School of Environment, Resources and Development, (SERD) | ||
ED77.05 : Rural Urban Relations 3(3-0) | ||
Course objectives: | ||
The main objective of this course is to provide the conceptual and theoretical foundations of rural-urban relations in the context of regional development with case studies from Asian countries. This course integrates between the rural and urban planners/professionals to identify appropriate policy measures and programs in bringing balanced development. |
||
Learning Outcomes: | ||
The student on completion of this course would be able to:
|
||
Pre-requisite(s): | ||
None |
||
Course Outline: | ||
|
||
Laboratory Sessions: | ||
None |
||
Learning Resources: | ||
Textbook: | ||
No designated textbooks, compendium of reading materials, class notes and handouts will be provided.
|
||
Reference Books: | ||
1. E. A. J. Johnson: The Organization of Space in Developing Countries, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1970.
2. M. Lipton: Why Poor People Stay Poor (A Study of Urban Bias in World Development), Temple Smith, 1977.
3. Fu-Chen Lo, (ed.): Rural-Urban Relation and Regional Development, Maruzen Asia, 1981. H. Carter: An Introduction to Urban Historical Geography, E. Arnold 1983.
4. D. A. Rondinelli: Secondary Cities in Developing Countries (Policies for Diffusing Urbanization), Sage Publication, 1983.
5. Charles Gore: Regions in Question, Methuen 1984.
6. J. Harris and M. Moore: Development and the Rural-Urban Divide, Frank Cass, 1984.
7. IFAD, Assessment of Rural Poverty (Asia and the Pacific), 2002.
8. Mei Zhang, China’s Poor Regions (Rural urban migration, poverty, economic reform, and urbanization), Routledge, 2003.
9. Arianne M. Gaetano and Tamara Jacka, On the Move (Women and Rural-to-Urban Migration in Contemporary China), Columbia University Press, New York, 2004
10. Kenneth Lynch, Rural-Urban Interaction in the Developing World, Routledge, 2005
11. Jytte Agergaard, Niels Fold and Katherive V. Gough, Rural-Urban Dynamics (Livelihoods, mobility, and markets in Africa and Asian frontiers), Routledge, 2010.
12. Tim Bunnell, D. Parthasarathy, and Eric C. Thompson (Editors), Cleavage, Connection and Conflict in Rural, Urban and Contemporary Asia, ARI , Springer Asia Series 3, Springer 2013.
|
||
Journals and Magazines: | ||
1. The Journal of Development Studies, Taylor and Francis
2. APO Productivity Journal, Asian Productivity Organization
3. Asian Development Review, ADB
4. The International Labor Review (International Development Planning Review), ILO
5. International Development Planning Review, Liverpool University Press
6. Development Policy Review, Wiley
7. Development and Change, Blackwell
|
||
Time Distribution and Study Load: | ||
Week 1 to 3: Lecture and discussion on the Components I and II and a short assignment
Week 4 to 6: Lecture and discussion on the Components III and IV and journal article review assignment
Week 7 to 9: Lecture and discussion on the Components V and VI with an assignment on rural-urban disparity and policy related country specific issues
Week 10 to 12: Lecture and discussion on the Components VII and VIII
Week 13 to 15: Lecture and discussion on the Components IX and X and preparation of case study by students
|
||
Teaching and Learning Methods: | ||
Lectures with scope for interactive process, searching and reviewing of journal articles relevant to the course, short and semester paper assignments, and presentations of Asian country cases on issues related to different modules of the course. Students need to work on two or three short assignments, and one semester paper on an identified issue of the student’s country using available secondary data and literature.
|
||
Evaluation Scheme: | ||
The final grade will be computed according to the following components: Midsem Examination (30%), Assignments and Presentations (40%) and Final Examination (30%). Closed-book examinations are given both in the midsem and final examinations.
A relative grading scale such as:
A (more than 85%): Demonstrates clear understanding, analytical and critical thinking, and reflection in assignments,
B+ (75-85%): Good understanding and presentation, fulfils the assignment requirements
B (65-75%): Fair understanding and performance in all components,
C+ (55-65%): Average understanding,
C (45-55%): Below average understanding, and
D: Deficient in all above |
||
Instructor(s): | ||
|
||