Urbanization, the process by which an increasing proportion of a population resides in urban areas, is a phenomenon that shapes societies and landscapes worldwide. Understanding the classification of urbanization is pivotal in comprehending its diverse impacts on economies, cultures, and environments. Urbanization can be categorized based on various factors such as population density, economic activities, spatial organization, and socio-cultural characteristics. By classifying urbanization, scholars and policymakers can better grasp the complex dynamics driving urban growth and its implications for sustainable development, resource management, and social equity. In this discourse, we explore the diverse classifications of urbanization and their significance in elucidating the multifaceted nature of urban transitions.
- The functional classification of towns provides insights into the town’s significance concerning occupation, industrial specialization, economic activities, religious practices, social dynamics, and political roles, among other factors.
- The configuration and operations of any region are contingent upon the town’s function, developmental history, and age.
- Various towns and cities garner recognition for their distinctive activities, products, or services, stemming from their specialisation in particular functions, while others cater to a diverse array of purposes.
- The classification of towns can be based on factors such as population size, functional specialisation, age, and developmental stage.
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF URBAN TOWN
Scholars worldwide have proposed various classifications of towns based on their functions, and one notable classification comes from M. Aurousseau, who introduced a system in 1921.
Aurousseau’s classification divides towns into six main categories, each containing multiple subtypes:
- Administrative
- Defense
- Cultural
- Production-towns
- Communication
- Recreation
While Aurousseau’s classification is relatively straightforward, it does face criticism for potential overgeneralization. One of the challenges is the intermingling of functional and locational qualities within the proposed classes. For instance, under the “communication” class, the function of ‘transfer of goods’ is included.
Despite these criticisms, Aurousseau’s classification represents a significant advancement in urban studies and provides a foundational framework for more advanced techniques. It serves as a comprehensive structure for categorising urban centres, incorporating various polygonal functional urban activities. This classification system has laid the groundwork for further refinement and development in the understanding of urban functions and their categorization.
Harris’s Classification:
Harris, in his study “A Functional Classification of Cities in the United States (1943),” sought to quantitatively identify dominant functions within the multifunctional character of cities.
Analysing data from the 1930 Census and studying 984 towns with a population of more than 10,000 in the United States, he established a scale of reference using two sets of data: employment and occupational figures reduced to percentages.
According to Harris, there are nine main categories of towns: manufacturing, retailing, diversified, wholesaling, transportation, mining, educational, resort or retirement, and others. However, his classification has limitations. It is not universally applicable, being restricted to metropolitan cities as functional units. Additionally, some decisions, such as excluding workers in telephone and telegraph services from the ‘Transport and Communications’ class, are subjective and personal.
Howard Nelson’s Classification:
Addressing the limitations of previous classifications, Howard Nelson introduced a more objective approach in his study, “A Service Classification of American Cities,” published in 1955. His method was based on major industrial groups listed in the 1950 Census of Population for standard metropolitan areas.
Nelson classified towns into nine groups: manufacturing, retail, professional services, wholesale, personal service, public administration, transportation and communication, finance, insurance, real estate, and mining. He omitted minor divisions like agriculture and construction. To address the problem of city specialisation and the degree of specialisation above the average, he assigned varying degrees of margin to different size classes.
Nelson observed a clear correlation between the percentages of people employed in various activities and the size of the city. He used statistical techniques, particularly the Standard Deviation (SD), to determine when a city becomes specialised. For example, a city classified as Pf 2F indicates that it employs a workforce between 22.87% to 28.76% in professional services and between 4.44 to 5.69% in finance, insurance, and real estate.
FAQs – Functional Classification of Towns:
1. What is the functional classification of towns?
– The functional classification of towns involves categorising them based on their roles in terms of occupation, industrial specialisation, economic activities, religion, social dynamics, and political functions.
2. Why is the functional classification of towns important?
– This classification provides insights into the significance of towns, considering factors such as their function, developmental history, and age. It helps understand the diversity of towns and their roles in regional dynamics.
3. What are the bases for the classification of towns?
– Towns can be classified based on factors such as population size, functional specialisation, age, and developmental stage. These criteria help in organising and studying urban areas systematically.
4. Who proposed a notable functional classification system for towns in 1921?
– M. Aurousseau introduced a classification system in 1921, dividing towns into six main categories: Administrative, Defense, Cultural, Production-towns, Communication, and Recreation.
5. What are the criticisms of Rousseau’s classification?
– Aurousseau’s classification faces criticism for potential overgeneralization and the intermingling of functional and locational qualities within proposed classes.
6. What did Harris aim to achieve with his functional classification of cities in the United States?
– Harris aimed to quantitatively identify dominant functions within cities by analysing data from the 1930 Census, establishing a scale of reference, and categorising towns based on employment and occupational figures.
7. How many main categories of towns did Harris identify in his classification?
– Harris identified nine main categories of towns, including manufacturing, retailing, diversified, wholesaling, transportation, mining, educational, resort or retirement, and others.
In case you still have your doubts, contact us on 9811333901.
For UPSC Prelims Resources, Click here
For Daily Updates and Study Material:
Join our Telegram Channel – Edukemy for IAS
- 1. Learn through Videos – here
- 2. Be Exam Ready by Practicing Daily MCQs – here
- 3. Daily Newsletter – Get all your Current Affairs Covered – here
- 4. Mains Answer Writing Practice – here
