Download - MALAPPURAM - Department of Town & Country Planning

DISTRICT URBANISATION REPORT

MALAPPURAM

DEPARTMENT OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING - GOVERNMENT OF KERALA

January 2011

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

PREFACE >>

PREFACE

Planning is a prerequisite for effective development. Development becomes comprehensive whengrowth centres are identified considering physical, social and economic variables of an area in an integratedmanner. This indicates that planning of villages and towns are to be complementary. Second AdministrativeReforms Commission (ARC) while interpreting the article 243 ZD of the Constitution of India states asfollows. “This, in other words, means that the development needs of the rural and urban areas should bedealt with in an integrated manner and, therefore, the district plan, which is a plan for a large areaconsisting of villages and towns, should take into account such factors as ‘spatial planning’, sharing of‘physical and natural resources’, integrated development of infrastructure’ and ‘environmentalconservation’. All these are important, because the relationship between villages and towns iscomplementary. One needs the other. Many functions that the towns perform as seats of industry, tradeand business and as providers of various services, including higher education, specialized health careservices, communication etc have an impact on the development and welfare of rural people. Similarly,the orderly growth of the urban centre is dependent on the kind of organic linkage it establishes with itsrural hinterland”. Therefore a move of harmonizing urban and rural centres of an area can be said as amove of planned urbanisation of the area.

In this context, it is relevant to mention the 74th Amendment Act of the Constitution of India, whichmandated the District Planning Committee to prepare a draft development plan for the district. As perArticle 243 ZD of the Constitution, the District Planning Committee (DPC) shall consolidate Panchayat/Municipality Plans in the district and prepare draft development plan for the district as a whole. TheConstitution also specifies that while preparing draft development plan due regard shall be given tomatters of common interest between panchayats and municipalities including spatial planning, sharing ofwater and other physical and natural resources, the integrated development of infrastructure andenvironmental conservation. In this respect, the district of Kollam has conducted an important experimentof preparation of an Integrated District Development Plan (IDDP) for the district. Through preparation ofIDDP, the District Planning Committee of Kollam has become the first ever DPC in the country to own aDistrict Development Plan as envisaged by the Constitution. This path-breaking venture has become amodel in participatory district planning in a spatial platform. The Plan was released during the internationalconference on district planning held at Kollam in August 2009. The Plan is now sanctioned by Governmentof Kerala. As per G.O (Rt) 354/04/LSGD dated 01.02.07, the State Government have extended the project tothe remaining districts in the state and the districts of Alappuzha, Thrissur, Idukki, Palakkad and Wayanadwere selected for extending the project in the first phase. However, even in these districts, preparation ofIDDP is yet to be completed.

Preparation of such a plan will surely need decisions and commitment at various levels due to themultiplicity of agencies involved and the vast spectrum of aspects to be addressed. However, delay inplanning shall not affect development. Hence a step by step approach may be adopted in planning.Therefore, the Department of Town and Country Planning evolved a sequence of plan preparation atdistrict level, involving District Urbanisation Report (DUR), District Spatial Plan (DSP) and Integrated DistrictDevelopment Plan (IDDP).

The District Urbanisation Report defines the future spatial structure of a district, which is formulatedby integrating hierarchy and activity pattern of urban and rural settlements and the connectivity betweenthem. The spatial structure of a district will act as a frame for the orderly development of urban centresand their rural hinterland subsequently leading to a planned urbanisation.

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

<< BACK

admin

Text Box

NEXT >>

The District Spatial Plan is a synergistic form of the District Urbanisation Report, since as a plan it iscongruent to a single unified physical design for the district through setting development goals and objectivesand formulating the development concept of the district. DSP will frame the general policies and strategies andstreamline directions of development of the district. The Development Directives of DSP is carved in the spatialplatform through the synthesis of findings of the analysis over the spatial structure based on secondary sourcesof data. But it lacks the resource studies as co-ordination of various agencies remain as an uphill task.

The Integrated District Development Plan can be termed as the highest echelon of this series and manifestall features of the draft district development plan as envisaged in Article 243ZD of the Constitution of India.Democratisation of planning and translation of sectoral policies into spatial plans are the paramount qualities ofIDDP as against DSP. IDDP comprises of two components; a Perspective Plan for 15-20 years and an Execution Planfor 5 years.

As said earlier, IDDP for Kollam District is already prepared under the leadership of the District PlanningCommittee, Kollam with the involvement of all the Local Governments in the district and Special TechnicalAdvisory Committee for IDDP. The Department of Town and Country Planning gave technical support for Planpreparation besides coordinating the entire process in the role of nodal agency.

Now, the Department has prepared District Spatial Plans for the districts of Thrissur and Palakkad andDistrict Urbanisation Reports for the districts of Thiruvananthapuram, Pathanamthitta, Alappuzha, Kottayam,Ernakulam, Idukki, Malappuram, Kozhikkode, Wayanad, Kannur and Kasaragod. The District Urbanisation Reportfor Malappuram is one among the series.

I take this opportunity to appreciate the officials of the Malappuram District Office of the Department,especially by Sri.V.K.Mohandas, Town Planner and Smt.Isha. P.A, Deputy Town Planner in the preparation of thisdocument. The State Project Cell for LDP-IDDP-SPP played anchor role in this regard, right from conceptualisationto shaping the end product. The toolkits and customised computer applications developed by the State ProjectCell has enabled the district offices to accomplish the task in a time bound manner. I also appreciate the consistentefforts of Sri. Jacob Easow, Senior Town Planner, Smt.Ushakumari.P.R, Town Planner, Sri. Baiju.K, Deputy TownPlanner and other officials of the State Project Cell. I also appreciate the officials of the circle headed bySri.G.Mohanan, Senior Town Planner for their efforts in vetting and finalising the District Urbanisation Report forMalappuram.

This is a first step on the ladder leading to the draft development plan for the district as laid down in theConstitution. It is hoped that the district of Malappuram will further extend the District Urbanisation Report intoIntegrated District Development Plan for the district.

Certainly, the District Urbanisation Report for Malappuram will provide a framework for development aswell as future planning of the district.

Thiruvananthapuram Eapen Varughese

11- 02-2011 Chief Town Planner

admin

Text Box

<< BACK

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

NEXT >>

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The District Urbanisation Report, Malappuram district is prepared as part of the State Perspective Plan forKerala. In this connection, the level of urbanisation in the district, the functional character and hierarchy ofsettlements etc are studied in detail and the probable future urban profile is derived. The future spatial strutureof the district is formulated through integrating hierarchy and activity pattern of settlements in the district andthe connectivity between them. In other words, the function and hierarchy of various settlements and therequired connectivity between settlements within the district is determined through deriving the spatial struture.It is hoped that the District Urbanisation Report will pave way for the planned development of the district byrendering the broad frame work for Planning and Development. The methodology for the study has been evolvedthrough a number of discussions and workshops and the same methodology is adopted for all districts in thestate for compatibility of results for comparison.

We have heavily relied on statistical data from various development departments. Their readiness toshare the data is gratefully acknowledged. Sri. Eapen Varughese, the Chief Town Planner and Sri. G. Mohanan,Senior Town Planner gave necessary directions. The guidance and inspiration given by Sri. Jacob Easow, SeniorTown Planner, Smt. Ushakumari P.R, Town Planner and Sri. Baiju.K, Deputy Town Planner of the State Project Cellis gratefully acknowledged without which this work would not have been possible. The other staff of the StateProject Cell also have been highly helpful in giving various inputs for the study.

Sri. K.M. Gopakumar and Sri. V.K. Mohandas contributed to the work as District Town Planners during thecurrency of this project. The assistance offered by the statistical wing and Smt. Jamseera. C.P, Planning Assistantis remarkable. The efforts put in by Sri. Saheer Poovanthodi, Town Planning Surveyor in the preparation of thereport needs special mention. All the staff of the District Town & Country Planning Office need to be speciallyacknowledged for their keen participation in various stages without which this work would not have beencompleted in the present form and time frame.

Malappuram Isha. P.A.10-2-2011 Deputy Town Planner in charge of Town Planner

Town Planning Office, Malappuram,

admin

Text Box

<< BACK

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

NEXT >>

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

District Urbanisation Report - Malappuram CONTENTS

Department of Town & Country Planning, KeralaDepartment of Town & Country Planning, Kerala

iviv

CONTENTS

Chapter 1 Profile of the District1.1 Administrative Divisions ................................................................................................... 11.1.1 Existing Functional Order of Settlements .......................................................................... 21.2 Area and Population .......................................................................................................... 41.3 Physiography .................................................................................................................... 41.4 Physical Features .............................................................................................................. 41.5 Socio-Economic Aspects .................................................................................................... 61.6 Inference .......................................................................................................................... 8

Chapter 2 History and Regional Linkages2.1 Historical Background ....................................................................................................... 92.2 Regional Linkages2.2.1 Regional Setting ................................................................................................................ 92.2.2 Connectivity .................................................................................................................... 102.3 Inference ........................................................................................................................ 10

Chapter 3 Population3.1 Population Size ................................................................................................................ 113.2 Growth of Population ...................................................................................................... 113.3 Population Density .......................................................................................................... 113.4 Sex Ratio ......................................................................................................................... 123.5 Population Concentration Pattern ................................................................................... 123.6 Migration Details ............................................................................................................ 133.7 Population Projection (Trend Based) ............................................................................... 133.7.1 Inventory of Methods of Population Projection ................................................................ 133.7.2 Population Projection of Malappuram District ................................................................. 153.8 Inference ........................................................................................................................ 15

Chapter 4 Occupational Structure4.1 Work Force of the District ............................................................................................... 174.2 Occupational Structure ................................................................................................... 184.3 Occupational Structure – Variation in Urban and Rural Areas ........................................... 194.4 Occupational Structure – Estimation of Nine fold Classification of 2001 ......................... 204.5 Spatial Distribution of the Major Classes of Workers ....................................................... 214.6 Activity Pattern Based on Occupational Structure ........................................................... 234.7 Occupational Structure – Temporal Variation .................................................................. 264.8 Inference ........................................................................................................................ 27

Chapter 5 Land Use5.1 Land Use Pattern of Kerala State ..................................................................................... 295.2 Land Use Break up of the District .................................................................................... 295.3 Regional Land Use Study ................................................................................................. 315.4 Concentration Pattern of Land Use ................................................................................. 34

admin

Text Box

<< BACK

CONTENTS District Urbanisation Report -Malappuam


vv

5.4.1 Agricultural Land Use ...................................................................................................... 345.4.2 Other Built Up Land Use ................................................................................................. 355.4.3 Forest Land Use .............................................................................................................. 365.4.4 Residential Land Use ...................................................................................................... 375.4.5 Residential / Agriculture Mixed Land Use ....................................................................... 385.4.6 Water Bodies .................................................................................................................. 385.4.7 Plantations ...................................................................................................................... 385.4.8 Marshy Land / Kole Land ................................................................................................. 395.4.9 Other Land Use ............................................................................................................... 395.5 Activity Zones Based on Land Use Concentration Pattern ............................................... 395.6 Inference ........................................................................................................................ 42

Chapter 6 Functional Character of Settlements6.1 Character of Settlements ................................................................................................ 436.2 Inference ........................................................................................................................ 44

Chapter 7 Hierarchy of Settlements7.1 Existing Hierarchy of Settlements ................................................................................... 457.2 Suggested Hierarchy of Settlements7.2.1 Suggested Hierarchy Of Settlements-Methodology Adopted ........................................... 467.2.2 Suggested Hierarchy Of Settlements-Procedure Adopted ................................................ 477.3 Inference ........................................................................................................................ 50

Chapter 8 Urban Profile8.1 Trend of Urbanization – Kerala ........................................................................................ 518.2 Urban Areas in the District .............................................................................................. 528.3 Urban Population Content (Existing) ............................................................................... 528.4 Growth Rate of Urban Population .................................................................................... 528.5 Urban Settlements from 1971-2001................................................................................. 538.6 Future Urbanization Profile of the District ....................................................................... 548.7 Urban Vision 2021 .......................................................................................................... 588.8 Inference ........................................................................................................................ 58

Chapter 9 Activity Pattern9.1 Description of Land Use Concentration ........................................................................... 599.2 Description of Future Urban Profile ................................................................................. 599.3 Description of Functional Classification .......................................................................... 599.4 Determination of Activity Pattern .................................................................................... 599.5 Inference ........................................................................................................................ 61

Chapter 10 Nodes10.1 Nodes ............................................................................................................................. 6310.2 Suggested Hierarchy of Nodes ........................................................................................ 6510.3 Inference ........................................................................................................................ 66



Chapter 11 Connectivity11.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 6711.2 Road Network ................................................................................................................. 6711.3 Rail Network ................................................................................................................... 6711.4 Water Transport .............................................................................................................. 6711.5 Air Transport ................................................................................................................... 6811.6 Future Regional Road Network ........................................................................................ 6911.7 Inference ........................................................................................................................ 72

Chapter 12 Spatial Structure12.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 7312.2 Activity Pattern ............................................................................................................... 7412.3 Hierarchy of Settlements ................................................................................................. 7412.4 Proposed Road Network .................................................................................................. 7412.5 Formulation of Spatial Structure ...................................................................................... 7512.6 Inference ........................................................................................................................ 76

Chapter 13 Summary of Findings .................................................................................................... 77

vi



LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1 Taluks and Taluk Head Quarters ........................................................................................ 1Table 1.2 Block Panchayats and Their Head Quarters ....................................................................... 2Table 1.3 Details of LSGs in Malappuram District ............................................................................. 2Table 1.4 GSDP in Various Districts, 2008-09 .................................................................................... 7Table 1.5 NSDP in Various Districts, 2003-04 .................................................................................... 7Table 1.6 NSDP (At Factor Costs By Industry of Origin)-At Constant Price (Base Year 1999-00) -

Malappuram ..................................................................................................................... 8Table 1.7 NSDP At Constant Price With Base Year2004-2005-Kerala ................................................ 8Table 1.8 District-Wise Per Capita Income at Constant (1999-2000) Prices ...................................... 8Table 3.1 District Wise Population and Growth Rate of Population - 1971-2001 ............................. 11Table 3.2 Methods of Population Projection ................................................................................... 14Table 3.3 Projected District Population-Decreasing Rate Method ................................................... 15Table 3.4 Projected Population of the District - Apportionment Method ......................................... 15Table 3.5 Final Projected Population Figures of the District ........................................................... 15Table 4.1 Number of Workers in Malappuram District..................................................................... 18Table 4.2 Workers Classification of Malappuram District 2001 ....................................................... 19Table 4.3 Workers Classification 2001- Urban And Rural Areas......................................................... 19Table 4.4 Activity Pattern Based on Occupational Structure ........................................................... 25Table 4.5 Four Fold Classification of Workers ................................................................................. 26Table 4.6 Numbers of Various Categories of Workers In Urban Areas of the District ....................... 27Table 4.7 Numbers of Various Category of Workers In Rural Areas of the District ........................... 27Table 5.1 Land Use Break-Up-Kerala State 2008 ............................................................................. 29Table 5.2 Land Use Break up - Malappuram District ....................................................................... 31Table 5.3 Comparison of Land Use Break Up of Malappuram District and Kerala State................... 31Table 5.4 Land Use Break-Comparison With Neighbouring Districts ............................................... 32Table 5.5 Grouping of Land Use Classifications .............................................................................. 40Table 5.6 Criteria of Determination of Activity Zones Based on Land Use ...................................... 41Table 5.7 Activity Zones of the District ........................................................................................... 41Table 6.1 Functional Character of the LSGs of the District .............................................................. 43Table 8.1 Population Figures (2001) of Kerala at a Glance ............................................................. 51Table 8.2 Trends of Population Growth of Kerala - 1981-2001 ........................................................ 51Table 8.3 Trends in Urbanisation of Kerala-1981-2001 ................................................................... 51Table 8.4 District Wise Percentage of Urban Population ................................................................ 52Table 8.5 Growth Rate of Urban Population-Comparison with State and Nation ............................. 53Table 8.6 Urban Settlements From 1971-2001 ................................................................................ 53Table 8.7 Future Urban Profile of the District ................................................................................. 56Table 8.8 Urban Centres and their Proposed Hierarchy ................................................................... 58Table 8.9 Changing Urban Profile of the District ............................................................................. 58Table 9.1 Activity Pattern of the Settlements of the District ........................................................... 59

vii



10.1 Hierarchy of Nodes ......................................................................................................... 6310.2 Proposed Hierarchy of Nodes .......................................................................................... 6610.1 Important Connections Shown in the Conceptual Road Network ..................................... 70

