JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY
DELHI
CENTRE FOR STUDIES OF REGIONAL
DEVELOPMENT (CSRD)
MA GEOGRAPHY (2023-25)
COURSE – RD 413
FIELD AND SURVEY METHODS (SOCIO-ECONOMY)
SUBMITTED TO : PROF. VINAY PRASAD
& VERGHESE KUNJAPPY
SUBMITTED BY –
NAME – ANIRUDH KUMAR
Reg no - 233510515455
1
INTRODUCTION
Rural-urban linkages form a critical axis in the socio-economic fabric of developing countries like
India, where villages often rely heavily on nearby urban centers for access to essential services such
as healthcare, education, banking, and transportation (Tacoli, 2003). This dependency is shaped by
spatial inequalities in infrastructure and opportunities, where rural areas, despite being home to a
significant proportion of the population, remain underserved in terms of basic amenities (Singh &
Fazal, 2020). Urban centers, in contrast, act as service hubs, offering better institutional support,
market access, and employment avenues, making them indispensable to rural livelihoods and
development trajectories.
This paper investigates the extent and nature of rural dependency on urban centers through a
comparative case study of Shimla—a well-developed urban hill town in Himachal Pradesh—and
1
Doodhwa village, located in the relatively remote Jhunjhunu district of Rajasthan. The study draws
on primary data collected from a total of 381 surveyed households across these locations. It examines
how residents from Doodhwa village frequently depend on urban hubs like Jhunjhunu town and Jaipur
for advanced healthcare, higher education, banking services, and non-agricultural employment
opportunities. While agriculture remains the primary occupation in the village, the lack of adequate
infrastructure and public services compels regular interaction with nearby urban centers.
In contrast, Shimla, with its comparatively robust infrastructure, demonstrates a lower degree of
service-based dependency, offering a useful point of comparison. The migration of youth from
Doodhwa to urban areas for education and jobs further highlights the socio-economic reliance of rural
populations on urban growth and access. By analyzing these contrasting geographies and service
frameworks, this study provides insight into how spatial and developmental disparities shape the
patterns and consequences of rural dependency on urban centers.
Understanding these dynamics is essential for developing integrated rural-urban policies that support
equitable access to services, reduce forced migration, and promote balanced regional development
(Rao & Tiwari, 2017).
STUDY AREA
In early March, during our field survey, we visited Shimla and Dudhwa, two villages located in
Rajasthan's Narlaul district. These rural settlements offer a fascinating glimpse into the region's
socio-economic landscape, shaped by traditional occupations and agricultural practices. It lies near the
border of Haryana and is positioned along the route connecting Narnaul and Singhana, which provides
moderate road connectivity. The village has basic infrastructural amenities such as schools, colleges,
and healthcare centers, and the primary occupation of its residents is agriculture. Shimla also has
historical relevance and an active local governance structure.
1
2
3
OBJECTIVES
1. What are the primary basic services that rural populations depend on urban centres for?
2. How does the level of infrastructure in the village affect this dependency?
3. What is the frequency and nature of rural-urban interactions in the case of Shimla and
Dudhwa village
LITERATURE REVIEW
Rural dependency on urban centers is a critical issue in the study of regional development and spatial
inequality. In developing countries like India, villages often lack essential services such as advanced
healthcare, higher education, banking facilities, and reliable transportation, compelling rural
populations to rely on nearby towns and cities. Tacoli (2003) argues that rural-urban linkages are not
merely about migration or market exchange, but about the daily survival strategies of rural households
that depend on urban areas for basic services and employment.
Singh and Fazal (2020) highlight that India’s rural regions continue to face chronic underinvestment
in infrastructure, despite policy commitments to rural development. Their study finds that limited
access to services in rural areas leads to frequent travel and economic dependency on nearby urban
centers. The situation is more pronounced in remote or semi-arid regions like Rajasthan, where
distances and terrain further exacerbate access issues. As a result, residents often travel long distances
for schooling, healthcare, and government services—activities that impact productivity and quality of
life.
Rao and Tiwari (2017) contend that this dependency perpetuates a cycle of underdevelopment, where
rural areas lose both labor and capital to cities. Youth migration is particularly concerning, as it leads
to the erosion of the rural labor force and a concentration of opportunity in urban areas. Deshingkar
and Grimm (2005) emphasize that migration, while offering individual mobility, contributes to rural
stagnation if not matched by local capacity building.
UN-Habitat (2016) proposes strengthening rural-urban linkages through integrated planning and
decentralization of services. Acknowledging spatial differences in development is crucial to creating
resilient rural communities that are not overly reliant on urban systems. Therefore, existing literature
emphasizes that while urban centers are vital, balanced development must prioritize local
empowerment and infrastructural investment in rural areas.
