultural Labourers3. Livestock, Forestry, Fishing, Hunting,

Plantation, Orchards, and allied activates4. Mining and Quarrying5. Manufacturing, Processing, Servicing and

repairs in Household industries6. Manufacturing, Processing, servicing and

repairs in other than household industries7. Trade and commerce8. Transport storage and Communications9. Others

The methodology adopted for the extrapolationto get the nine fold classification of workers in 2001based on the workers classification in census1991 isdescribed briefly here. The only two types of workersincluded in both 1991 and 2001 census are thecultivators and agricultural laborers. The remaining twotype’s workers in the 2001 census, House hold industrialworkers and other workers are totaled together andthis total is divided in to 7 classes of workers in thesame proportion as these 7 classes of workers as therein the 1991 census. Then the number of male workersin manufacturing, processing, servicing and repairs inHouse hold industries, manufacturing, processing,

servicing and repairs in other than house holdindustries, trade & commerce, t ransport, storage &communication and others are totaled to calculate thepercentage of male workers in non-agriculturalactivit ies in each of the local bodies of the District.The details are shown in Annexe-6. In order to avoid

three fold census classification as per census 2001, andthe result are further iterated with the factors likeimpact of proposed urban development projects, gradeof the local bodies and hierarchy of settlements.

the possibility of error, i.e. exclusion of some of theactual urban area, the extrapolation of the data onclassification of workers based on 1991 census, the localbodies with non agricultural male workers more than70% (instead of 75%) is taken for the study. Based on

this, there are 14 local bodies identified in the District,

which are satisfying the three-fold census classification

to be termed as urban. The list of which is given below.

1. Thrithala2. Pattambi3. Akathethara4. Marutharod5. Pudunagaram6. Anakkara7. Kappur8. Nagalassery9. Thirumittacode10. Pudussery11. Pirayiri12. Mannarkkad13. Nelliyampathy14. Puthupariyaram

Fig 8.6 shows the spatial distribution of urbancenters based on this criterion.

Fig 8.6 Urban centres based on Census Criteria




The classification of an area into urbandepending on 9 fold classifications of workers obtainedout of a mere extrapolation of the census 2001 databased on the previous decades data can’t be taken asvery accurate. Though it gives a near accurate pictureabout the trend of urbanization, some other factorslike the extent of physical and economic development,future urban development projects and existinghierarchy of settlements needs to be considered.Criteria 2: Grade of local bodies

The grading of local bodies was donecomparing their physical and economicaldevelopment. So, here in the absence of direct data toassess the physical and economic development, thegrade of Panchayat can be taken as a proxy indicator tomeasure the physical and economic development ofthe local body.

Special grade Panchayats of Palakkad Districtare listed below

1. Pattambi2. Akathethara3. Elappully4. Puthuppariyaram5. Pudusseri6. Kongad7. Parali8. Mannarkkad9. Agali10. Kozhinjampara11. Nalleppilly12. Pattanchery13. Koduvayur14. Kollengode15. Muthalamada16. Elavancherry17. Nemmara18. Alathur19. Wadakkanchery

Out of the 14 Panchayaths listed based on criteria

one, 5 are special grade Panchayats and Anakkara,

Kappur, Nagalassery,Thirumittacode, Nelliyampathy,Pirayiri, Thrithala, Pudunagaram and Marutharoad

Panchayats are not special grade Panchayats and areexcluded from the selected local bodies and the list oflocal bodies after the exclusion are: 1. Pattambi 2. Akathethara 3. Puthussery 4. Mannarkkad 5. Puthupariyaram

The fig 8.7 shows the distribution of urbancenters based on grade of local bodies and censuscriteria.

Before finalizing the future urban local bodiesof the District, the urban development Projects of the

District and their impact are also to be studied.

Fig 8.7 Urban centres based on grade of local bodiesCriteria: 3: Perspective in urban development

The major urban development projects

envisaged in the District as of now are mainly

1. Integrated railway coach factory at Kanjikode

2. Integrated Textile Park at Kanjikode

3. Information Technology Park at Kanjikode

4. Defence park at Kanjikode

5. Defence project of BEML Ltd at KanjikodAll these mega projects are proposed in

Pudussery Grama Panchayat which will help Kanjikode



6161

Fig 8.8 Urban centres based on 1,2 and 3 criteria

Criteria: 4: Hierarchy of settlements

The hierarchy of the above 5 local bodies in theoverall context of the District is also to be taken in toaccount before finalizing the local bodies with urbancharacter, because the hierarchy of local body is anindicator on the type and number of facilities in thelocal bodies.