viii



LIST OF FIGURES

Fig 1.1 Location of Malappuram ................................................................................................... 1Fig 1.2 Taluks in Malappuram District .......................................................................................... 1Fig 1.3 Block Panchayats in Malappuram District ......................................................................... 2Fig 1.4 Physiographical Divisions of the District ........................................................................... 4Fig 1.5 Spatial Distribution of the Water Bodies of Malappuram District ...................................... 6Fig 1.6 Temporal Variation of Sectoral Distribution of NSDP-Malappuram District ........................ 8Fig 1.7 Temporal Variation of Sectoral Distribution of NSDP-Kerala State ...................................... 8Fig 2.1 Regional Setting of Malappuram District ......................................................................... 10Fig 2.2 Regional Linkages ........................................................................................................... 10Fig 3.1 Rural-Urban Composition of Population-Malappuram District ......................................... 11Fig 3.2 Rural-Urban Composition of Population Destiny-Malappuram District ............................ 12Fig 3.3 Variation of Population Density ....................................................................................... 12Fig 3.4 Population Concentration Pattern 2001 ........................................................................... 12Fig 4.1 Work Participation Rate-Malappuram District 2001 ........................................................ 17Fig 4.2 Main, Marginal and Non Workers Malappuram District 2001............................................ 17Fig 4.3 Main Workers and Marginal Workers-Temporal Variation ................................................. 17Fig 4.4 Nine Fold Classification of Workers-1991 Malappuram District ....................................... 18Fig 4.5 Workers Classification 1991-Malappuram District ........................................................... 18Fig 4.6 Classification of main Workers 2001-Malappuram District .............................................. 19Fig 4.7 Classification of Workers in Urban Areas-Malappuram District-2001 .............................. 19Fig 4.8 Classification of Workers in Rural Areas-Malappuram District-2001 ............................... 19Fig 4.9 Nine Fold Classification of Workers 2001 ........................................................................ 20Fig 4.10 Workers Classification 2001-Malappuram District ........................................................... 20Fig 4.11 LSG Wise Distribution of Workers Based On 9 Fold Classification For 2001(Estimated) ... 21Fig 4.12 LSG Wise Distribution of Workers (Primary, Secondary, Tertiary) For 2001(Estimated) ..... 21Fig 4.13 Variation of Concentration Index of Agricultural Labourers ............................................. 22Fig 4.14 Variation of Concentration Index of Cultivators ............................................................... 22Fig 4.15 Variation of Concentration Index of HH Industrial Workers .............................................. 22Fig 4.16 Variation of Concentration Index of Other Workers ......................................................... 22Fig 4.17 LSGs Wise Distribution of Primary Workers ..................................................................... 23Fig 4.18 LSGs Wise Distribution of Secondary Workers ................................................................. 23Fig 4.19 LSGs Wise Distribution of Tertiary Workers ..................................................................... 23Fig 4.20 Activity Pattern Based on Occupational Structure ........................................................... 24Fig 4.21 Variation in the Number of Different Category of Workers in Urban Areas ....................... 27Fig 4.22 Variation in the Number of Different Category of Workers in Rural Areas ........................ 27Fig 5.1 Land Use Breakup-Kerala State ....................................................................................... 29Fig 5.2 Land Use Map-Malappuram District ................................................................................ 30Fig 5.3 Percentage of Land Use Breakup-Malappuram District ................................................... 31Fig 5.4 Comaparison of the Percentage Share of Forest Land Use of the State in Surrounding

District ............................................................................................................................ 32

ix



Fig 5.5 Forest Land Use Comparison With Surrounding Districts ................................................. 32Fig 5.6 Comparison of the Percentage Share of Land Marked as Marshy Land of the State in

Malappuram and Surrounding District ............................................................................. 32Fig 5.7 Percentage Share of Marshy Land-Comparison With Surrounding Districts ..................... 32Fig 5.8 Comparison of the Percentage Share of Residential Land Use in District of Kerala-

Malappuram and Surrounding Districts ........................................................................... 33Fig 5.9 Comparison of Percentage Share of Residential Land Use in Malappuram & Surrounding

Districts .......................................................................................................................... 33Fig 5.10 Comparison of Percentage Share of Agricultural Land Use of the State - Malappuram &

Surrounding Districts ....................................................................................................... 33Fig 5.11 Percentage Share of Agriculture Land Use-Malappuram & Surrounding Districts ............ 33Fig 5.12 Comparison of Population Land Use Malappuram & Surrounding Districts ...................... 33Fig 5.13 Comparison of the Percentage Share of State Res/Agr Mix Land Use of the State in

Malappuram & Surrounding ............................................................................................ 34Fig 5.14 Percentage of Res/Agr Mix Land Use in the Districts ...................................................... 34Fig 5.15 Concentration Pattern of Agricultural Land Use .............................................................. 35Fig 5.16 Variation of Concentration Index of Agricultural Land Use among LSGs of Malappuram

District ............................................................................................................................ 35Fig 5.17 Concentration Pattern of Other built Up Land Use .......................................................... 35Fig 5.18 Variation of concentration Index of Other Built up land Use among LSGs of Malappuram

District ............................................................................................................................ 36Fig 5.19 Concentration Pattern of Forest Land Use in LSGs of Malappuram District ...................... 36Fig 5.20 Variation of Concentration index of Forest Land Use Among LSGs of Malappuram District .... 37Fig 5.21 Concentration Pattern of Residential Land Use ............................................................... 37Fig 5.22 Variation of Concentration Index of Residential Land Use Among LSGs of Malappuram

District ............................................................................................................................ 37Fig 5.23 Concentration Pattern of Res/Agri Mixed Land Use ......................................................... 38Fig 5.24 Concentration Pattern of Water Body .............................................................................. 38Fig 5.25 Concentration Pattern of Plantation Land Use ................................................................. 39Fig 5.26 Concentration Pattern of Marshy Land / Kole Land Use .................................................. 39Fig 5.27 Concentration Pattern of Other Land Use ........................................................................ 39Fig 5.28 Concentration Pattern of Urban Land Use ....................................................................... 40Fig 5.29 Concentration Pattern of Agricultural Land Use .............................................................. 40Fig 5.30 Concentration Pattern of Forest Land Use ....................................................................... 40Fig 5.31 Concentration Pattern of Plantation Land Use ................................................................. 41Fig 5.32 Activity Zones Based On Land Use Concentration ........................................................... 41Fig 6.1 Functional Classification of the LSGs of the District ........................................................ 44Fig 7.1 CFI Vs Frequency Graph................................................................................................... 45Fig 7.2 Existing Hierarchy of Settlements ................................................................................... 46Fig 7.3 Existing 1st and 2nd Order Settlements ............................................................................. 47Fig 7.4 Existing Third Order Settlements ..................................................................................... 48Fig 7.5 Proposed Third Order Settlements Based on Four Criteria ............................................... 48

x



Fig 7.6 Size of Service Area Polygone of 3rd Order Settlemets ..................................................... 49Fig 7.7 Determination of 3rd Order Settlements-Hexagons Adjusted ............................................ 49Fig 7.8 Suggested Hierarchy of Settlements ................................................................................ 50Fig 8.1 Urban Areas of the Malappuram District ......................................................................... 52Fig 8.2 Decadal Variation of urban Population in the District ...................................................... 52Fig 8.3 Comparison of Growth Rate of Urban and District Population ......................................... 53Fig 8.4 Growth Rate of Population-LSG wise Variation ................................................................ 53Fig 8.5 Future Urbanisation Profile 2021 ..................................................................................... 57Fig 9.1 Activity Pattern of the Settlements of the District ........................................................... 61Fig 10.1 Spatial Distribution of Nodes .......................................................................................... 65Fig 10.2 Suggested Hierarchy of Nodes ........................................................................................ 65Fig 11.1 Transportation Network (Existing)-Malappuram District .................................................. 68Fig 11.2 Conceptual Road Network Based On Hierarchy of Settlements ....................................... 69Fig 11.3 Proposed Regional Road Network ................................................................................... 72Fig 12.1 Formulation of Spatial Structure ...................................................................................... 73Fig 12.2 Activity Pattern - Malappuram District ............................................................................ 74Fig 12.3 Proposed Hierarchy of Settlements - Malappuram District .............................................. 74Fig 12.4 Proposed Road Network - Malappuram District ............................................................... 75Fig 12.5 Formulation of Spatial Structure ...................................................................................... 75Fig 12.6 Spatial Structure - Malappuram District ........................................................................... 76

xi



ANNEXES

Annexe 1 Taluks and Villages in Malappuram District .................................................................... 79

Annexe 2 Population projection of Kerala ....................................................................................... 81

Annexe 3 Estimation of Nine fold classification of workers for 2001 ............................................... 83

Annexe 4 List of LSGs with CI of various land uses greater than one .............................................. 86

Annexe 5 Concentration index of Urban, Agriculture, Forest and Plantation land use ..................... 89

Annexe 6A Weightage of facilities .................................................................................................... 91

Annexe 6B Composite functional index (CFI) of settlements ............................................................. 92

Annexe 7 Existing hierarchy of settlements .................................................................................... 94

Annexe 8 Centrality and connectivity ............................................................................................. 96

Annexe 9 Determination of third order settlement from NE sub region ......................................... 102

Annexe 10 Deteremination of third order settlement from SE sub region........................................ 102

Annexe 11 Suggested hierarchy of settlements .............................................................................. 103

xii

admin

Text Box

<< BACK

admin

Text Box

CHAPTER 1 >>


1District Urbanisation Report -Malappuram PROFILE OF THE DISTRICT

100 Grama Panchayats, 7 Municipalities, 15 Block

Panchayats and one District Panchayat are the local

self government institutions in the district.

The names of the block panchayats and the

block headquarters are listed in Table 1.2.

Chapter 1 PROFILE OF THE DISTRICT

Fig 1.2: Taluks in Malappuram District

The administration set up of the district is

comprised of Revenue Divisions, Taluks, Villages and

Desoms. There are two Revenue Divisions in the

district namely Perintalmanna and T irur. Ernad,

Perintalmanna, T irur, Ponnani , Ni lambur and

Tirurangadi are the six taluks in the district and Manjeri,

Perintalmanna, Tirur, Ponnani, Nilambur, Tirurangadi

are the respective taluk headquarters. The district

comprises of 132 villages.The details are given in

Annexe 1.

Fig 1.1 Location of Malappuram

Table 1.1: Taluks and Taluk Head QuartersSl.

N o. Taluk Taluk He ad Quarte rs1 Ernad Manje ri2 N i lam bur N i lam bur3 Perintalm anna Pe rinthalm anna4 Tirur Tirur5 Tirurangadi Tirurangadi6 Ponnani Ponnani

1.1 ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISIONS

MalappuramDistrict

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

2


Fig 1.3: Block Panchayats in Malappuram District

Table 1.2: Block Panchayats and their Head Quarters

PROFILE OF THE DISTRICT District Urbanisation Report -Malappuram

The name of local governments with their area

and grade in the district is shown below.

Table 1.3: Details of LSGs in Malappuram

District

Sl. No.

Taluk

Block Pancha

yath/Municipality

N ame of LSGArea in Sq. kms

Grade of LSG

1 A ree kode 12.21 Special2 Cheekkode 23.96 First3 Kavanoor 31.3 Third4 Kizhuparamba 14.99 Third5 Kuzhimanna 23.66 Third6 Muthuvaloor 22.76 Third7 Pulpatta 30.12 Third8 Urngattiri 76.09 Second9 Cherukavu 16.87 Second

10 Kondotty 10.85 Second11 N ediyiruppu 20.28 First12 Pulikkal 27.95 First13 V azhakkad 23.78 Second14 V azhayur 21.19 Second

Eran

ad

Are

ekod

eKo

ndot

y

S l . N o .

N a m e o f B l o ck P a n ch a y a t

P o p u l a t i o n 2001

B l o ck H e a d q u a rte rs

N a m e o f th e LS G w h e re B l o ck H Q i s s i tu a te d

1 A re e k o d e 24 3571 A re e k o d e A re e k o d e2 K a l i k a v u 19 6025 K a l i k a v u K a l i k a v u3 K o n d o tty 26 7572 K o n d o tty K o n d o tty4 K u tt i p p u ra m 24 0373 T h o z h u v a n n u r V a l a n ch e ri5 M a l a p p u ra m 17 1168 V a l i y a n g a d i M a l a p p u ra m M u n i c i p a l i t y6 M a n k a d a 17 2107 R a m a p u ra m P u z h a k k a tt i r i7 N i l a m b u r 16 9849 N i l a m b u r N i l a m b u r8 P e ri n ta l m a n n a 25 9341 P e ri n ta l m a n n a P e ri n ta l m a n n a M u n i c i p a l i ty9 P e ru m p a d a p p a 14 6437 P e ru m p a d a p p u P e ru m p a d a p p u

10 P o n n a n i 11 5541 E d a p p a l E d a p p a l11 T a n u r 26 5928 T a n u r T a n u r12 T i ru r 20 6842 T h e k k u m m u ri T i ru r M u n i c i p a l i ty13 T i ru ra n g a d i 32 5403 C h e m m a d T i ru ra n g a d i14 V e n g a ra 22 1318 V e n g a ra V e n g a ra15 W a n d o o r 21 5219 W a n d o o r W a n d o o r

To ta l 321 6694

1.1.1 Existing functional order of settlements



15 Anakkayam 45.23 Second16 Morayur 24.57 Second17 Pookkottur 20.63 Second18 Malappuram (M) 33.61 Third19 Manjeri (M) 53.06 First20 Edavanna 49.13 Special21 Pandikkad 57.01 First22 Trikkalangode 59.9 Second

23 Karuvarakundu 64.2 Special24 Mambad 67.93 First25 Porur 34.86 Third26 Thiruvali 33.83 Third27 Thuvvur 31.38 First28 Wandoor 59.45 Special29 Munici

pality

Nilambur (M) 36.26 Newly formed

30 Amarambalam 140.15 Special31 Chaliyar 124.28 Third32 Chokkade 78.9 Special33 Chungathara 155.69 Special34 Edakkara 55 First35 Kalikavu 61.3 Special36 Karulai 131.31 Third37 Moothedam 52.24 Third38 Pothukal 54.38 Special39 Vazhikkadavu 114.38 Special40 Angadippuram 36.94 Special41 Kodur 18.42 Second42 Koottilangadi 20.92 Third43 Kuruva 35.79 Second44 Makkaraparamba 11.17 Second45 Mankada 31.33 Third46 Moorkkanad 30.55 Second47 Pulamanthole 32.1 First48 Puzhakkattiri 22.69 First49 Munici

palityPerintalmanna (M)

34.41 Second

50 Aliparamba 35.67 Third51 Edappatta 25.77 Third52 Elamkulam 21.31 Second53 Keezhattur 40.93 Second54 Melattur 27.24 Second55 Thazhekode 45.03 Second56 Vettathur 35.84 First

Nila

mbu

r

Perin

talm

anna

Man

kada

Perin

talm

anna

Mal

appu

ram

Municipality

Wan

door

Erna

dN

ilam

bur

Wan

door

57 Municipality

Ponnani (M) 16.59 Third

58 Alamcode 20.53 Third59 Marancheri 20.47 Special60 Nannamukku 19.36 First61 Perumpadappa 15.02 First62 Veliyankode 15.21 Special63 Edappal 22.28 Special64 Kalady 19.87 Third65 Tavanur 22.5 Special66 Vattamkulam 20.84 Special67 Athavanad 26.77 Second68 Edayoor 30.63 Second69 Irimbiliyam 24.06 Third70 Kuttippuram 31.31 Special71 Marakkara 27.76 Second72 Valanchery 21.9 Special73 Malap

puram

Ponmala 21.6 Second

74 Kottakkal (M) 20.43 Newly 75 Tirur (M) 23.32 First76 Cheriyamundam 11.26 Second77 Kalpakancheri 16.25 Second78 Niramaruthur 9.55 Special79 Ozhur 15.92 Second80 Perumanna Clari 9.1 Special81 Ponmundam 9.12 Special82 Tanalur 15.12 Special83 Tanur 19.49 Special84 Valavannur 15.28 Second85 Mangalam 12.12 Special86 Purathur 24.8 Second87 Talakkad 16.04 First88 Thirunavaya 19.58 Special89 Triprangode 20.67 Third90 Vettom 15.13 Special91 Chelembra 15.81 Second92 Pallikkal 25.85 Second93 Malap

puram

Oorakam 21.56 Second

94 Kannamangalam 28.27 Special95 Moonniyur 22.4 Special96 Nannambra 18.35 Second

Ponn

ani

Peru

mpa

dapp

aPo

nnan

i

Tiru

rang

adi

Tiru

rang

adi

Kondoty

Tiru

r

kutt

ippu

ram

Municipality

Tanu

rTi

rur

4



97 Parappanangadi 22.25 Special98 Peruvallur 19 Special99 Thenhippalam 16.19 Special

100 Tirurangadi 17.73 Special101 Vall ikkunnu 25.14 First102 Abdu Rahim an

Nagar14.83 First

103 Edarikode 15.28 Third104 Othukkungal 17.28 Third105 Parappur 15.11 First106 Thennala 10 Second107 Vengara 18.66 Special

Tiru

rang

adi Ti

rura

ngad

iV

enga

ra

1.2 AREA AND POPULATION

With a total area of 3550 sqkm Malappuram

district accounts for 9.13% of the geographical area of

Kerala state. With a total population of over 36 lakhs

(as per Census 2001), it has over 11.39% of total

population of state. Population density of Malappuram

district is 1021 persons/sq. km, which is above state

average (819 persons/sq. km) and is ranked 5th in the

state as per census 2001.