DATA SOURCE AND METHODOLOGY
To support this research, a detailed household survey was carried out in the villages of Shimla and
Dudhwa, located in the Khetri region of Rajasthan. The fieldwork was conducted in early March and
involved collecting primary data through structured interviews using standardized household
questionnaires. This method allowed researchers to obtain in-depth insights into various facets of rural
life. Because the data was collected directly from local residents, it is highly specific to the regional
context and reflects the real-life conditions of the study area.
In addition to gathering primary data, the study also drew upon secondary sources, including official
government documents, census statistics, and scholarly research. These sources were instrumental in
providing contextual information and supporting comparative evaluation. The combination of
firsthand data and existing literature created a more well-rounded understanding of the local
4
dynamics. This integrated approach not only improves the reliability of the findings but also ensures
that the analysis and recommendations are both evidence-based and contextually relevant.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
This highlights limited access to education in rural villages, compelling many students to seek
opportunities in urban centers. Additionally, while 31.4% have pursued education in the Arts
stream—often more accessible in rural schools—those aiming for further specialization or higher
studies must still rely on urban institutions. Only 8.9% of respondents have taken up Science, a stream
typically requiring better facilities and infrastructure, which are rarely available in villages. Streams
such as Commerce (1.1%), Engineering (0.7%), Medical (0.5%), and Management (0.2%) have
extremely low representation, reflecting the unavailability of such professional courses in rural
regions. This forces aspirants to migrate or travel to towns and cities where such education is offered.
The presence of early dropouts or those with no formal stream (7.1%) further emphasizes the
inadequacy of local educational support. Overall, the data illustrates a clear pattern of educational
underdevelopment in rural settings, reinforcing their socio-economic reliance on urban centers for
quality education, career advancement, and skill development.
The educational attainment data shows a clear rural dependency on urban centers for higher
education. While 17.9% of respondents are illiterate and about 45% have studied only up to Class 10,
access to senior secondary and higher education remains limited in villages. A combined 19.6% have
completed graduation or post-graduation—levels typically not available in rural
5
settings—highlighting the need to migrate or commute to urban areas. Additionally, 12% fall under
"Other," likely including vocational or technical courses offered mainly in cities. This reflects the
rural population’s strong reliance on urban centers for educational advancement and socio-economic
mobility.
The data on type of financial service highlights a significant reliance on urban-centered financial
institutions, reinforcing rural dependency on urban areas for essential banking services.
Out of the valid responses (892), 83.2% of respondents rely on Public Sector Banks (PSBs), which are
typically located in or near urban centers or larger market towns. This dominant dependence on PSBs
suggests that villagers often have to travel to urban or semi-urban areas to access formal banking
services such as savings, loans, and remittances, as banking infrastructure in rural regions remains
sparse.
Private banks account for 16.4%, further emphasizing the urban dependency, since such institutions
usually have limited rural outreach and are concentrated in cities. The minimal use of cooperative
banks (0.2%) and private lenders (0.1%)reflects a limited local or informal financial network in the
villages surveyed.
Strikingly, over half the sample (56.1%) did not report any financial service usage, which could
indicate either exclusion from the formal financial system or the inaccessibility of services in rural
settings. This lack of access often pushes residents toward urban centers for financial inclusion,
government subsidies, digital transactions, or credit facilities.
6
The data on economic challenges faced by respondents clearly highlights issues that are tightly linked
to rural dependency on urban centers.
The most significant challenge reported is unemployment, affecting 56.0% of respondents. This high
percentage reflects the lack of diverse and stable job opportunities within rural areas like Dudhwa,
pushing individuals to migrate or commute to urban centers such as Jhunjhunu or Jaipur for
employment. The rural economy’s limited scope, largely tied to agriculture, fails to provide
year-round income, increasing dependency on cities for jobs in services, construction, or industry.
Additionally, 17.9% identified a high cost of living as a major challenge. This is often a side effect of
rural-urban economic interaction: as rural populations depend more on urban markets for goods,
services, education, healthcare, and transport, their cost burden increases. Accessing urban services
often involves travel, accommodation, and service charges, contributing to financial strain.
Low wages (9.3%) and lack of financial support (6.6%) further reveal economic vulnerability. The
prevalence of low-income jobs in agriculture or informal labor means that even when employment
exists, it is often insufficient. With limited access to rural credit, subsidies, or financial services,
people again turn to urban institutions and networks, deepening urban dependency.
