Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
192.168.6.56/handle/123456789/48918Full metadata record
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | Kenneth Lynch | - |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2019-02-28T06:51:32Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2019-02-28T06:51:32Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2005 | - |
| dc.identifier.isbn | 0-203-64627-4 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://10.6.20.12:80/handle/123456789/48918 | - |
| dc.description | This book sets out to reunite the urban and the rural areas in the study of development across the developing world. Most approaches in development studies – both theoretical and empirical – are based on the premise that there is a clear distinction between the urban and the rural. However, this distinction has been challenged. There is research on ‘rural’ activities in ‘urban’ spaces, urban activities in rural spaces, and on the changing interface between urban and rural spaces and on the increasing interdependence between these two realms. There is therefore a need to bring these disparate themes together in one volume. Some of the earliest works on the interaction between city and country in the developing world focused on modernisation diffusion (Gould, 1969; Rostow, 1960). These were developed into spatial models that may be pessimistic, for example Friedman’s (1966) core–periphery model, or optimistic, for example Vance’s (1970) mercantile model. These influential theories are primarily focused on settlement hierarchies rather than on the interaction between town and country, suggesting an urban focus, although they are used to theorise about rural–urban interaction. Although not the originator of this concept, Lipton (1977) made a considerable impact on development studies later, presenting a thesis on the ways in which urban-based industrialisation policies can have an adverse impact on the development of rural areas. Subsequently, a number of studies looked into Lipton’s ideas of urban bias, some agreeing that urban bias undermined rural development, some arguing that the distinction between urban and rural areas was rather crude and did not reflect the complex reality. More recently, however, the theory of the distinction between urban and rural development has been questioned in the context of a number of disparate themes. This questioning has been particularly strong in the field of demography and migration studies. The impact of the economic crises of the 1980s has also prompted research on the differentials between cities and rural areas. Continued urban growth has prompted concerns about the environmental impacts on the countryside. In consequence regional development initiatives have been based on small towns, and analyses have emphasised the importance of maximising rural–urban interaction for development. Disparate critiques have begun to coalesce into a stronger body of research in recent years. | - |
| dc.language | en | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.publisher | Routledge | en_US |
| dc.subject | Developing World | en_US |
| dc.title | Rural Urban Interaction in the Developing World | en_US |
| dc.type | Book | en_US |
| Appears in Collections: | Rural Development Studies | |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.