1.3 PHYSIOGRAPHY

As the name suggests, Malappuram is a districtwith hilly terraced tract. The streams that meanderthe hills reach the coconut fringed sea coast. Thetopography of the district is highly undulating. It startsfrom the hill tops covered with thick forests on theeast along the Nilgiris and gradually slopes down tothe valleys and the small hills, before finally endingon the sandy flat of cocunut grooves in the west. Thesea coast of the district extents to 70 km. The majorforest area is concentrated in Nilambur and Wandoorblocks and Melattur in the western ghats.

1.4 PHYSICAL FEATURES

a) Natural Sub-Divisions:

Similar to the other parts of the state,

Malappuram district also consists of three natural divi-

sions, low land, mid land and high land. The low land

stretches along the seacoast, the midland in the cen-

tral area and the highland region towards the eastern

and north eastern parts. Nilambur taluk lies completely

in the highland region, Eranad and Perinthalmanna

Taluks lie in the midland region and Ponnani Taluk lies

in the lowland region where as Tirur and Tirurangadi

Taluks lie both in lowland and midland regions.

Fig 1.4 Physiographical divisions of the district

View from Kottakunnu - Malappuram

Padinharekara Beach- Ponnani



The district level analysis of topography and re-

lief reveals that about 18.48% of the area of the dis-

trict is in the low land region where as 44.93% of the

total area of the district lies in the mid lands region.

36.59% of the total area of the district is in the high

land region. Nilambur Taluk largely constitutes the

highland category. This taluk also covers the maxi-

mum forest area of the district and is characterized by

very low density of population.

b) Climate:

The district has more or less the same climatic

conditions prevalent elsewhere in the state, viz, dry

season from December to February, hot season from

March to May, and the south west and north east mon-

soon from June to November. The southwest mon-

soon is usually very heavy and nearly 75 % of the an-

nual rains are received during this season. The climate

is generally hot and humid, the range of temperature

varies between 20 ºC and 30ºC. The average annual

rainfall is 2900mm.

c) Forests and Mountains:

The district has a total area of 3550 sq km

comprising of 759 Sq km of forest area, out of which

325 Sq.km is reserve forest and 434 Sq km is vested

forests. Forest area is concentrated in Nilambur and

Wandoor blocks and Melattur in the Western Ghats.The

The evergreen forests are found in the slope of

Western Ghats and deciduous forests in the plain and

the lower ghats slopes. Forests are located in

Amarambalam, Edakkara, Chungathara, Kalikavu,

Nilambur, Mampad, Urangattiri, Karuvarakundu and

Perakamanna areas of Nilambur taluk and Mankada,

Vettathur, Kariavattam and Arakkuparamba areas of

Perintalmanna taluk.

The North- eastern portion of the district hasmountains and hills. The important hills of the districtare Vayut mala, Vellarimala, Chakkumala, Uroth malaand Pandallur hills.

Malappuram district is not rich in mineral wealth.Laterite stone, locally known as Vettukallu, is foundabundantly in the midland areas. It is exploitedeconomically for construction work and hundreds ofquarries cutting laterite stones are in operation, giving

employment to thousands in the region.

Nilambur Teak forest

d) Rivers:

Kadalundi River

forests in Malappuram district are classified under

evergreen and deciduous forests. Of these, 80% is

deciduous and the rest is evergreen.

The district is gifted with four important rivers of

the state. They are Chaliyar, Kadalundipuzha,

Bharatapuzha and Tirurpuzha. Chaliyar stretches over a

length of 169 kms, and originates from Illambaleri hills

in Tami lnadu. Kadalundipuzha has a circuitous

PROFILE OF THE DISTRICT District Urbanisation Report - Malappuram6


The Biyyam kayal and Vel iyamkode kayal

near Ponnani are the important backwaters of

the district. Biyyam kayal is an ideal picnic spot

wh er e D TP C has a rra ng em e nt s f or b oat i n g .

Maniyar kayal, Valanchery kayal and Marenchery

kayal, all in Ponnani taluk, are the other minor

backwaters in the district.

Fig 1.5: Spatial Distribution of the water bodies ofMalappuram District

1.5 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTSIn the case of socio-economic aspects the

following parameters are analyzed.

Literacy rate (1991 and 2001);

Share of Work force (1991 and 2001);

Gross State Domestic Product 2008-09

Net State Domestic Product (2008-09);and

Per capita Income (2009-10)

The Work Participation Rate (WPR) in Kerala

has increased from 34.75% to 35.93% from 1991 to

2001. Malappuram district is having the lowest

a) Literacy Rate:

As per 2001 census, Kerala is the most literate

state in India having literacy rate of 90.92%. Inter-

district analysis within Kerala reveals that the

highest l iteracy is recorded in Kottayam district

(95.9%) and the lowest is in Palakkad district

(84.3%). The literacy rate of Malappuram is 89.6%,

just below the state average. The district occupies

9th position among the other districts with respect

to rate of literacy.

Biyyam Kayal

co ur se of 13 0 km s a nd i s f orm ed by t he

conf l uence of two r i v ers , the Ol i puzha and

Veliyar. Bharatapuzha, the second longest river

in Kerala, flows along the southern border of

the d i s t r i ct a nd dr a i ns i nto A rabi a n Sea at

P o nn ani . T ho oth ap uzh a, a tr i bu tar y of

Bharathappuzha originates from the silent val-

l e y, f l ow s t hroug h Th oot ha , E l a m ku l a m ,

P u l a m an th ol e , and j o i n s the m ai n r i v e r at

Pallipuram. T irurpuzha 48 kms long, originates

from Athavanad hi lls in T irur Taluk, flows in a

south west course up to Thirunavaya, deviates

to encircl e T irur town and f lows south west

pa ra l l e l to th e sea , un t i l i t jo i n s th e

Bharatapuzha near Ponnani Port.

b) Share of Workers:

District Urbanisation Report - Malappuram PROFILE OF THE DISTRICT


7

c) Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP):

During 2008-09 the contribution from primary,

secondary and tertiary sectors to the GSDP of state

at constant prices (1999-2000) constitutes 12.42%,

25.02% and 62.56% respectively. While analyzing the

sectoral distribution of state income it is seen that

the contribution from primary sector is decreasing

and tertiary sector is increasing. But secondary

sector remains almost stagnant. GSDP district wise

distribution at factor cost shows that Ernakulam

district continues to have highest income of Rs.

19940.06 crores in 2008-09. While lowest gross

Table 1.4: GSDP in Various Districts, 2008-09

S l N oN am e o f D i s tri ct

G S D P i n cro re s

P e rce n ta g e to to ta l

1T h iru v a n a n t

h ap u ram14941.69 11.05%

2 K o l l am 9974.42 7.38%

3P a th a n am th

i tta5321.41 3.94%

4 A l ap p u z h a 8755.38 6.48%5 K o tta y a m 9495 7.02%6 Id u k k i 4354.11 3.22%7 E rn a k u la m 19940.06 14.75%8 T h ri s s u r 13338.06 9.87%9 P al ak k a d 10209.08 7.55%

10 M alap p u r am 10303.48 7.62%11 K o z h ik o d e 11938.27 8.83%12 W a y a n a d 2440.12 1.80%13 K an n u r 9743.37 7.21%14 K a s argo d e 4448.04 3.29%

135202.49 To ta l

Source: Department of Economics & Statistics

NSDP district wise distribution at factor cost

shows that Ernakulam district continues to have

highest income at Rs. 9957.15 crores in 2003-04. While

lowest net domestic product was recorded in Wayanad

district (Rs. 1618.42 crores). The NSDP of Malappuram

district was Rs.5924.31 crores (7.51% of total NSDP of

State) in 2003-04 and is ranked 6th in the state. In the

year 2008-09 the NSDP of the state has become

144818.05 Crores, the corresponding figure for the

district being 9269.81 Crores

Table 1.5: NSDP in Various Districts, 2008-09

Sl. No Name of District

NSDP in crores

Percentage to total

1 Thiruvananthapuram 13129.55 10.902 Kollam 8818.36 7.323 Pathanamthitta 4725.95 3.934 Alappuzha 7767.86 6.455 Kottayam 8429.48 7.006 Idukki 3796.53 3.157 Ernakulam 17646.7 14.668 Thrissur 11968.61 9.949 Palakkad 9003.7 7.48

10 Malappuram 9269.81 7.7011 Kozhikode 10801.44 8.9712 Wayanad 2170.64 1.8013 Kannur 8858.95 7.3614 Kasaragod 4016.48 3.34

Total 120404.06

value of WPR (24.12%) as per the Census 2001. It

has been showing a decreasing trend during the

past few decades, with WPR of 25.17% in 1981 and

24.87% in 1991. A considerable percentage of the

male population is working abroad which is not

accounted for in the census. Also, the number of

female workers in the district is less compared to

other districts. This may be the reason for the low

value of WPR.

d) Net State Domestic Product (NSDP)

domestic product was recorded in Wayanad district

(Rs. 2440.12 crores). The GSDP of Malappuram district

was Rs. 10303.48 crores, (7.62% of total GSDP of

State) in 2008-09 and is ranked 5th in the state. The

details are given in Table 1.4.

Table 1.6: NSDP (At factor costs by Industry ofOrigin)-at Constant Price (Base year 1999-00)-

Malappuram

YearPrimary in lakhs

Secondary in lakhs

Tertiary in lakhs Total in lakhs

2005-06 146353 142880 447141 7363742006-07 121595 162174 508760 7925292007-08 116186 181166 571799 8691512008-09 117332 201541 608108 926981


Department of Town & Country Planning, Kerala

88




Sl. N o

District2008-09(P)

Rank

2009-10(Q)

Rank

Grow th Rate

(% )2008-09

1Thiruvananth

apuram52266 3 57563 3 10.14

2 Kollam 44914 10 48795 11 8.64

3Pathanam thi

tta51752 4 56994 4 10.13

4 A lappuzha 48549 7 53535 6 10.275 Kottayam 56190 2 61668 2 9.756 Idukki 49705 6 51367 7 3.347 Ernakulam 71548 1 79553 1 11.198 Thrissur 51071 5 56087 5 9.829 Palakkad 44769 11 49825 10 11.29

10 M alappuram 31900 14 33783 14 5.911 Kozhikode 46585 9 50389 9 8.1612 W ayanad 40096 12 38341 13 -4.3813 Kannur 47808 8 50623 8 5.8914 Kasaragod 40013 13 44588 12 11.44

STATE 48655 52984 8.9P - P rovis ional, Q - Quick Es tim ate

P - Provisional, Q - Quick EstimateSource: Economic Review 2010

1.6 INFERENCEMalappuram is the district having the largest

number of local bodies in the state- 100 grama

panchayats and 7 municipalities. The physiography of

the district deserve special mention as it have all the

three divisions, namely high land in the eastern and

north eastern parts, mid land in the central area and

the low land on the western side adjacent to the

Lakshadweep sea. The district has about 29% of its

geographical area as forest mainly seen in the eastern

part.

19.87 15.34 13.37 12.66

19.40 20.46 20.84 21.74

60.72 64.19 65.79 65.60

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09

Primary in % Secondary in % Tertiary in %

Fig 1.6: Temporal variation of Sectoral Distribution of NSDP -Malappuram District

15.91 13.49 12.29 11.38

21.90 21.66 21.51 21.27

62.19 64.86 66.20 67.36

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09

Primary in % Secondary in % Tertiary in %

Fig 1.7: Temporal variation of Sectoral Distribution of NSDP -Kerala State

From the figure it is seen that the contribution

from primary sector is decreasing both at the state

level and district level and that from the teritiarysector

increasing but the secondary sector is almost static

Table 1.7: NSDP At Constant price with baseyear 2004-2005-Kerala

YearPrimary in lakhs

Secondary in lakhs

Tertiary in lakhs

Total in lakhs

2005-06 1837492 2529366 7183128 115499862006-07 1680597 2698859 8083010 124624662007-08 1668131 2920130 8986199 135744602008-09 1647681 3079721 9754403 14481805

e) Per Capita Income (PCI):The per capita income of Malappuram has

increased from Rs. 16294/- in 2004 to Rs.18001/- in 2005

and to Rs 33783/- in 2009-10. But when compared to

other districts it is the lowest, the state average in 2009-

10 being Rs 52984/-Table 1.8: District-wisePer Capita

Income at constant (1999-2000) Prices

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

CHAPTER 2 >>

District Urbanisation Report - Malappuram HISTORY AND REGIONAL LINKAGES


9

Chapter 2HISTORY AND REGIONAL LINKAGES

2.1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The ancient history of the district is obscure.

During the Sangam period, the district formed part of

Chera Empire. The inscriptional evidence found at

the Triprangode temple indicates that Godaravi of the

Chera empire had his sway over this region. The rulers

of Ernad were the ancestors of Zamorins and the later

history of the district is interwoven with the history of

Zamorin rulers. Zamorin or Samuthiri originally

belonged to Nediyirippu in Ernad Taluk of the district,

before shifting his seat to Calicut. Zamorins later

conquered over Prappanad and Vettattunad (Tanur).

The war with the Valluvakonathiri ended in

establishing Zamorin’s superiority and gave him the

honour of presiding over the Mamangam, as the

protector of Mamangam. By 1400 AD Zamorins

established control over the entire district.

The Mysorian invasion during the period 1766

– 93 had political overturn in Malabar. Manjeri was the

headquarters of Hyder Ali’s troop. Later in 1788, Tippu

Sulthan descended in Kerala with large army and

established his authority in Malabar and made Feroke

his Capital. But signing of treaty on SreeRangapattanam

in 1792 resulted in the collapse of Mysorian throne and

the large tract of Malabar, which were under the

authority of Mysorians were ceded to the British.

Thereafter the district was under direct control of the

British and Zamorins were vested with the power to

administer over the region. In October 1798, the British

East India Company assumed full control of the region

covered by the Zamorin. Thereafter British Collectors

ruled Malabar, which included the present Malappuram

district.

2.2 REGIONAL LINKAGES

2.2.1 Regional Setting

Malappuram district is situated in the Southern

part of Malabar Region of Kerala. The district is situated

between 10o 42’ and 11o 82’ North latitude and between

75o 48’ and 76o 33’ in the east longitude. The total

extent of the district is 3550 sqkm, which is 9.13 % of

the total extent of the state. With regard to area,

Malappuram district ranks 3rd in the state. The district

is bounded on the north by Kozhikode and Wayanad

districts, east by Nilgris district of Tamil Nadu, and south

by Palakkad and Thrissur districts and west by the

Arabean Sea.

During the rule of British, the Mappila out breaks

occurred. The Non-cooperation and Khilaphat

movement during the struggle for independence also

have repercussions in the district (Reference : District

Census Hand book, Malappuram district 2001 ).

MalappuramDistrict

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 1

District Urbanisation Report - Malappuram10


HISTORY AND REGIONAL LINKAGES

Fig 2.1: Regional setting of Malappuram District

The District‘s major regional linkages of National

importance are the Kochi - Mangalore NH 17 and

Palakkad - Kozhikode NH 213. The major state highways

passing through the district are Perumpilavu –Nilambur,

Calicut-Ni lambur-Gudallur, Tirur-malappuram and

Parappanangadi-Malappuram.

The district headquarters, Malappuram is not

situated on the rail network. But ‘Shornur –Mangalore’

and ‘Shornur – Nilambur Road’ railway lines are passing

Malappuram town, the headquarters of the

district is at a distance of 400km by road from the state

capital of Thiruvananthapuram. Kochi, the commercial

capital of the State is at a distance of 160 km from the

town and the distance to Kozhikode city, the commercial

center of Malabar region is 53 km.

Thrissur, Palakkad, Shornur and Guruvayoor are

the other major urban centers in the vicinity of the

town. Distances to these centers are 90 km, 90 km, 60

km and 70 km respectively.

2.2.2 Connectivity

Fig 2.2: Regional Linkages

through the district. Kuttippuram, Tirur,

Parappanangadi, Angadippuram and Nilambur Road are

the important railway stations in the district. The

distances from the major centers of the state, viz.

Thiruvananthapuram, Kochi and Kozhikode to Tirur, the

major railway station in the district are 373 km, 152 km

and 40 km respectively.

The Calicut international Air port, the only airport

in the Malabar region, located at Karippur in Pallikkal

Panchayat of the District give international connectivity.

It is situated at a distance of 22 km from the district

headquarters.

2.3 INFERENCE

Malappuram has a rich history and cultural heri-

tage. The district is well connected to other parts of

the state and the country through three modes of trans-

port, road, rail and air.