In sum, the majority of these economic challenges—especially unemployment, low wages, and high
cost of living—are rooted in the underdevelopment of rural economic infrastructure, compelling
individuals to rely heavily on urban centers for livelihood, financial stability, and essential services.
The data on entertainment expenses—covering cinema, sports events, music, and clubs—offers
further insight into rural dependency on urban centers, especially in terms of access to recreational
facilities.
A substantial 89.5% of respondents reported zero expenditure on entertainment. This overwhelming
figure suggests two possibilities: either there is a lack of entertainment infrastructure in rural areas
like Dudhwa and parts of Shimla, or the cost and inaccessibility of urban-based entertainment limit
rural participation. In either case, it highlights how urban areas monopolize access to organized leisure
and cultural experiences, reinforcing socio-cultural dependency alongside economic reliance.
7
Only 10.5% of respondents reported any spending on entertainment, with a small percentage (each
ranging between 0.5% and 2.3%) spending amounts from ₹150 up to ₹2000. This indicates that only a
minority—likely those with better economic means or mobility—are able to engage in such activities,
which are typically located in urban centers like Jhunjhunu or Jaipur.
The 43.4% missing data also suggests that entertainment may be a low priority or even an unfamiliar
concept in daily rural life, further showing the divide in lifestyle opportunities between rural and
urban settings.
The data on healthcare preferences during illness strongly reinforces the theme of rural dependency on
urban centers for essential services.
A combined 89.6% of respondents rely on government hospitals (58.7%) and private hospitals/clinics
(30.9%), which are typically located in urban or semi-urban areas. This clearly reflects that most
villagers cannot access adequate medical services within their immediate rural surroundings and must
travel to towns or cities like Jhunjhunu or Jaipur for treatment. These urban health facilities offer
better infrastructure, specialized doctors, and diagnostic tools, making them a necessary but less
accessible option for rural populations.
Only 3.6% use primary health centres (PHCs), and just 3.2% rely on rural practitioners or community
health centres, indicating the limited capacity or availability of these local rural health services. These
figures underscore a lack of trust or satisfaction in rural healthcare options, forcing villagers to depend
on urban alternatives—even at a higher cost and travel burden.
8
The data reveals that 21.8% of respondents lack access to maternal and child health in their area,
directly indicating reliance on urban centers for such critical healthcare needs. Even among the 75.5%
who report availability, many still travel to urban hospitals, as seen in prior health data, suggesting
that services in rural areas may be inadequate or underutilized. This reflects a clear urban dependency,
where rural residents depend on better-equipped urban healthcare facilities—particularly for maternal
and child health—due to gaps in infrastructure, availability, or trust in local services.
The chart shows that around 67% of women go to government hospitals and about 30% use private
hospitals for childbirth, while a very small fraction (~3%) rely on home deliveries. This strongly
reflects urban dependency, as both government and private hospitals with adequate maternal care
facilities are primarily located in urban centers. The low rate of home deliveries suggests a
preference—or necessity—for institutional births, but since such institutions are more prevalent in
towns or cities, rural households are heavily reliant on urban healthcare infrastructure for safe
childbirth services. This urban dependency underscores the limited access or trust in rural healthcare
options for maternal care.
9
The pie chart titled "Challenges: Low Market Price" reveals that approximately 60% of respondents
indicated "Yes," acknowledging that low market price is a significant challenge. Around 36%
responded "No," while 4% did not reply. This data highlights that a majority of rural respondents are
impacted by unstable or inadequate pricing for their agricultural produce.
In the context of Shimla village in Jhunjhunu district, this finding aligns with ground realities.
Farmers in Shimla largely depend on the nearby Jhunjhunu town for selling their crops, including
mustard, bajra, and wheat. However, due to a lack of cold storage facilities, limited transportation, and
heavy reliance on middlemen, they often have to sell their produce immediately after harvest, even
when market prices are unfavorable. The absence of collective bargaining power or real-time price
information further worsens their situation, leading to financial uncertainty.
Similarly, in Dudhwa village, located near Narnaul town on the Rajasthan-Haryana border, farmers
face comparable challenges. Despite their proximity to an urban center, smallholders struggle with
low farm-gate prices due to poor access to formal markets and the dominance of local traders.
Inadequate infrastructure and logistical support force them to depend on middlemen, resulting in low
income from their produce. The pie chart’s finding that a significant proportion of respondents
experience low market price as a challenge accurately reflects the lived realities in both Shimla and
Dudhwa villages, where urban dependency does not necessarily translate into better market access or
fair pricing.
