Moving to the city
- The gongs of Behmai: 35 years on, will justice be served?
- Mann Ki Baat: Start-up India to crop insurance, here's all that Modi said
- J-K crisis: Mehbooba to chair PDP meet, discuss govt formation
- MCD strike: Kejriwal supports demands of protesting employees
- Fifth Column: Hope PM Modi has realised that India is not Gujarat
In 1950, with 12-14 per cent of the total population in cities, India and China were overwhelmingly rural and equally urban. In 1990, too, at 25-26 per cent of the total, the urban proportions were similar. By 2011, however, a dramatic gap had appeared. At the end of 2011, the Chinese government said, China was 51 per cent urban, whereas that figure for India was only 32 per cent. Urban China has stolen a big march over urban India in the last two decades.
Scholars have always been sceptical about official Chinese statistics. It is also unclear how "urban" is defined in China. During my recent visit, I, for example, could not get a clear answer from Chinese experts about the definition of the urban. Urban is what the Chinese government calls urban, it seems.
But however one may cut the statistical cloth, driving along China's industrialised eastern coast tells a clear tale. Not even the most urbanised states of India look comparable: not Tamil Nadu, not Gujarat, not Maharashtra. The partial exception is greater Delhi. Pictures and accounts from the Chinese interior also do not look, or sound, as rural as those from India's least urbanised states. China today is undoubtedly much more urbanised than India.
Why is that so? And who has paid for China's urban transformation? While firmer answers must await careful scrutiny, we can begin to generate some early ideas for reflection and debate.
The first question, some might say, is straightforward. As my seminar interlocutors in Beijing and Guangzhou argued, China's per capita income, compared to India's today, is roughly three times as high. At higher levels of income, societies tend to be more urban (and also generally less poor).
But this argument begs an important query. Is China more urban because it is richer, or is China richer because it has pursued urbanisation more vigorously? What is the cause? What is the effect?
- The problem in Arunachal is as much about politics as about institutional norms
- The public university is becoming insecure, narrow-minded and conservative
- Building on the Jan Dhan framework, India should move from price to income support
- Haryana panchayat poll outcome does not reflect the state’s social composition
- India’s education system is terribly out of step with the times
- China is not India’s sibling, nor is China India’s nemesis