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

CHAPTER 3 >>

District Urbanisation Report - Malappuram


11POPULATION

Chapter 3POPULATION

3.1 POPULATION SIZEThe population of the district as per 2001 Census

is 36,25,471, with a break up of 17,54,576 males and

18,70,895 females. The district has recorded the highest

population and highest rate of growth of population in

the state during the last two decades. The district

having 9.13% of the total geographical area of the

state accommodates 11.39% of the total population of

the state.

The district population is divided between rural

and urban areas in the ratio of 9:1 in 2001 whereas it

was 10:1 in 1991. Fig. 3.1 shows the rural- urban

composition of the district population.

Fig 3.1: Rural- urban composition of population-Malappuram district

Source: Census of India

3.2 GROWTH OF POPULATION

The population of the district showed tre-mendous increase during 1961-’71 and thereafter thegrowth rate has been steadily declining. During 1981-’91 the growth rate was the highest (28.87%) amongthe districts of the state which was more than doublethe growth rate of the state (14.32%). As per census2001 the growth rate of the district is 17.10%,whereas growth rate exhibited by the rural and ur-ban areas of the district are 16.20 % and 26.10% respec-tively.

Table 3.1 District wise Population and Growth rate of Population - 1971-2001

The variation of population among the districtsof Kerala and the decadal growth rate of population

during 1971-2001 are shown in Table 3.1.

1971 1981 19 91 2001 197 1-81 1981-911991-2001

1 Ka s a ra god 1992 - - 1071508 12040 78 - 22.78 12.3 72 Ka nnur 2966 22 35829 2803467 2251727 24089 56 25.39 16.63 6.9 83 W a ya na d 2131 4 13850 554026 672128 780 619 33.87 21.32 16.1 44 Kozhikode 2344 18 21734 2245265 2619941 28791 31 23.25 16.69 9.8 95 Malappuram 3550 18 56357 2402701 3096330 36254 71 29.43 28.87 17.0 96 Pa l a kka d 4480 16 85347 2044399 2382235 26174 82 21.3 16.52 9.8 87 Thris s ur 3032 21 28797 2439543 2737311 29742 32 14.6 12.2 8.6 68 Erna kula m 2407 21 63674 2535294 2817236 31057 98 17.18 11.12 10.2 49 Idukki 5019 7 65608 971636 1078066 11292 21 26.91 11.22 4.7 5

10 Kotta ya m 2203 15 39030 1697442 1828271 19536 46 10.29 7.71 6.8 611 Al a ppuzha 1414 21 25722 2350145 2001217 21091 60 10.56 7.28 5.3 912 Pa tha na mthi tta 2642 - - 1188332 12340 16 - 5.6 3.8 413 Kol la m 2491 24 12821 2813650 2407566 25852 08 16.61 10.68 7.3 814 Thi ruva na ntha pura m 2192 21 98606 2596112 2946650 32343 56 18.08 13.5 9.7 6

Kerala State 38863 213 47375 25453680 29098518 31841 374 19.24 14.32 9.4 3

Nam e of Districts/StateArea

(Sqkm )

PO PULATIO N GROW TH RATESl.No

3.3 POPULATION DENSITY

Population density is one of the important indi-

ces of concentration of population. As per 2001 Cen-

sus, the overall density of population in the dis-

trict is 1021 persons per sq.km, ranking 5th in the state.

The usual trend of urban areas exhibiting high

density compared to the rural areas is true with the

district as well. As per 2001 Census, the average density

of urban areas of the district is 1904 persons per sqkm

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 2

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >



POPULATION

Fig 3.2: Rural- urban composition of population density-Malappuram district


Among the municipal towns Ponnani

municipality has the highest density-3525 persons per

sqkm. Tirur municipality stands next, with a population

density of 3242 persons per sqkm. Fig 3.3 shows the

variation of density among the LSGs of the district.

Source: census 2001 Fig 3.3: Variation of Population Density

3.4 SEX RATIO

3.5 POPULATION CONCENTRATION PATTERN

The analysis of density of population in the LSGs

of the district shows that 2/3rd of the total population

of the district is concentrated in the low land and

mid land areas. This is presented in Fig 3.4.

Fig 3.4: Population Concentration Pattern 2001

whereas the corresponding figure for rural areas is only

972 persons per sqkm. Fig. 3.2 shows the rural- urban

composition of population density of the district.As per census 2001 the sex ratio of the district is

1066 (ie.1066 females for 1000 males) as against a state

figure of 1058. In 1991 also the district figure was

higher than that of the state, being 1053 and 1036 for

the district and state respectively. Since1981, the

district is witnessing a continuous increase in sex ratio.

Generally rural areas have higher proportion of

females than urban areas, the sex ratio for rural and

urban areas of the district being 1067 and 1061

respectively in 2001.



13POPULATION

3.7.1 Inventory of Methods of Population Projection.

Population growth of an area depends on

number of births, number of deaths and numbers of

in migrants/out migrants over the time period taken

for population projection. If one can predict the exact

future values of all these factors, population

projection of that area can be done very accurately.

The mathematical expression is as follows:

P1 = P0 + B- D + I-O where P1 and P0 refer to the

size of population at the beginning and end of the time

period and B, D,I and O are the numbers of births,

deaths, immigrants and out migrants respectively in

the time period concerned.

Practically this is very difficult. So understanding

the pattern of population growth in the past and

There are different methods for projecting

the population.

1. Arithmetic increase method

2. Geometric increase method

3. Incremental increase method

4. Changing rate of increase method (Decrease

rate of method)

5. Graphical method

6. Logistical curve method

7. Apportionment method

3.6 MIGRATION DETAILS

Malappuram district is one of the major

contributors to the immigrant population in the

Middle East from the state. The occupational structure

of the district, the lowest rate of work participation

and the lowest per capita income indicate this, but no

clear cut data are available to substantiate this fact.

3.7 POPULATION PROJECTION

The Population parameter serves as the base

in al l the development endeavors. One of the

objectives of all sorts of planning is providing

maximum benefits for the maximum number of

people. Estimate of future population is therefore

required for planners to visual ize the future

development scenario which is resultant of the

current trends and differentials and consequences

of interventions made.

In the arithmetic increase method, population is

assumed to be increasing at a constant rate. The average

increase in population is found out from the previous

decades population data. This is added to the present

population to obtain the population in the succeeding

decade.

In the Geometrical increase method average of

the percentage increase in population over each

decade is found out and the present total population

is multiplied by this average percentage increase in

population to find out the added population over the

present population in a decade.

Incremental increase method is a combination

of the above two and gives the advantage of both the

methods. In this method the average increase of

population per decade and the net incremental

increase of the population per decade are found out.

The net incremental increase in population is added to

the average increase of population to get the corrected

average increase of population and this figure is added

to the present population figures to get the future

population figures.

assuming that the same pattern of growth will continue

in the future, the present population is projected to

the desired future period.



POPULATION

In the apportionment method, census

population record is expressed as the percentage of

the population of the whole country. The ratio of the

town population under consideration to the National

Population is calculated for the last three or four

decades. A graph is plotted between these ratios and

the time. The extension of the graph will give the ratio

corresponding to the future years for which forecasting

of the population are to be done.

The table analyses the suitability of each of theabove methods.

Table 3.2: Methods of population projection

Sl No

Methods Of Population Projection

Suitability

1 Arithmetic Increase method

Suitable where increase in population is uniform and where population growth is nearing saturation level.

2 Geometrical Increase method

Suitable where percentage increase in population is uniform and in old cities

3 Incremental increase method

This is modification of the above two methods and gives correct result where these two methods are suitable

4 Changing rate of increase method

Most suitable when the rate of increase in population goes on reducing

5 Graphical Methods

Suitable when population data and details of development pertaining to similar cities are available

6 Logistical curve method

Suitable for any area where extra ordinary changes in death rate, birth rate and migration are not expected

7 Apportionment method

Suitable for any area where extra ordinary changes in death rate, birth rate and migration are not expected

From the above table it can be found that the

most suitable methods of population projection for

Malappuram are decreasing rate method, logistical

curve method and apportionment method.

In the changing rate of increase method the

percentage increase in population over each decade

and the average of the increase or decrease of net

percentage increase in population are found out. The

average of the increase or decrease in net percentage

increase in population is added (or subtracted) to the

present decade’s percentage increase of population to

get the corrected increase of percentage of population

and with this the future population figures can be found

out.

In the graphical method cities having conditions

and characteristics similar to the city where future

population is to be estimated are selected. It is then

assumed that the city under consideration will develop

as the selected similar cities have developed in the

past. This method has a logical back ground, and if

statistics of development of similar cities are available,

quite precise and reliable results can be obtained.

Logistical curve method assumes that the

population of a limited space follows the growth curve

characteristics of living things provided birth, death and

migration within the limited space do not produce

extra ordinary changes. The curve is S shaped. P.F

Verhulst has put forward a mathematical solution to

the curve. The population P at any time t from origin

(t=0) with Po is the original population.

P = Ps / (1+ m. loge 1 (nt))

Where Ps = Saturation Population, m,n = constants

Ps =2 PoP1P2 – P12 (P0+P1)/(P0 P2 – P12)


District Urbanisation Report -Malappuram 15POPULATION

3.7.2 Population projection of MalappuramDistrict

Decreasing rate method:

The population growth rate of 2011 & 2021 are

calculated assuming that the same percentage of

decrease in population growth prevails as that of 2001

for the succeeding two decades. Based on the

population growth rate calculated, the population of

the district is projected for 2011 and 2021 and the same

is shown in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3: Projected District Population –

Decreasing rate method

Apportionment method:

In the apportionment method, the ratio of the

District population to the State population has been

found out and the same is projected to the next two

decades assuming that the change in the ratio during

2001 -2011 and 2011-2021 is the same. In order to find

out the projected population in 2011 and 2021,the

projected population of the state for the same period

are needed. The details of population projection of

Kerala are elaborated in the Annexe 2. The projected

population of the district based on the apportionment

method is shown in Table 3.4.

Year

Tota

l po

pula

tion

Popu

latio

n G

row

th r

ate

% D

ecre

ase

in

Popu

latio

n G

row

th r

ate

1971 1856362

1981 2402701 29.43

1991 3096330 28.87 -1.91

2001 3625471 17.09 -40.8

2011 3992234 10.12 -40.8

2021 4231308 5.99 -40.8

Table 3.4: Projected Population of the District

– Apportionment method

NB: Due to the non availability of data needed, the logisticalcurve method is not attempted here.

Table 3.5: Final Projected Population

figures of the District

KeralaMalappur

am Districtx y y/x

19 71 21347375 18 5636 2 0.08719 81 25453680 24 0270 1 0.094 0.00719 91 29098518 30 9633 0 0.106 0.01220 01 31841374 36 2547 1 0.114 0.00720 11 33817196 41 0244 0 0.121 0.00720 21 35198589 45 3231 5 0.129 0.007

Year

Total populationRatio of District

population to Sate

Change in the ratio

Year

Total population as per decrease rate method

Total population as

per apportionmen

t method

Average population

figures

2011 3992234 4102440 40473372021 4231308 4532315 4381812

So it can be concluded that the total population

of Malappuram District will be 4047337 and 4381812

by 2011 and 2021 respectively if the present trend

continues.

Malappuram is the most populous district in the

state during the last two decades. Also the district

shows the highest rate of population growth. It ranks

fifth in the state in population density. Two third of

the total population live in 28.27% of the area of the

district, confined mostly to the low land and midland

areas.

3.8 INFERENCE

The projected total population by the two

methods differs slightly. The average of these two is

taken as the population figures of Malappuram District.

This is shown in Table 3.5

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

CHAPTER 4 >>


District Urbanisation Report -Malappuram 17OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE

Chapter 4OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE

The economic base of the district based on the

occupational structure as per census 2001 is studied inthis chapter. The change in economic base over a period

of time is also analysed.

4.1 WORK FORCE OF THE DISTRICTThe process of urbanisation is closely linked

with the economic activities of the region. The threecriteria adopted during the census operations todeclare an area as urban are

a) Minimum population size of 5,000b) Minimum population density of 400 persons per SqKm andc) 75% of male working population in nonagricultural sector.A large number of local governments in the

district satisfy the first two criteria. The third criteriawhich is related to the economic activities of the

region, is the crucial one.

As per census 2001, the work participation rate

of Malappuram District is 24.1%, which is the lowest in

the state. Out of the total population of 36.25 lakhs,

8.74 lakhs are workers. The total workers are further

divided into the main and marginal workers. Main

workers constitute 18.9 % of the total population and

marginal workers constitute 5.2 % of the total

population. This is shown in Fig 4.1 and 4.2.

Fig4.1: Work participation rate-Malappuram district 2001

Fig 4.2: Main, Marginal and Non workers Malappuramdistrict 2001

The change in the number of total workers and

the main workers over a period of time are shown in

the Fig 4.3 and Table 4.1. The graph shows that the total

workers and main workers are gradually increasing over

the last two decades (from 1981 to 2001).

604736

770033

874476

522883

665399 691848

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

800000

900000

1000000

1981 1991 2001

Total workers

Total mainworkers

Fig 4.3: Main workers and Marginal workers-temporalvariation


Even though the number of the total workers

of the district show increase in figures during 1991-

2001, the growth rate of the workers during this period

(growth rate is 11.94%) is below the growth rate of the

total population (growth rate of total population is

17.1%) of the same period. This indicates that the

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 3

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >


District Urbanisation Report -Malappuram18 OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE

Table 4.1: Number of workers in MalappuramDistrict

4.2. OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE

The occupational pattern is the major indicator

of economic activities of the region. Due to change in

the workers classifications in different censuses, it is

difficult to compare and study the change in workers

classification.

The nine fold classification of workers of

Malappuram district in 1991 is shown in Fig 4.4.

From the figure it is clear that 35% of the workers

were agricultural labourers and 15% were engaged

in other services. For the purpose of analysis the

workers are classified into primary, secondary and

tertiary sectors (fig 4.5). Primary sector includes

agricultural labourers, cultivators and livestock,

forestry, fishing, hunting, plantation, orchard and

allied activities & mining and quarrying. Secondary

sector includes Manufacturing, Processing, Servicing

and repairs in Household industries and other than

household industries. Tertiary sector includes Trade

and commerce, Transport, Storage and

Communications & other services. As per the above

grouping 55% workers were engaged in primary

sector, 11% of workers were engaged in secondary

sector and 34% of workers were engaged in tertiary

sector.


2001

874476

691848

Total workers

Total Main workers

1981

604736

522883

1991

770033

665399

Nine fold classification of workers 1991

14%

36%

6%1%

2%

7%

13%

6%

15%

Cultivators

Agr lbrs

Livestock, Forestry,Fishing, Hunting,Plantation, Orchards, andallied activites Mining and Quarring

Manufacturing, ProcessingServiciing and repairs in Household industries

Manufacturing,Processing, servicing andrepairs in other thanhousehold industriesTrade and commerce

Transport , storage andCommunic-ations

Other Services

Fig 4.4: Nine fold classification of workers-1991 MalappuramDistrict

Workers classification 1991

56%

10%

34%

Primary Secondary Teritary

Fig 4.5 Workers Classification 1991- MalappuramDistrict

As per the census 2001, the main workers

are classified into four categories viz. cultivators,

agricultural laborers, household industrial workers

and other workers. The other workers category

mainly includes workers in service sectors. However

primary sector workers like fishermen, workers

engaged in mining and plantation workers are also

seen included in the other workers category.

opportunity of working is not increasing in proportion

to the growth of population. This may be due to the

shrinking economic base of the district.

Source: Census 1991


Taluk wise details of workers as per census 2001

is presented in Table 4.2.


District Urbanisation Report -Malappuram

Table 4.2: Workers classification of MalappuramDistrict 2001

Sl.N

o

Talu

k

Culti

vato

rs

Agr

icul

tura

l la

bour

ers

H.H

.Indu

strie

s

Oth

er w

orke

rs

1 Ernad 13,616 41,135 3,427 1,35,0622 Nilambur 11,362 36,395 2,961 93,445

3Perintalmanna

12,462 34,770 2,813 83,066

4 Tirur 8,983 18,274 3,289 1,50,3955 Tirurangadi 6,256 14,177 2,236 1,11,8006 Ponnani 4,709 10,996 2,886 69,961

Malappuram Dist

57,388 1,55,747 17,612 6,43,729


The cultivators and agricultural labourersconstitute only 24.37 % of the total main workerswhereas lion share of the main workers( 75.63%)belongs to the other workers category (See Fig 4.6).As mentioned earlier, the other workers category willinclude some of the primary workers like fishermenand plantation workers. Assuming that about 10 % ofthe total workers belong to this primary workercategory, even then it can be seen that more than 50% of the total workers are engaged in tertiary activity.This finding poses a contrast against the nationalfigures where more than 60% of the total workersengage in primary activity. This is a clear indication ofthe declining trend of the primary sector in the

economy of Malappuram District.