10
The bar graph titled "Challenges: Storage Problems" shows that approximately 67% of respondents
reported no storage-related issues, while around 29% indicated that they do face such challenges. A
small percentage, about 4%, did not respond, and one anomalous value ("22") appears to be either a
data error or an outlier category. At first glance, the data suggests that storage is not a widespread
concern among the majority of respondents. However, when analyzed in the context of urban
dependency in villages like Shimla (Jhunjhunu district) and Dudhwa (near Narnaul town), a more
nuanced picture emerges.
In Shimla village, farmers rely on Jhunjhunu town for accessing markets, selling produce, and
acquiring inputs. While many farmers do not identify storage as a direct challenge, this is often
because they are forced to sell their crops immediately after harvest due to the lack of local storage
facilities. Without access to cold storage or collective warehouses, especially for perishable goods,
they have little choice but to accept prevailing market rates, even when prices are low. Therefore, the
high percentage of “No” responses may reflect market compulsion rather than the actual availability
of proper storage infrastructure.
Similarly, in Dudhwa village, close to Narnaul, access to urban markets does not necessarily translate
into better storage outcomes. While better-connected farmers might sell directly or use private storage
facilities, small and marginal farmers often face significant constraints. For them, the absence of
proper on-farm or public storage systems increases post-harvest losses or forces early, low-price sales.
This reality is reflected in the 29% who acknowledged facing storage problems.
Thus, the bar graph highlights that although a majority claim not to face storage issues, this may mask
deeper vulnerabilities. In both Shimla and Dudhwa villages, urban dependency without supportive
infrastructure like storage facilities results in uneven benefits, where some farmers manage to cope
while others continue to struggle with post-harvest losses and price pressures.
11
The bar graph titled "Quantity Sold" shows that most farmers are selling only small quantities of their
produce, with the highest number selling around 50 units. As the quantity increases, the number of
farmers selling those larger amounts becomes noticeably lower. This reflects the situation in villages
like Shimla (Jhunjhunu) and Dudhwa (near Narnaul), where farmers depend on nearby towns for
selling their crops.
Due to the lack of proper storage and the immediate need for cash, many small farmers are unable to
hold onto their produce and are forced to sell in small amounts right after harvesting. While they are
close to urban markets, they don’t always have the means to make the most of them. Only those
farmers who have better access to resources like transportation and storage are able to sell larger
quantities.
This highlights that proximity to cities alone doesn't ensure better outcomes for farmers. Without the
necessary infrastructure and support, such as storage facilities and fair market access, most farmers
would continue to sell in small volumes and earn limited income.
CONCLUSION
This study demonstrates the crucial role that urban centers play in shaping the socio-economic
realities of rural populations, particularly in developing nations like India. By comparing Shimla and
Dudhwa villages, it is evident that rural areas, even though close to urban centers, face substantial
challenges due to inadequate infrastructure and services. The rural-urban connections in both villages
show a heavy reliance on urban hubs for vital services such as education, healthcare, banking, and
employment opportunities.
The findings reveal a clear educational gap in rural areas, with many students needing to migrate to
urban centers for higher education and specialized programs. Similarly, economic dependence on
urban areas is evident, as rural residents rely on cities for employment, banking, and financial services
12
due to the scarcity of these services in rural settings. Healthcare issues, such as the lack of sufficient
local facilities, also compel rural populations to seek treatment in urban centers, particularly for
specialized healthcare and maternal services.
Agriculture, while still the main occupation, faces considerable challenges because of poor
infrastructure, limited access to markets, and low prices for agricultural produce. These factors force
farmers to depend on urban markets, where they face unfavorable pricing and exploitation by
middlemen.
In conclusion, the study stresses the importance of integrated rural-urban policies that improve
infrastructure and services in rural areas while empowering local communities to reduce their
dependency on urban centers. Enhancing investments in education, healthcare, financial systems, and
agricultural infrastructure will help create more self-reliant rural communities. Strengthening
rural-urban links through decentralized planning and regional development will promote more
balanced growth, offering equal opportunities and reducing the need for forced migration between
rural and urban areas.
References
● Deshingkar, P., & Grimm, S. (2005). Internal migration and development: A global
perspective. IOM.
● Rao, P. S., & Tiwari, M. (2017). Rural-urban linkages and their impact on regional
development. Rural Development Journal, 28(4), 101-115.
● Singh, S., & Fazal, S. (2020). Spatial inequalities in rural India: The urbanization paradox.
Economic and Political Weekly, 55(18), 45-52.
● Tacoli, C. (2003). Rural-urban linkages and livelihood diversification: An overview of the
debate. In Rural-Urban Linkages and Policy Strategies (pp. 5-22). UN-Habitat.
● UN-Habitat. (2016). Urbanization and rural-urban linkages: A global overview. United
Nations Human Settlements Programme.