Alathur is included in the list having the 2nd

order hierarchy with CFI 189.93 since Akathethara andPudupariyaram are adjacent Panchayaths to Palakkadmunicipality and are part of Palakkad urbanagglomeration, will in course of time become part ofthe palakkad municipality. Based on the study ofcensus urban criteria and hierarchy of settlements andtrend of present economic development Koduvayurand Cherplasery are included in the list.

The final list of the probable urban local bodiesis given below.

emerge as Kerala’s new investment destination. Thiswill come up in the Kanjikode –Pudussery –Walayarindustrial belt on the National Highway 47 stretch fromPalakkad town to Walayar which is on the KeralaTamilnadu border. Pudussery Panchayat is alreadyincluded in the list of probable future urban localbodies of the district (fig 8.8).

1. Pattambi2. Pudussery3. Mannarkkad4. Koduvayur5. Alathur6. Cherplasery

Clearly the above local bodies define the futureurban profile of the District (fig 8.9).

The likely future urban profile of the districtevolved is shown in fig 8.10

Fig 8.9 Urban centres based on all the four criteria includinghierarchy of settlements

Fig 8.10: Future urbanization profile – Palakkad District




8.8 URBAN PROFILE

The analysis for determining the future

urbanization profile shows 6 local bodies have

possibilities to attain urban character. All the 6 local

bodies listed as probable future urban local bodies

can’t be expected to attain the urban character in next

two decades (2011 and 2021), but only some of these

will attain urban character by the next two decade and

the remaining will attain the urban character in the

succeeding decades after that. The growth rate of

population can be taken as deciding criteria by how

fast a local body attains urban nature.

The pattern of growth rate of population

among the local bodies of the District as per census

2001 shows that the higher growth rate is concentrated

in LSG’s adjacent to Palakkad and Chittur-

Thathamangalam Municipalities and Mannarkkad.

Alathur on the southern half and Pattambi and

Cherplasery on the western half , have already attained

urban character and Mannarkkad on the Northern half

was in and out of the census classification and now

shows a fast trend towards urbanization.

Koduvayur adjacent to Chit tur-

Thathamangalam being a trade centre and due to its

connect ivity to Pol lachi in Tamilnadu Distr ict and

Pudunagaram may attain urban status within next 20

years. Pudussery, being the indust r ial capital of

Palakkad district has the potent ials to become an

industrial city and attain the urban status in the next

20 years. Careful and thoughtful proposals are to be

materialized in this area for the speedy urbanization.

In short 3 local bodies will attain the status of

urban local bodies in the next 10 years where as the

other 3 local bodies will attain the urban status within

the next 20 years. This is shown in Table 8.10.

Table 8.10: Changing urban profile of theDistrict

Census year

Total number of Urban

area

Municipal

Towns

Non municipal towns

Urban out

growth

Census Town

Total area (sq km)

1971 8 2 6 0 0

116.32

1981 5 4 0 1 0

94.60

1991 10 5 0 1 4

221.85

2001 9 4 0 4 1

144.24

2011 12 7 0 4 1

243.08

2021 15 10 0 4 1

315.29

8.9 INFERENCEThe level of urbanization of the State shows a

declining trend in general. Palakkad District shows

even a less level of urbanization when compared to

the State average. Also, the level of urbanization shows

a slight inclining trend within the District. The urban

areas of the district shows lower growth rate of

population whereas the rural areas surrounding the

urban areas show significantly higher growth rate

indicating possible out migration of people from the

urban areas to the surrounding rural settlements or

the migrants to the urban centres getting settled down

in the peripheral grama panchayats of urban centres

due to factors like availability of land etc.

The future urban profile of the district derived

through sequential analysis through four criteria viz.

Census urban, existing physical and economic

development, perspectives in urban development and

finally proposed hierarchy of settlements shows that

the LSGs of Alathur, Pattambi and mannarkkad are

likely to become urban within the next 10 years and

the LSGs of Pudussery, cherpulassery and koduvayur

are likely to become urban within the next 20 years.

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

CHAPTER 9 >>

chapter 8 urban profile - office of the chief town … the census 1981, nenmara, pattambi and...

Documents