Urban

2% 8%

2%

88%

Cultivators

AgriculturallabourersH.H Industries

Other workers

Fig 4.7: Classification of Workers in urban areas-Malappuram District-2001

Rural

7%

19%

2%

72%

Cultivators

AgriculturallaborersHH industrialworkersOther workers

Fig. 4.8: Classification of Workers in rural areas- MalappuramDistrict-2001

6%

18%

2%

74%

Cultivators

AgriculturallabourersH.H Industries

Other workers

Fig 4.6: Classification of Main Workers 2001- Malappuram District


4.3 OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE – VARIATION IN

URBAN AND RURAL AREASThe Table 4.3 shows the four-fold classification

of workers in the urban and rural areas of the district.

The same values are depicted in pie in Fig. 4.8

Table 4.3: Workers Classification 2001 –Urban and Rural areas

Cultivators

Agricultural

laborers

HH industrial workers

Other workers

Urban 2116 7084 1567 75946Rural 55272 148663 16045 567783

Source: Census 2001

The figures show that the share of cultivators

and agricultural labourers are 10% and 26% in urban

and rural areas respectively. The share of household

industrial workers is the same at 2% in both the urban

and rural areas. This indicates that as far as the workers

classification is considered, major share of the workers-

OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE 19


District Urbanisation Report -Malappuram20 OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE

4.4 OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE- ESTIMATION OFNINE FOLD CLASSIFICATION OF 2001

A study on the existing occupational structure

in various settlements of the District will put light on

those settlements likely to become census urban

shortly. The workers of each settlement which are

classified into four fold classification as per census 2001

are divided into the following nine categories based

on the workers classification in the 1991 census.

1. Main Cultivators

2. Main Agricultural Labourers

3. Livestock, Forestry, Fishing, Hunting,

Plantation, Orchards, and allied activities

4. Mining and Quarrying

5. Manufacturing, Processing, Servicing and

repairs in Household industries

6. Manufacturing, Processing, servicing and

repairs in other than household industries

7. Trade and commerce

8. Transport, storage and Communications

9. Others

The methodology adopted for the

extrapolation to get the nine- fold classification of

workers in 2001 based on the workers classification in

census1991 is described briefly here. The only two

types of workers included in both 1991 and 2001 census

are the cultivators and agricultural labourers. The

remaining two types of workers in the 2001 census,

house hold industrial workers and other workers are

totalled together and this total is divided in to 7 classes

of workers in the same proportion as these 7 classes of

workers as were there in the 1991 census. Then the

number of male workers in manufacturing, processing,

servicing and repairs in House hold industries,

manufacturing, processing, servicing and repairs in

Fig 4.9: Nine fold classification of workers 2001

Fig 4.10: Workers classification 2001 –MalappuramDistrict


other than house hold industries, trade & commerce,

transport, storage & communication and others are

totalled to calculate the percentage of male workers

in non-agricultural activities in each of the LSGs of the

district. The details are shown in Annexe 3 and Fig 4.9

& 4.10.

Comparing the nine fold classification of

workers in 1991 with the estimated nine fold

classification in 2001, it can be seen that work force in

house hold industries, other than household

industries, trade and commerce, transport, storage and

communication and others show an increasing trend

whereas cultivators and agricultural labourers show

declining trend. When grouped into primary,

secondary and tertiary sectors the figures round to 22%,

88% in urban areas and 72% in rural areas depend on

the tertiary sector for their lively hood.



District Urbanisation Report -Malappuram

Fig 4.11 LSG wise distribution of workers based on 9 fold

21OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE

The LSG wise distribution of workers based on

the nine fold classification for 2001 (estimated) isshown in Fig 4.11 and the same classified in to primary,secondary and tertiary workers is shown in Fig 4.12.The figures show that the primary workers areconcentrated more in the middle and north easternregion of the district. The percentage of primaryworkers in different local governments in the districtvaries from 16 to 46. The urban areas except Manjeriand most of the panchayats on the western half of thedistrict are having low percentage of primary workers.

The percentage of secondary workers indifferent LSGs varies from 6 to 22. Higher CI values areseen in the LSGs falling along the major traffic routes.The figures show an even distribution of secondaryworkers among the LSGs when the net area of thedistrict is considered.

Fig 4.12 LSG wise distribution of workers (Primary,Secondary, Tertiary) for 2001 (estimated)

classifications for 2001 (estimated)

24% and 54% respectively in 2001 while thecorresponding figures in 1991 are 55%, 11% and 34%respectively. From this it can be concluded that thereis a significant shift in the occupational structure ofthe district from primary to secondary and service

sectors.

The workers in the tertiary sector are also distributed

in more or less the same pattern as that of secondary

workers, the concentration being more towards the

urban centres. The percentage of tertiary workers vary

between 26 to 77, the highest being 76.40% in Thennala

grama panchayat.

4.5 SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF MAJOR CLASSES

OF WORKERS

The spatial distribution major classes of workers

viz. cultivators, agricultural labourers, household

industrial workers and other workers is analysed based

on their concentration indices. The concentration index

gives an idea about where a particular class of workers

is concentrated in the district.

Fig 4.13 shows the variation of the concentration

index of agricultural labourers. From the map it is clear

that the agricultural labourers are concentrated in the

north eastern part of the district.



Similarly the variations of the concentration

indices of other classes of workers are presented in

the following maps.

22 OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE

Fig 4.13: Variation of Concentration Index of AgriculturalLabourers

Fig 4.14: Variation of Concentration Index of Cultivators

Fig 4.15 Variation of Concentration Index of HH IndustrialWorkers

Fig 4.16: Variation of Concentration Index of Other Workers




The variation of concentration index of

primary sector, secondary sector and tertiarysectorworkers (as depicted in Fig 4.17, Fig 4.18 and Fig 4.19respectively) are studied and their spatial variation

analysed to derive the activity pattern of the district.

Fig 4.17 LSGs wise distribution of Primary workers

Fig 4.18 LSGs wise distribution of Secondary workers

Fig 4.19 LSG wise distribution of Tertiary workersThe figures show that primary sector workers

are concentrated in the midland and highland region;the secondary and tertiary sector workers are evenly

distributed.

The cultivators and agricultural labourers areevenly distributed in the district except in the urbancentres and coastal local bodies. The householdindustrial workers are concentrated in the coastal LSGsand the eastern areas. The other workers are more in

the mid land and coastal stretch.Over laying the concentration pattern of

primary, secondary and tertiary sector workers theactivity pattern based on occupational structure can bederived as follows.

1. Primary Activity2. Secondary Activity3. Tertiary Activity4. Combination of Primary and Secondary Activities5. Combination of Primary and Tertiary Activities6. Combination of Secondary and Tertiary Activities

4.6 ACTIVITY PATTERN BASED ON OCCUPATIONALSTRUCTURE



24 OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE

The activity pattern derived thus is depicted in Fig. 4.20.

Fig 4.20 Activity Pattern based on occupational structure




Table 4.4 Activity Pattern based on occupational structure

Activity Pattern

Secondary

Secondary

Secondary

Secondary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Name of LSG

Thavanoor

Vattamkulam

Vazhakkad

Vazhayoor

A.R. Nagar

Alangode

Areekode

Athavanad

Cheekkode

Cheriyamundom

Edarikkode

Edayoor

Elamkulam

Irimpiliyam

Kalpakancheri

Kannamangalam

Keezhparamba

Kodur

Koottilangadi

Makkaraparamba

Marakkara

Melattur

Morayur

Muthuvalloor

Nannambra

Nannamukku

Nediyiruppu

Niramaruthur

Oorakam

Othukkungal

Ozhur

Parappur

Perumanna Klari

Perumpadappu

Ponmala

Name of LSG

Aliparambu

Chaliyar

Chokkad

Chungathara

Edakkara

Edapatta

Kalikavu

Karulai

Karuvarakundu

Kavannoor

Keezhattur

Mampad

Mangalam

Mankada

Moorkanad

Moothedom

Peruvalloor

Porur

Pothukall

Pulamanthole

Pulpatta

Thazhekode

Thuvvoor

Tiruvali

Trikkalangode

Urangattiri

Vazhikkadavu

Vettathur

Chelembra

Cherukavu

Kalady

Kondotty

Kuzhimanna

Maranchery

Pulikkal

Activity Pattern

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Secondary

Secondary

Secondary

Secondary

Secondary

Secondary

Secondary



OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE26

From this analysis it is seen that as the economy

moves up from secondary to tertiary there is clear

concentration towards higher order settlements. In 28

LSGs the predominant activity is primary; in 11 LSGs

the predominant activity is secondary and in 41 LSGs

the predominant activity is tertiary. There are 5 LSGs

with a predominance of both primary and secondary

and 15 LSGs with a predominance of both secondary

and tertiary sector activities. In 7 LSGs predominant

activity is a combination of primary and tertiary.

4.7 OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE- TEMPORAL

VARIATION

The number of various categories of workers

from 1981 to 2001 in the district is shown in the Table

4.5.

The cultivators and agricultural labourers show

an increase in number during 1981-91 but it is on

decline in the next decade, whereas the other workers

show an increase of nearly three times. This is a clear

indication of the movement of economy from primary

to service sector, in the district.

The Fig 4.21 and Table 4.6 show the variation

of the number of different category of workers in

the urban areas of the district from 1981 to 2001. There

is significant increase in the category of other


Table 4.5: Fourfold classification ofWorkers

Year

1981

1991

2001

Cultivators

68561

88408

57388

HH ind

workers

14827

17296

17612

Others

244802

333958

643729

Agr labourers

194693

225737

155747

Activity Pattern

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary

Primary + Secondary

Primary + Secondary

Primary + Secondary

Primary + Secondary

Primary + Secondary

Primary + Tertiary

Primary + Tertiary

Primary + Tertiary

Primary + Tertiary

Primary + Tertiary

Primary + Tertiary

Primary + Tertiary

Secondary + Tertiary















Name of LSG

Ponmundom

Pookkottur

Puzhakkattiri

Thalakkad

Thanlur

Thenchippalam

Thennala

Thirunavaya

Valavannur

Veliyankode

Amarambalam

Edavanna

Kuruva

Purathur

Wandoor

Anakkayam

Angadipuram

Pandikkad

Parappanangadi

Ponnani

Tanur

Vettom

Edappal

Kottakkal

Kuttippuram

Malappuram

Manjeri

Munniyoor

Nilambur

Pallikkal

Perinthalmanna

Tirur

Tirurangadi

Triprangode

Valanchery

Vallikunnu

Vengara




Table 4.7: Number of various category ofworkers in rural areas of the District

4.8 INFERENCE

The study of the occupational structure of the

district shows that around 76 % of the population are

non workers. The district is having the lowest rate of

work participation in the state. There is a drastic decline

in the primary sector in terms of number of workers

engaged in primary activities. The only sector which

shows growth is the service sector. It is observed that

the rural areas of the district are also slowly

withdrawing from the primary sector and have started

depending more on the service sector.

Table 4.6: Number of various categories ofworkers in urban areas of the District


The Fig 4.22 and Table 4.7 show the variation

of different category of workers in rural areas of

Malappuram district during the period from 1981- 2001.

The pattern of change in the number of workers in

different category show that the rural areas also

exhibit the same pattern as that of the urban areas.

This indicates that the primary sector activity, mainly

the agricultural activity is on the decline in the rural

areas of the district.

Fig 4.22: Variation in the Number of different category ofworkers in Rural Area

Fig 4.21: Variation in the number of different category ofworkers in urban areas

workers during this period, meanwhile the category of

workers in cultivators and agricultural labourers are in

the decline during the same period, despite the slight

increase during 1981-91.

Year

1981

1991

2001

Cultivators

66749

83921

55272

HH ind

workers

14082

16072

16045

Others

215735

292461

567783

Agr labourers

189460

213591

148663Source: Census 2001

Year

1981

1991

2001

Cultivators

1812

4487

2116

HH ind

workers

745

1224

1567

Others

29067

41497

75946

Agr labourers

5233

12146

7084

admin

Text Box

CHAPTER 5 >>

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >



Chapter –5LAND USE

Land use is indicated by the predominant activitybe it agriculture, residential, commercial, forest etc,for which a parcel of land is put into. Hence the analysisof the existing land use is inevitable to understand thepredominant economic activities of an area as well asthe availability of vacant land for future economicactivities. In order to spatially analyze the land usepattern and economic activity as well as linkagesbetween them land use survey in all the 107 LSGs inthe district has to be completed. However this will takeconsiderable time. Hence land use data generated aspart of Natural Resources and Environmental Data Base(NREDB) and procured from KSLUB has been made useof. The source of the data is from IRS-P6, LISSIV, IC/IDLISS III+ PAN Satellite data,2003-04 (ie from IndiaSatellite Data). The above data base is predominantlyagriculture oriented and as such the analysis limited to

that extent.

5.1 LAND USE PATTERN OF KERALA STATE

Based on the land use data of the Natural

Resources and Environmental Data Base, the Land useof Kerala can be categorized under 9 Major categoriesand the percentage share of these categories is shownin Table 5.1 and Fig 5.1. Accordingly predominant landuse of the state is a mix of residential and agriculturalwhich constitute 41.38 % of total Land area. It can befurther seen that Forest area of the state contributesnearly 23.18 % of the total area making the forest landuse second highest land use of the state. TheAgricultural Land use and plantation land use togetherconstitute 20.18% (Agricultural 10.17% and plantation10.01%) of total area. The above analysis support thepeculiar scenario of the state in terms of rural-urbancontinuum, highly scattered settlement pattern, andtraditional homestead type of development whereindividual houses are surrounded by agricultural land

mainly of mixed cultivation.

LAND USE 29

Sl. No.Land Use Category

Area(sqkm)% of Total

Area

1 Forest 8426.6 23.182 Water bodies 1061.34 2.923 Marshy Land 102.51 0.284 Residential 1253.86 3.455 Agriculture 3695.24 10.176 Plantation 3638.05 10.017 Res/Agr Mix 15043.82 41.388 Other Built up

Land Use 173.36 0.489 Others 2956.94 8.13

Total 36351.73 100

Table 5.1: Land use break-up – Kerala State2008

Source: Natural resources and environmental database of Kerala

Fig 5.1: Land use breakup – Kerala State

5.2 LAND USE BREAK UP OF MALAPPURAM

DISTRICT

Total area of the district is 3551.87 Sq.km. The

land use map of the district is shown in Fig. 5.2. The

breakup of land use of the District with its percentage

to total area of the District is shown in Table 5.2 and Fig.

5.3. The highest percentage of land use falls under the

category Residential / Agricultural mix, which include

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 4



LAND USE30

Fig 5.2: Land use map – Malappuram District



Source : Generated from NREDB of the State

Fig 5.3: Percentage of land use breakup- Malappuram distSource : Generated from NREDB of the State

LAND USE 31mainly dry cultivation lands wherein residential

developments are co-existent. The district consists of

252.27 sq km of pucca agricultural land and 18.14 sq km

of land under intense residential land use. Water

bodies and forest also has a significant share (57.05 and

643.13sq km respectively) in the land use of the district.

Sl. No.Land Use Category Area(sqkm)

% of Total Area

1 Forest 643.13 18.112 Water bodies 57.05 1.613 Marshy Land 11.87 0.334 Residential 18.14 0.515 Agriculture 252.27 7.16 Plantation 138.19 3.897 Res/Agr Mix 2159.13 60.798 Other Built up

Land Use 19.79 0.569 Others 252.3 7.1

Total 3551.87 100

Table 5.2: Land use breakup – MalappuramDistrict

From the analysis of land use of the district it is

clear that the major portion of the total land area of

the District is coming under three major uses–

Residential / Agricultural mix (60.79%), forest land

(18.11 %) and agriculture (7.10%). The land use analysis

shows that the district has potential resources such as

agricultural land and forest.

5.3 REGIONAL LAND USE STUDY

In this section the land use pattern of

Malappuram District is compared with the state as well

as the surrounding districts of Thrissur, Palakkad and

Kozhikode. Land use pattern of Malappuram in

comparison with Kerala state is shown in Table 5.3. From

the table it is clear that within the district the

predominant land use is a mix of residential and

agriculture. The comparison of category wise land use

with that of Kerala shows that the Residential /

Agricultural land use category is higher compared to

that of the state.

The comparison of Land use pattern of

Malappuram District with neighbouring Districts

(Thrissur, Palakkad and Kozhikode) is shown in Table

5.4.

Generated from NREDB of the State

Sl. No.Land Use Category

Area ( sq.km)

% of total in the

District

% of the corresponding area

in the State

1 Forest 643.13 18.11 23.182 Water bodies 57.05 1.61 2.923 Marshy Land 11.87 0.33 0.284 Residential 18.14 0.51 3.455 Agriculture 252.27 7.1 10.176 Plantation 138.19 3.89 10.017 Res/Agr Mix 2159.13 60.79 41.388 Other Built up

Land Use 19.79 0.56 0.489 Others 252.3 7.1 8.13

Total 3551.87 100 100

Table 5.3 Comparison of Land use break up of

Malappuram District and Kerala state



LAND USE32

Sl. No.

Land Use Category

Palakkad ThrissurMalappu

ramKozhiko

de

1 Forest 1263.9 772.86 643.13 438.532 Water bodies 123.42 88.58 57.05 59.683 Marshy Land 4.58 32.62 11.87 4.234 Residential 12.05 31.53 18.14 80.285 Agriculture 755.55 353.65 252.27 127.756 Plantation 208.59 159.35 138.19 6.747 Res/Agr Mix 1813.06 1544.9 2159.13 1502.22

8Other Built up Land Use 56.75 19.67 19.79 4.41

9 Others 231.08 32.46 252.3 124.23Total 4468.98 3035.63 3551.87 2348.07

Table 5.4 Land Use Break - Comparison withNeighbouring Districts


Comparison of the percentage share of Forest

land use of Malappuram district and neighbouring three

districts shown in Fig. 5.4. The figure clearly shows that

Palakkad district has the highest share where as Thrissur

is placed in the second position and Malappuram is in

the third position.

The percentage of Forest Land Use of each district

is shown in Fig.5.5. Palakkad district shows highest

percentage (28.28%) followed by Thrissur (25.46%).

Malappuram and Kozhikode shows less percentage of

forest land when compared to the neighbouring

districts.

Fig 5.4 Comparison of the percentage share of Forest Landuse of the state in surrounding districts


Fig 5.5 Forest Land use Comparison with surrounding districtsGenerated from NREDB of the State

Comparison of the percentage share of Marshy

land use of Malappuram District and neighboring three

Districts is shown in Fig. 5.6. The figure shows

Malappuram District has a contribution of about 11.58

% of the total area under this category in the state.

Where as Thrissur District has highest contribution

(31.82%) of the total area.

Fig 5.6 Comparison of the percentage share of landmarked as Marshy Land of the state in Malappuram and

surrounding districtThe percentage of Marshy land of each district

is shown in Fig. 5.7. The figure shows Malappuram

District has only a contribution of about 0.33 % of the

total area. It is observed that the Kole lands of the

district is categorized as Marshy land as per NREDB.

Where as Thrissur District has highest contribution

(1.07%) of the total area.

Fig 5.7 Percentage share of Marshy Land - Comparisonwith surrounding districts

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

Palakkad Thrissur Malappuram Kozhikode

15.00

9.177.63

5.20

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00


28.2825.46

18.11 18.68

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00


4 .47

31.82

11.584.13

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50


0.10

1.07

0.330.18



LAND USE 33

Comparison of the percentage share of

Residential Land Use in districts of Kerala shown in Fig.

5.8. Residential land use which include land uses

categorized as Mixed Built-up/Mixed Built-up

converted from paddy, Residential, and Residential

(Converted from Paddy) shows higher concentration

in Kozhikode District with 6.4 % of the total area under

this category in the state. The corresponding share of

Malappuram District is only 1.45 %. At the same time it

is higher than the corresponding share of Palakkad

district and less than that of Thrissur district.

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00


0.962.51

1.45

6.40

Fig 5.8 Comparison of the percentage share of ResidentialLand Use in districts of Kerala – Malappuram and

Surrounding Districts

The percentage of Residential Land use of

Malappuram & Surrounding Districts is shown in Fig.

5.9. The figure shows that Kozhikode district shows

highest percentage (3.42%) followed by

Thrissur.(1.04%). Malappuram and Palakkad shows

lowest percentages of Residential Land use which is

0.51% and 0.27% respectively.

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00


0.27

1.040.51

3.42

Fig 5.9Comparison of Percentage share of Residential land

use in Malappuram & Surrounding Districts

In case of wet agriculture land use Palakkad

district shows highest percentage (20.45%) followed

by Thrissur.( 9.57%). In case of Malappuram district it

shows only 6.83% share of wet land.

0.00

5.00

10.0015.00

20.00

25.00

Palakkad Thrissur Malappuram K ozhikode

20.45

9.576.83

3.4 6

Fig 5.10 Comparison of the percentage share of AgriculturalLand use of the State - Malappuram & surrounding districts

The comparison of percentage of Agriculture

Land Use of each district is shown in Fig.5.11. The fig-

ure shows that Palakkad district shows highest percent-

age (16.91%) and Thrissur District is in second position

(11.65%) followed by Malappuram (7.1%) and

Kozhikode (5.44% ).

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00


16.91

11.65

7.105.44

Fig 5.11 Percentage share of Agriculture land use -Malappuram & Surrounding districts

The percentage share of Plantation Land Use in

Malappuram & surrounding districts is shown in Fig.

5.12. The figure shows that Thrissur district shows

highest percentage (5.25%), Malappuram comes in the

3rd position.

0.001.002.003.004.005.006.00


4.675.25

3.89

0.29

Fig 5.12 Comparison of Plantation Land use Malappuram &Surrounding districts



LAND USE34

Res / Agri mix category mainly include dry

agriculture land uses. Compared to the other districts

of Kerala, Malappuram shows highest percentage

(14.35%), followed by Palakkad (12.05%), Thrissur

(10.27%), and Kozhikode (9.99%) of residential and

agricultural land uses.

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00


12.0510.27

14.35

9.99

The percentage share of Res / Agr mix of each

district are shown in Fig. 5.14. The figure shows that

Kozhikode district shows highest percentage (63.98%)

followed by Malappuram (60.79%). Thrissur shows

50.89% and Palakkad shows lesser percentage (40.57%)

of Resi / Agri mix land.

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00


40.5750.89

60 .79 63.98

Fig 5.14 Percentage of Res / Agr mix land use in the districts

Fig 5.13Comparison of the percentage share of State Res/AgrMix land use of the state in Malappuram & Surrounding

5.4 CONCENTRATION PATTERN OF LAND USE

The concentration pattern of a land use gives an

idea about where that particular land use is

concentrated within the district. The Land use

concentration Index can be used to identify the

concentration pattern of a land use within an area.

CI of a land use in a local body=

(Area of the Land use in a LSGI/Total Area of the LSGI)

(Area of the Land use in the District/Total Area of

the District)

The Concentration Index value may be greaterthan one, equal to one or less than one. LSGs withConcentration Index greater than one indicates thatthe land use under consideration is concentrated morein that LSG than in other LSGs of the district.

Using the above method concentration index of9 categories of Land use (which are Forest, WaterBodies, Marshy Land, Residential, Agriculture,Plantation, Resi/Agri Mix, Other built up land use andothers) are analysed.

The regional land use study shows a generalobservation that Malappuram stand in the second orthird position with respect to surrounding districts inthe case of urban components of land use (residential,mixed built up, resi/agri mix etc., other built up etc.).In case of rural components of land use (Agriculture,plantation etc.), Malappuram stand in the third

position.

5.4.1 Agricultural Land Use

The Agricultural land use consists of Cashew/orange/ pepper/pineapple, Viruppu (1st Crop)/Mundakan, Land without scrub, Double Crop/Triplecrop, Agriculture farm, Agriculture farm (Orchids)/andMixed trees categories of land use as demarcated inthe land use map generated out of NREDB. Theconcentration pattern of agricultural land use (Figure-5.15) shows that agricultural area of the district ismainly concentrated in the central, and some of theup land regions of the district. The pattern also revealsthat agricultural land use is also influenced by thelocation of water bodies.

The variation of concentration index of

Agricultural land use among the LSGs is shown in Fig

5.16. The list of LSGs with concentration index of

agricultural land use more than one is given in Annexe

4. The highest concentration of agricultural land use

within the district is seen in Grama Panchayats of

Alangode, Vattamkulam, Thavanoor, Triprangode,

Thalakkad, Thirunavaya, Irimpiliyam, Nannambra.



LAND USE 35

Fig 5.15: Concentration pattern of agricultural land use

Fig. 5.16: Variation of concentration Index of agricultural

land use among LSGs of Malappuram District

5.4.2 Other Built Up Land Use

Other built up land use include Commercial,

Industrial /Industrial Park and Educational Institutions.

Figure 5.17 shows the distribution of the concentration

pattern of the Other Built up Land Use. From the figure

it is clear that Other Built up area of the district is

mainly concentrated in the western and south eastern

parts .Also it is observed that the concentration index

of the Other Built up land Use in urban LSGs and in

those LSGs along the major transport corridors are

higher than that in other LSGs. Also it is observed that

high land area of the district has lesser concentration

of Other Built up Land Uses even in LSGs along main

transportation corridors indicating that the economic

activity of hill areas is not considerably dependent on

secondary / tertiary sectors. The list of LSGs with high

concentration of the Other Built up Land Use (i.e.

concentration index of other built up land use greater

Fig 5.17 Concentration pattern of other built up land use



Fig 5.19: Concentration pattern of forest land use in LSGs ofMalappuram Dist

LAND USE36

Fig 5.18 Variation of concentration Index of other built upland use among LSGs of Malappuram district

5.4.3 Forest Land Use

Forest Land use contains land use categories of

Dense Mixed Forest, Dense Mixed Forest (R.F)/Forest

Blank, Dense mixed forest mainly bamboo, Dense

mixed forest mainly bamboo & teak (R.F), Dense mixed

forest mainly bamboo (R.F), Dense mixed forest mainly

teak or cashew, Bamboo (R.F), Barren Rocky/ Stone

waste/ sheet rock (RF), Open mixed forest/Open mixed

forest (RF), Scrub forest, Degraded grass land (RF),

than one) is shown in Annexe 4. The variation of

concentration index of other built up land use among

the LSGs where concentration index of other built up

land use is greater than one is shown in Fig 5.18. The

highest concentration of other built up land use within

the district is seen in Kondotty, Pallikkal, Areekode,

Tirurangadi, Vengara, Tanur, Kottakkal, Kuttippuram

and Ponnani LSGs.

Dense mixed forest mainly rubber, Under utilized /

degraded notified forest and Dense Grassland/

Degraded grass land.

The concentration pattern of forest land use

shows (Figure 5.19) that forest area of the District is

mainly concentrated in the North - Eastern part of the

District. Total area of active forest land of the district is

643.13 sq km which is about 18.11% of the total area of

the district. The forest land of the district is

concentrated in 12 LSGs namely grama panchayats of

Pothukal, Chungathara, Edakkara, Vazhikkadavu,

Karulai, Amarambalam, Chokkad, Karuvarakundu,

Urangattiri, Vettathur, Mampad, and Chaliyar. The

forest land is seen in the high land regions of the

district. The variation of concentration index of Forest

Land use among the LSGs is shown in Fig 5.20



LAND USE 37

Fig 5.20: variation of Concentration Index of forest land use

among LSGs of Malappuram District

5.4.4 Residential Land Use

The concentration pattern of Residential land

use shows (Figure 5.21) that the concentration of the

Residential land Use in urban LSGs and in those LSGs

along the major transport corridors(Road and

Railways) are higher than that in other LSGs.

The list of LSGs where residential land use is

concentrated is given in Annexe 4. The variation of

concentration index of Residential land use among

the LSGs where concentration index of Residential

land use is greater than one is shown in Fig 5.22. From

the figure it is observed that Edarikkode,Chelembra,

and Vallikkunnu LSGs are characterized with the

highest concentration index for residential land use

(5 to 10).

Fig 5.21: Concentration pattern of Residential land use

Fig. 5.22: Variation of concentration index of Residential landuse among LSGs of Malappuram District



LAND USE38

Fig 5.23: Concentration pattern of Res/Agri mixed land use

5.4.6 Water Bodies

Water bodies include perennial, Reservoir/

Canal, Reservoir Bed/River bed/River island, Water

Bodies, and Back waters. The land use is concentrated

among the major river basis and important backwaters

which are Chaliyar Puzha, Kadalundy puzha, Bharatha

This category of Land use include land usecategories of Rubber (R.F),Tea/Cofee/cardomom/Eucalptus, Tea & Eucalyptus, Tea (R.F)/Cofee (RF)/Cardomom(RF), Teak, Teak & Softwood (R.F), Teak (R.F)/Cashew (RF), Eucalyptus (R.F)/ Eucalptus and soft wood(RF)/Sof wood (silver oak), Oil Palm and Oil Palm (R.F)as per land use data of NREDB.

Plantations are concentrated in most of thenorth eastern areas of the district. The concentrationpattern of Plantations is shown in Fig.5.25. From thefigure it is observed that Chungathara, Chaliyar,Nilambur, Mampad, Moothedom, Vazhikkadavu,Karulai, and Edakkara LSGs are characterized withconcentration index greater than one for Plantation

land use.

5.4.5 Residential / Agriculture Mixed Land UseResi/Agri mixed land use consists of land use

categories of Arecanut, Banana, Banana & Tapioca,

Coconut/ coconut & Arecanut/coconut & tapioca,

Coconut dominant mixed crop, Current fallow, Mixed

Crop, Rubber, Mixed and Tapioca as per the land use

data of NREDB. The concentration pattern of Resi/ Agri

land use is shown in Fig. 5.23. From the figure it is

observed that Resi / Agri area concentrated in almost

all LSGs of district except in a few LSGs. The pattern

also reveals that the concentration of Res/Agri land use

is mainly in and around the urban centers and main

transport corridors of the district.

puzha Tirur puzha, Biyyam kayal and Veliyamkode

kayal. Fig. 5.24 shows concentration index based on

extend of land under water bodies in LSGs of

Malappuram.

Fig 5.24: Concentration pattern of water body

5.4.7 Plantations



LAND USE 39

5.4.8 Marshy Land / Kole Land

Fig 5.25: Concentration Pattern of Plantation landuse

Fig 5.26: Concentration pattern of Marshy land/Kole landuse

Following land use of NREDB are grouped to

form the category Other Land use - Barren Rocky/ Stone

waste/ sheet rock, Coastal Sand, Sands/ reverine/Flood

plain, Beaches, Harbour / Port, Mining / Industrial waste

land, Airport, Playground, Mining. Other Land uses are

spread along the major transport corridors. The

concentration pattern of other land use is shown in

Fig. 5.27.

Land parcels which are categorised as

temporarily marshy land / Marshy land/Permanently

marshyland as per NREDB is included under Marshy land

/ Kole land. The concentration pattern of marshy land

use is shown in Fig. 5.26. From the figure it is observed

that marshy areas are concentrated in low land regions

of district.

Fig 5.27: Concentration pattern of other land use

5.5 ACTIVITY ZONES BASED ON LAND USE

CONCENTRATION PATTERN

The area of concentration of major land uses

are analyzed in the above paragraphs. By combining

the concentration pattern of the major land uses

spatially and analysing the resulting pattern, area of

5.4.9 Other Land Use



LAND USE40

Sl . N o

.

M ajor Land u se Land u se Cate g orie s g ro up e d

1Urban (N on A gricu l ture )

O th e r B u i lt upt+O the rs+Re sid e ntial (P lot s ize <50 C e n ts)

2 A gricu l tureA gri+R e s/A g ri+R e side ntial(P lo t s ize >50 C e n ts)

3 Fore stA l l com pon e nts o f Fore st Land use

4 P lantationA l l com pon e nts o f P lantation Land u se

Table 5.5 Grouping of Land Use Classifications

specialization (based on the existing land use) of

activities can be delineated. In order to evolve the

activity zones the nine catagories of land uses are

grouped into four catagories which are urban or non

agricultural, agricultural, plantation and forest as given

Table 5.5. The concentration index of these major land

use catagories are shown in Annexe 5 The

concentration patterns area shown in Fig.5.28, 29, 30

and 31 respectively. Based on this, the activity of LSGs

is evolved as per the criteria given in Table 5.6.

Fig 5.28 Concentration pattern of Urban Land use

Fig 5.29 Concentration pattern of Agricultural Land use

Fig 5.30 Concentration pattern of Forest Land use



LAND USE 41

Thus the district can be divided to four distinctzones based on the land use analysis – Urban activityarea, agricultural area ,Plantation area and forestresource area.The Activity zones derived based on theabove criteria are shown Fig 5.32 and Table 5.7

LSGs showing urban nature are evidently theexisting urban LSGs and those along the majortransport corridors Activity zones based on agricultureis concentrated in the LSGs in the mid land and lowland region . LSGs having Plantation and Forest Landuse are concentrated in the high land region.

Fig 5.31 Concentration pattern of Plantation Land use

Sl No.

Activity based on Land use

Criteria

1 Urban CI*Urban>Agri/CI Plantation/CI Forest2 Agriculture CI*Agri>Urban/CI Plantation/CI Forest3 Plantation CI*Plantation>Urban/CI Agri/CI Forest4 Forest CI*Forest>Urban/CI Agri/CIPlantation

*CI-Concentration Index of

Table 5.6 Criteria of determination of Activityzones based on Land use

Fig 5.32 Activity zones based on Land use Concentration

Sl.No Name LSG Activity Based on Land use

1 A.R. Nagar Urban2 Areekode Urban3 Athavanad Urban4 Cheekkode Urban5 Cherukavu Urban6 Edarikkode Urban7 Edayoor Urban8 Elamkulam Urban9 Kalpakancheri Urban10 Kannamangalam Urban11 Kondotty Urban12 Kottakkal Urban13 Kuttippuram Urban14 Kuzhimanna Urban15 Malappuram Urban16 Marakkara Urban17 Morayur Urban18 Munniyoor Urban19 Muthuvalloor Urban20 Nediyiruppu Urban

Table 5.7 Activity zones of the district



LAND USE42

5.6 INFERENCE

The district is blessed with land and other

natural resources. In most of the LSGs there is a high

concentration of agriculture land use. The land use

analysis shows that there is a clear demarcation of

urban,agricultural, forest and plantation land uses and

the urban development has taken place mostly along

the major transport corridors. This indicates the

necessity of proper planning intervention in order to

avoid haphazard growth.

72 Perumpadappu Agriculture73 Ponmala Agriculture74 Ponmundom Agriculture75 Pookkottur Agriculture76 Porur Agriculture77 Pulamanthole Agriculture78 Pulpatta Agriculture79 Puzhakkattiri Agriculture80 Thalakkad Agriculture81 Thanlur Agriculture82 Thavanoor Agriculture83 Thazhekode Agriculture84 Thirunavaya Agriculture85 Thuvvoor Agriculture86 Tiruvali Agriculture87 Trikkalangode Agriculture88 Triprangode Agriculture89 Valavannur Agriculture90 Vallikunnu Agriculture91 Vattamkulam Agriculture92 Veliyankode Agriculture93 Vettathur Agriculture94 Vettom Agriculture95 Wandoor Agriculture96 Edakkara Plantation97 Mampad Plantation98 Moothedom Plantation99 Amarambalam Forest100 Chaliyar Forest101 Chokkad Forest102 Chungathara Forest103 Karulai Forest104 Karuvarakundu Forest105 Pothukall Forest106 Urangattiri Forest107 Vazhikkadavu Forest

21 Oorakam Urban22 Pallikkal Urban23 Parappur Urban24 Perumanna Klari Urban25 Peruvalloor Urban26 Ponnani Urban27 Pulikkal Urban28 Purathur Urban29 Tanur Urban30 Thenchippalam Urban31 Thennala Urban32 Tirur Urban33 Tirurangadi Urban34 Valanchery Urban35 Vazhakkad Urban36 Vazhayoor Urban37 Vengara Urban38 Alangode Agriculture39 Aliparambu Agriculture40 Anakkayam Agriculture41 Angadipuram Agriculture42 Chelembra Agriculture43 Cheriyamundom Agriculture44 Edapatta Agriculture45 Edappal Agriculture46 Edavanna Agriculture47 Irimpiliyam Agriculture48 Kalady Agriculture49 Kalikavu Agriculture50 Kavannoor Agriculture51 Keezhattur Agriculture52 Keezhparamba Agriculture53 Kodur Agriculture54 Koottilangadi Agriculture55 Kuruva Agriculture56 Makkaraparamba Agriculture57 Mangalam Agriculture58 Manjeri Agriculture59 Mankada Agriculture60 Maranchery Agriculture61 Melattur Agriculture62 Moorkanad Agriculture63 Nannambra Agriculture64 Nannamukku Agriculture65 Nilambur Agriculture66 Niramaruthur Agriculture67 Othukkungal Agriculture68 Ozhur Agriculture69 Pandikkad Agriculture70 Parappanangadi Agriculture71 Perinthalmanna Agriculture

admin

Text Box

CHAPTER 6 >>

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >



Chapter 6

FUNCTIONAL CHARACTER OF SETTLEMENTSThe function of a settlement is the major

activity within the settlement, be it agricultural and

allied activity (rural) or secondary sector and tertiary

sector activities (urban activities). The peculiar character

of the land use pattern existing in Kerala makes it

difficult to clarify a LSGs as either pucca urban of pacca

rural. Here an attempt is made to determine the major

function of a settlement by studying the major land

use and the average plot size within the settlement.

The analysis is based on the Methodology explained in

the Annexure 6 of the Volume I, Perspective Plan, IDDP,

Kollam.

FUNCTIONAL CHARACTER OF SETTLEMENTS 43

Table 6.1: Functional character of the LSGs of

the district

6.1 CHARACTER OF SETTLEMENTS

In the Kerala context, where a rural urban

continuum exists, settlement will be having either

pucca urban area, pucca rural area or mixed

(Residential cum agricultural) use area in separate or

in its combination. Also the mixed land use area can

be further classified into urban, semi urban, semi rural

and rural as noted above. When the total area of a

settlement is concerned, the predominance of any of

the four (urban land use, rural land use, semi urban or

semi rural) determines the character of the area. The

functions of all settlements of the district are derived

based on the cited methodology and are shown in Table

6.1 and Fig 6.1

Sl. No

Name of LSGFunctional

ClassificationLand Use

Concentration1 Urangattiri RURAL AGR2 Keezhparamba RURAL AGR3 Cheekkode RURAL AGR4 Muthuvallur RURAL AGR5 Kavannoor RURAL AGR6 Kuzhimanna RURAL URBAN7 Pulpatta RURAL AGR8 Vazhakkad RURAL URBAN9 Pulikkal RURAL AGR

10 Nediyiruppu RURAL URBAN11 Morayur RURAL AGR12 Pookkottur RURAL AGR13 Anakkayam RURAL AGR14 Pandikkad RURAL AGR15 Edavanna RURAL AGR16 Trikkalangode RURAL AGR17 Chaliyar RURAL PLANTATION18 Chungathara RURAL PLANTATION19 Pothukal RURAL AGR20 Edakkara RURAL PLANTATION21 Moothedom RURAL PLANTATION22 Vazhikkadavu RURAL PLANTATION23 Karulai RURAL PLANTATION24 Nilambur RURAL PLANTATION25 Chokkad RURAL AGR26 Amarambalam RURAL PLANTATION27 Kalikavu RURAL AGR28 Mampad RURAL PLANTATION29 Tiruvali RURAL AGR

30 Porur RURAL AGR31 Wandoor RURAL AGR32 Thuvvoor RURAL AGR33 Ka ruvarakundu RURAL AGR34 Mankada RURAL AGR35 Makkaraparamba RURAL AGR36 Koottilangadi RURAL AGR37 Kodur RURAL AGR38 Kuruva RURAL AGR39 Puzhakka ttiri RURAL AGR40 Angadipuram RURAL URBAN41 Pulamanthole RURAL AGR42 Moorkanad RURAL AGR43 Edapatta RURAL AGR44 Melattur RURAL AGR45 Keezhattur RURAL AGR46 Vettathur RURAL AGR47 Thazhekode RURAL AGR48 Aliparambu RURAL AGR49 Elamkulam RURAL URBAN50 Veliyankode RURAL AGR51 Nannamukku RURAL AGR52 Alangode RURAL URBAN53 Maranchery RURAL AGR54 Vattamkulam RURAL AGR55 Marakkara RURAL URBAN56 Edayoor RURAL AGR57 Valanchery RURAL URBAN58 Athavanad RURAL URBAN59 Irimpiliyam RURAL AGR60 Ponmala RURAL AGR61 Chelembra RURAL AGR

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 5



Fig 6.1: Functional Classification of the LSGs of the district

The study of the functional character of

settlements shows that 68 out of the 107

settlements are termed as rural, 29 are termed as

FUNCTIONAL CHARACTER OF SETTLEMENTS4462 Oora ka m RURAL AGR63 Va l l ikunnu RURAL AGR64 Thenchippa la m RURAL URBAN65 Ka nnama nga la m RURAL URBAN66 Manjeri RURAL URBAN67 Mal appuram RURAL URBAN68 Peri ntha lmanna RURAL URBAN69 Areekode SEMI RURAL URBAN70 Va zha yoor SEMI RURAL URBAN71 Cheruka vu SEMI RURAL AGR72 Perumpada ppu SEMI RURAL AGR73 Tha va noor SEMI RURAL AGR74 Ka la dy SEMI RURAL AGR75 Eda ppa l SEMI RURAL AGR76 Kuttippuram SEMI RURAL URBAN77 Kottakka l SEMI RURAL URBAN78 Ozhur SEMI RURAL URBAN79 Ponmundom SEMI RURAL AGR80 Peruma nna Kl ari SEMI RURAL AGR81 Tha nl ur SEMI RURAL AGR82 Nirama ruthur SEMI RURAL AGR83 Cheriya mundom SEMI RURAL AGR84 Va la vannur SEMI RURAL AGR

85 Ka lpaka ncheri SEMI RURAL URBAN86 Manga l am SEMI RURAL AGR87 Tha la kka d SEMI RURAL AGR88 Vettom SEMI RURAL PLANTATION89 Tripra ngode SEMI RURAL AGR90 Pa l l ikka l SEMI RURAL URBAN91 Peruva l loor SEMI RURAL AGR92 Munni yoor SEMI RURAL URBAN93 Pa rappa na ngadi SEMI RURAL AGR94 Nanna mbra SEMI RURAL AGR95 Pa rappur SEMI RURAL URBAN96 Othukkunga l SEMI RURAL URBAN97 Eda rikkode SEMI RURAL URBAN98 Kondotty SEMI URBAN URBAN99 Thi runava ya SEMI URBAN AGR

100 Purathur SEMI URBAN AGR101 Venga ra SEMI URBAN URBAN102 A.R. Nagar SEMI URBAN URBAN103 Thenna l a SEMI URBAN AGR104 Tanur URBAN URBAN105 Tirura ngadi URBAN URBAN106 Ponnani URBAN URBAN107 Tirur URBAN URBAN

semi rural, 6 as semi urban and 4 as urban. This

shows the comparatively lower level of urbanisation

of the district.

6.2 INFERENCE

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

CHAPTER 7 >>



Chapter 7HIERARCHY OF SETTLEMENTS

The existing hierarchy of settlements in the

district is determined based on the number and order

of facilities, and suggestions on required hierarchy of

settlements is made mainly based on their locational

aspects, so that balanced distribution of facilities is

made possible.

7.1 EXISTING HIERARCHY OF SETTLEMENTS

Cumulative Functional Index (CFI) method is

used to find out the hierarchy of settlements. The CFI

of a settlement is assessed based on the number and

presence of the following types of facilities in the

settlement.

1. Educational facilities

2. Health facilities

3. Markets

4. Facilities in Agriculture and allied sector

5. Physical infrastructure facilities

Fig 7.1: CFI Vs Frequency graph

HIERARCHY OF SETTLEMENTS 45

6. Transportation facilities

The weightage of each of these facilities in the

district and CFI calculated based on this is given in the

Annexes 6A & 6 B.

CFI is plotted against the number of

settlements to find out the hierarchy of settlements

in the district. The graph so obtained is shown in Fig

7.1. While plotting the graph Perintalmanna

Municipality is not taken in to account because of its

very high CFI, which will make it difficult for assessing

the hierarchy of the lower order settlements. It is

assumed that Perintalmanna Municipality is the first

order settlement of the district. Hence in the graph

second order and other lower order settlements are

identified.

From the graph it is seen that there are 4 second

order settlements, 5 third order settlements and 97

fourth order settlements as given below.

I order settlement

Perintalmanna Municipality

II order settlements

Ponnani Municipality

Tirur Municipality

Manjeri Municipality

Malappuram Municipality

III order settlements

Kondotty

Angadippuram

Kottakkal

Nilambur

Thenhipalam

IV order settlements See Annexe 7

The spatial distribution of the settlements of

different hierarchies is shown in the Fig 7.2. The first

order settlement is at the meeting point of National

Highway 213 and SH 39. In all the settlements (up to

third order), except Tirur, Thenhipalam, Manjeri and

Nilambur there is a node which is a meeting point of

National highway and State highway.

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 6



7.2 SUGGESTED HIERARCHY OF SETTLEMENTS

The proposed hierarchy of settlements in the

district is identified based on Christaller’s Central Place

Theory. It is a spatial theory in western geography that

attempts to explain the reasons behind the distribution

pattern, size and number of cities and towns around

the world. It is based on the conclusion that people

gather together in cities to share goods and ideas and

HIERARCHY OF SETTLEMENTS

Fig 7.2: Existing Hierarchy of Settlements

46

7.2.1 Suggested Hierarchy of Settlements-

Methodology Adopted

that they exist for purely economic reasons; the city/

the higher order facility centre will be located centrally

and it exists primarily to provide goods and services to

its surrounding population. Two important assumptions

made about human behavior are

1) humans will always purchase goods from the closest

place that offer the good and

2) whenever demand for a certain good is high, it will

be offered in close proximity to the population; when

demand drops, so too does the availability of the good.



Another important concept in Chirstaller’s

theory is the threshold, which is the minimum numberof people needed for a central place business oractivity to remain active and prosperous. Smallbusinesses dealing with lower-order goods/facilitiescan survive in small towns because people will buyfrequently at the closer locations instead of going intothe city. But businesses with higher order facilitiescannot survive in areas where the population is small.Therefore they are to be located in large cities thatcan serve a large population in the surrounding

hinterland.The concept of centrality and connectivity are

explained in Annexe 8

According to Christaller’s Central Place Theory,

there will be a first order settlement serving the entire

region (district) which will be centrally located; the


Fig 7.3 shows the spatial distribution of thefirst order and the second order settlements.

For analysis purpose the district is divided into

four sub regions and it is assumed that there are atleast four second order settlements in the district, onefrom each of the sub region. But this methodology isnot applicable in the case of Malappuram.

The density pattern of Malappuram Districtshows that the western part comprising the coastalareas are the most thickly populated. Two of the foursecond order settlements are located in this narrow

7.2.2 Suggested Hierarchy Of Settlements – Procedure Adopted

lower order settlements will be located at the verticesof the hexagonal shaped service area of the higherorder settlements. In Malappuram districtPerintalmanna is the first order settlement, which isnot centrally placed. It is located at the south east endof the district, and also caters equally to the needs ofthe neighboring district, Palakkad.

Fig 7.3: Existing 1st and 2nd order Settlements



HIERARCHY OF SETTLEMENTS48

Fig 7.4: Existing third order settlements

Thus Wandoor from the north east quardant is

identified as the 3rd order settlement which is shown

in Fig 7.5. The method of determination of 3rd order

settlement from SE sub region is explained in Annexe 10.

Fig 7.5: Proposed third order settlement based on four criteria

belt. The other two are in the medium density zone.

The eastern part consisting mainly of forest &

plantations are the low density areas. No second order

settlement is identified from this area which includes

the north east and northwest sub regions. Considering

the factors like service population(threshold), terrain

etc it is understood that no higher order facility can

survive in these sub regions. Hence the spatial

distribution of the next lower order settlements (ie.3rd

order) is studied. Angadippuram and Kottakkal from

the south west, Thenhipalam and Kondotty from the

north west and Nilambur from the north east sub

region are the existing 3rd order settlements. The

spatial distribution of the third order settlements is

shown in Fig 7.4.

1.Existing administrative status of the settlement

2. Centrality

3. Connectivity

4. Existing hierarchy

Since a higher order settlement can act as a lowerorder settlement as well, the total number of 1st, 2nd

and 3rd order settlements is taken as the number of 3rd

order settlements.

Then the population to be served by a 3rd ordersettlement = District population / No. of 1st, 2nd and3rorder settlements. And accordingly the service areaof 3rd order settlement in each of the density zone iscalculated.

There is no 3rd order settlement in the north east

sub region. Hence a 3rd order settlement is proposed

here, based on the following criteria.




According to Christaller’s Central Place Theory,

the service area of a settlement will be hexagonal in

shape. Lower order settlements are located on the

vertices of the service area hexagon of a higher order

settlement. But due to the absence of 2nd order

settlements in the eastern part of the district and the

possibility of suggesting one being nil because of the

lack of threshold population, the method of

identifying 3rd order settlements as the vertices of the

polygon formed by the perpendicular bisectors of the

line joining the 2nd order settlements is not attempted

here. Hence the proposed 3rd order settlements are

identified as described below.

Fig 7.6: Size of service area polygon of 3rd order settlements

LEGEND

Proposed 3rd Order Settlement

High Density ZoneMedium Density Zone

Low Density Zone

Side = 7.76Km

Average Density 2104Per/Sqkm

Area to be served 156.65 Sqkm

Side = 10.58Km

Average Density 1133Per/Sqkm

Area to be served290.90 Sqkm

side = 15.44Km

Average Density 531.5 Per/Sqkm

Area to be served 620 Sqkm

Population to be served by 3rd order Settlement 329588

Fig 7.7: Determination of 3rd order settlements-Hexagonsadjusted

The service area of a 3rd order settlement being

known, the service area hexagon for each of the density

zone can be formed. The size of service area polygons

of third order settlements are shown in Fig. 7.6. These

hexagons are placed centrally over the 3 rd order

settlements and the areas not served by a 3rd order

settlement are identified. Service area hexagons of

suitable size according to the population density of the

region are placed on these settlements. Accordingly

Valanchery from the south east sub region, Tirurangadi

from the south west sub region and Areekode from the

north west sub region are identified as proposed 3rd

order settlements,(shown in Fig 7.7) taking into

consideration the following criteria.

1.Centrality 2.Connectivity 3. Existing hierarchy

1. Angadippuram2. Kottakkal3. Thenhippalam4. Kondotty5. Nilambur6. Valanchery7. Wandoor8. Tirurangadi9. Areekode

The suggested hierarchy of settlements is given in Fig7.8 and Annexe 11.

Thus the 3rd order settlements are :



7.3 INFERENCE

In the suggested hierarchy of settlements,

there is one first order settlement, 4 second order

settlements and 9 third order settlements in the

district. The first order settlement, Perintalmanna

is urban in nature. Malappuram Municipal i ty,

though the headquarters of the district belongs

to the second order group, followed by the other

Fig 7.8 Suggested Hierarchy of Settlements

50 HIERARCHY OF SETTLEMENTS

three municipal towns in the district, viz. Manjrei,

T i rur and Ponnani . Of the ni ne thi rd order

sett lements Kottakkal and N i l am bur have

attained urban status recently; Angadippuram,

Kondotty, Val anchery, Thenhippa lam,

Tirurangadi, Areekode and Wandoor are the other

3rd order settlements

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

CHAPTER 8 >>



URBAN PROFILE

Chapter 8URBAN PROFILE

At the turn of the 20th century, Kerala had a

population of 63.96 lakhs, of which 59.42 lakhs were in

its rural areas (source census 2001, p 17). This

constituted 92.89 per cent of the total population of

the state. At the end of the 20th century the total

population in Kerala has increased to 3.18 crores

(31838619) of which rural population is 2.35 crores. This

means that the rural population constitutes about 74 %

of the total population in 2001. The population figures

of the State as per census 2001 are shown in Table 8.1.

Table.8.1: Population figures (2001) of Keralaat a glance

Source: census 2001, Provisional totals, p 1

There is an increase of about 400% in the total

population of Kerala within a century. During this period

the rural population has increased by 300%. Rural

population content in Kerala has declined from 92.89%

to 74% of the total population within a century. This is

an indication on the trend of urbanisation in Kerala that

has happened in a century. To know the urbanisation

trend in the immediate past the population figures of

the last three decades are analyzed here (see Table

8.2).

Table 8.2: Trends of population growth ofKerala - 1981-2001

Source: census 2001 Provisional totals, p 106

There is a steady decline in the population

growth rate over the last three decades. Population

growth rate was 19.24% in 1981 and it reduced to 9.24%

in 2001. During the period 1981-91 population of 36.45

lakhs were added to the previous decades population,

51

8.1 TREND OF URBANIZATION – KERALA

Table 8.3: Trends in urbanisation of Kerala -1981-2001

Source: census 2001, Provisional totals, p 106

Year

Tota

l pop

ulat

ion

Tota

l urb

an

popu

lati

on

% o

f urb

an

popu

lati

on

Gro

wth

rat

e of

to

tal p

opul

atio

n

Gro

wth

rate

of

urba

n po

pula

tion

1981 25453680 4771275 18.7 19.24 37.641991 29098518 7680294 26.4 14.32 60.972001 31838619 8267135 26 9.42 7.64

Person Males FemalesGrowth

rateTotal 31841374 15468614 16372760 9.43Rural 23574449 11451282 12123167 10.07Urban 8266925 4017332 4249593 7.64

YearTotal

population

Growth rate of total population

Growth rate of urban

population

1981 25453680 19.24 37.641991 29098518 14.32 60.972001 31841374 9.43 7.64

whereas population of only 27.4 lakhs were added

within the next decade. The growth rate of urban

population of Kerala over the last three decades

shows that it is in a transition phase. Over the last two

decades (1971-81 and 1981-91) growth rate in urban

population was on the rise, 37.64% in 71 - 81 and 60.97%

in 81- 91. But it has drastically declined to 7.64% in

2001 with a decrease of 87.5 % over the preceding

decadal urban population growth rate. At the same

time the growth rate in total population has decreased

from 14.32 % to 9.42% only with a decrease rate of

34.2%.

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 7

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >



URBAN PROFILE

Table 8.4: District wise percentage of urbanpopulation

8.4 GROWTH RATE OF URBAN POPULATION

The graph (Fig 8.2) shows the decadal variation

in the urban population of Malappuram District from

1971 to 2001. The total urban population of the District

has increased from 124852 to 356170 in a period of three

decades. The variation during this period is somewhat

uniform.

Population

124852

177774

282454

356170

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

350000

400000

1971 1981 1991 2001

Population


Fig 8.1 Urban Areas of the Malappuram District

8.2 URBAN AREAS IN THE DISTRICT

As per the 2001 census, the population of

Malappuram District is 3,625,471, which constitutes

about 11.4% of the total population of the State,

standing first among the 14 districts of the state. Of the

total population of the Malappuram district, 3, 561, 70

is urban population. That is 9.82 % of the total

population of the District is in the urban areas of the

District. There are five municipalities, Malappuram,

Manjeri, Perintalmanna, Tirur and Ponnani in the

district. The urban areas of Malappuram District is

shown in Fig 8.1

8.3 URBAN POPULATION CONTENT (EXISTING)

The process of urbanization of an area can be

assessed in relation to its urban population content.

The urban population content of Kerala state is 26%,

whereas that of the District is 9.82%. On comparing the

urban content of all the 14 District of the State, it can

be seen that the urban content of Malappuram District

is very low, which is positioned in the 12th rank.

52

Urb a n R u ra l To ta l%

Urb a n

K a nn u r 1 2 1 2 8 9 8 1 1 9 6 0 5 8 2 4 0 8 9 5 6 5 0 .3 1

Er n a k u l a m 1 4 7 7 0 8 5 1 6 2 8 7 1 3 3 1 0 5 7 9 8 4 7 .6 2

K o zh i ko d e 1 1 0 1 1 5 7 1 7 7 7 9 7 4 2 8 7 9 1 3 1 3 8 .2 3Th i r u va n an th a p u ram 1 0 9 1 6 6 1 2 1 4 2 6 9 5 3 2 3 4 3 5 6 3 3 .8 4

Al a pp u zh a 6 2 1 4 5 7 1 4 8 7 7 0 3 2 1 0 9 1 6 0 2 9 .5 5

Th r i s s u r 8 3 9 4 3 3 2 1 3 4 7 9 9 2 9 7 4 2 3 2 2 8 .2 6

K a s a ra go d 2 3 3 7 0 0 9 7 0 3 7 8 1 2 0 4 0 7 8 1 9 .4 7

K o l l a m 4 6 5 9 7 8 2 1 1 9 2 3 0 2 5 8 5 2 0 8 1 8 8

K o tta ya m 2 9 9 8 0 8 1 6 5 3 8 3 8 1 9 5 3 6 4 6 1 5 .3 9

P a l a k k a d 3 5 6 5 7 5 2 2 6 0 9 0 7 2 6 1 7 4 8 2 1 3 .6 1 0P a tha n a mth i tta 1 2 3 7 9 8 1 1 1 0 2 1 8 1 2 3 4 0 1 6 1 0 1 1M alap pu r am 3 5 6 1 7 0 3 2 6 9 3 0 1 3 6 2 5 4 7 1 9 .8 1 2

I d u kk i 5 7 5 9 3 1 0 7 1 6 2 8 1 1 2 9 2 2 1 5 .1 1 3

W a ya n a d 2 9 6 1 2 7 5 1 0 0 7 7 8 0 6 1 9 3 .8 1 4

D i s tr i c t

P op u l a ti o n 2 0 0 1Urb a n Co n te

n t R a n k 2 0 0 1

Fig 8.2 Decadal variation of Urban Population in theDistrict



URBAN PROFILE

The graph (see Fig 8.3) shown below depicts

the growth rate of urban population against the growth

rate of population over the last two decades in the

District. The total population of the district has been

doubled since the formation of the district. But the

Urban population in the district has been tripled in the

corresponding period.

The growth rate of district population is more

when compared to the growth rate of the population

of the country and the state during the decade 1971-81

and 1981-91. But it is less than the national growth rate

in the decade 1991-01.

53

28.87

17.09

58.88

26.10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1981-91 1991-01

District

Urban

Fig 8.3 Comparison of Growth rate of Urban and DistrictPopulation

The following table compares the growth rate

of urban population of thedistrict with that of the State

and the Nation. The table shows that there is a huge

decline in the growth rate of urban population of the

state. The district also shows a reduction in urban

growth rate.Table 8.5 Growth rate of urban population –

Comparison with State and Nation

KeralaMalappuramIndia

1981-9160.9758.8836.47

1991-017.64

26.1031.13


Growth rate of population among the LSGs of

the district as per census 2001 (Fig 8.4) shows that

growth rate is the highest among those grama

panchayats adjacent to the urban LSGs and those along

the major transportation corridors.

Fig 8.4: Growth rate of population- LSG wise variation

8.5 URBAN SETTLEMENTS FROM 1971-2001

The number of urban settlements of the district

increased from 4 in 1971 to 5 in 1991 (see Table 8.6).

They are Malappuram, Manjeri, Tirur, Ponnani and

Perintalmanna, Perintalmanna being the newly added

municipal town.

Cens

us y

ear

Tota

l num

ber o

f

Urb

an c

entr

es

Mun

icip

al T

owns

Non

mun

icip

al to

wns

Urb

an o

ut g

row

ths

Cens

us T

owns

Tota

l are

a (

sq k

m)

1971 5 1 4 0 0 77.91981 5 4 1 3 0 1131991 5 5 0 1 0 1722001 5 5 0 0 0 186

Table 8.6 – Urban settlements from 1971-

2001



URBAN PROFILE

Criteria 1 Existing urban areas

As per the Census 2001 there are 5 Urban LSGs in the

district. They are

1. Malappuram

2. Manjeri

3. Perintalmanna

4. Tirur

5. Ponnani

These are expected to retain their status.

8.6 FUTURE URBANIZATION PROFILE OF THEDISTRICT

The analysis of the occupational structure of the

District shows that the production sectors- i.e., the

agriculture and industrial sector, shows declining trend

in the district. The only sector, which shows growth, is

the service sector. More than 50% of the total urban

population depends on the service sector for their

lively hood. It is observed that rural area of the district

is also slowly withdrawing from the primary sector and

started depending more on the service sector. Because

of this shift in the occupational structure some of the

rural areas will be having more than 75% of the male

workers in the non-agricultural category in the near

future and hence will fall in the category of census

urban. Hence there may be significant increase in the

urban population as well as in the extent of urban areas

of the District in the future. In the following paragraphs,

the future urban LSGs are delineated based on the

three fold census classification as per census 2001, and

the results are further iterated with the factors like

grade of the LSGs, hierarchy of settlements and the

impact of proposed urban development projects.

54

Criteria 2 Census urban areas

A study of the existing occupational structure

in various settlements of the District will put light on

those settlements likely to become census urban

shortly. For this an estimation of nine fold classification

of workers of each settlement is attempted based on

the workers classification in the 1991 census. In order

to avoid the possibility of error, i.e. exclusion of some

of the actual urban areas in the extrapolation of the

data on classification of workers based on 1991 census,

the gramapanchayats with nonagricultural male

workers more than 70% (instead of 75%) is taken for

the study. Based on this, there are 44 grama panchayats

identified in the district, which are satisfying the three-

fold census classification to be termed as urban, the

list of which is given below.

Sl. No.

123456789

10111213141516171819202122

Name ofpanchayatKeezhparambaAreakodeVazhakkadVazhayoorCherukavuPulikkalKondottyNediyiruppuNilamburMakkaraparambaKoottilangadiKodurNannamukkuMarancheryThavanoorEdappalKaladyValancheryKuttippuramIrimbiliyamKottakkalOzhur

Sl. No.

23242526272829303132333435363738394041424344

Name ofpanchayat

PonmundomPerumanna Klari

ThanalurNiramaruthur

CheriyamundomThirunavayaThalakkad

TriprangodeChelembra

PallikkalOorakam

VallikunnuThenhippalam

KannamangalamMunniyoorNannambraTirurangadi

VengaraA.R. NagarThennalaParappur

Othukkungal

The classification of an area into urban

depending upon the 9 fold classifications of workers

derived out of a mere extrapolation of the census 2001

data based on the previous decades data cannot be

taken as very accurate. Though it gives a near accurate

picture about the trend of urbanization, some other

factors like the grade assigned to the Grama Panchayats

earliar, hierarchy of settlements and impact of proposed

urban development projects need to be considered.



URBAN PROFILE 55

Criteria 3: Grade

The grading was done comparing physical and

economical development in various LSGs. So ,here, in

the absence of direct data to assess the physical and

economic development, the grade of Panchayat can

be taken as a proxy indicator to measure the physical

and economic development of the LSG.

Out of the 44 Panchayats listed based on

criteria one, 17 are the Special grade Panchayts. The

list of LSGs after exclusion of the lower grade

panchayats is given below.

AreekodeNilamburMarancheryThavanoorEdappalValancheryKuttippuramKottakkalPonmundomPerumanna KlariThanalurNiramaruthurThirunavayaThenhippalamKannamangalamMunniyoorVengara

123456789

1011121314151617

Criteria 4: Hierarchy of settlements

The hierarchy of the above 17 LSGs in the

overall context of the district are also to be taken in to

account before finalizing the urban profile, because

the hierarchy of a settlement is an indicator on the

type and number of facilities in the settlement. The

Annexe 3 shows the hierarchy of the settlements. Out

of the 17 Grama Panchayats listed above the following

are in the category of settlements having the lowest

hierarchy (CFI 0- 50) and hence excluded from the list

of probable future urban centres.

1. Marancheri

2. Edappal

3. Ponmundam

4. Perumannaclari

5. Tanalur

6. Niramaruthur

7. Thirunavaya

8. Kannamangalam

9. Moonniyur

10. Vengara

Wandoor, which is a special grade panchayat

with CFI Value 91.05 is also included in the list. Thus

the list of probable future Urban centres based on

hierarchy of settlements becomes as follows.

1. Kottakkal

2. Nilambur

3. Thenhippalam

4. Kuttippuram

5. Valanchery

6. Areekode

7. Tavanur

8. Wandoor

Criteria 5: Perspectives in urban development

Before finalizing the future urban profile of the

district, the urban development projects of the district

and their impact are also to be studied.

Important projects in the district which influence

the urban development are KINFRA food and IT Park at

Chelembra panchayat, LPG Bottling Plant of IOC at

Thenhippalam Panchayat, Fishing Harbor and Cargo

Park at Ponnani, Arya Vaidya Sala, Kottakkal and

Regulator cum Bridge at Chamravattom.

The industrial park of KINFRA located at

Kakkenchery in Chelembra panchayat houses a large

number of food processing units, IT industries, a

Biotechnology unit and 10 acres of knowledge space

and creates an average movement of 300 tones of



URBAN PROFILE56materials a day through the national highway. This

certainly will boost the industrial activities in the

district which in turn will influence the development.

Hence Chelembra Panchayat is included in the list of

future urban LSGs though it was excluded from the list

because of being a lower grade panchayat.

The Chamravattom Regulator-cum-Bridge

which is one of the major projects taken up by the State

Government paves way for the formation of a coastal

highway; the project once completed will reduce the

distance from Eranakulam to Kozhikode by about 20

km, improve the facilities for drinking water, irrigation

etc. and also creates better inland water transportation

and scope for tourism activities in the region. The LSGs

which are to be benefited in the long run with the

realization of this project are Talakkad and Triprangode.

Hence these two are included in the list even though

they are lower order grama panchayats.

The Karipur International Airport located in

Kondotty and Pallikkal panchayats has a direct influence

on the development of these panchayats. The

proposed fishing harbour at Parappanangadi will also

influence the industrial development of the district.

Hence these grama panchayats are included in the list

of probable Urban LSGs.

Angadipuram, a special grade panchayat

adjacent to Perintalmanna Muncipality is not included

in the list due to the percentage of nonagricultural male

workers being less than 70%, but as the developments

in Perintalmanna Muncipality have direct influence on

the developments in this grama panchayat and this

need to be included in the list.

The select list after including these seven

grama panchayats is given below.

1. Nilambur

2. Thenchipalam

3. Kuttippuram

4. Kottakkal

5. Valanchery

6. Areekode

7. Tavanur

8. Wandoor

9. Chelembra

10. Talakkad

11. Triprangode

12. Kondotty

13. Pallikkal

14. Parappanangadi

15. AngadippuramClearly, the above LSGs will define the future urban

profile of the District. The likely future urban profile of

the district evolved is shown in the Table 8.7 and the

same is shown in Fig 8.5.

Angadippuram Panchayat which is expected to

attain urban nature by 2011 is adjacent to

Perintalmanna, the first order settlement, and hence

is assumed to become a part of the municipality.

Table 8.7: Future urban profile of the District

Sl No Existing Urban LSGsFuture probable Urban

Centres

1 Malappuram Kottakkal

2 Majeri Municipality Nilambur3 Perintalmanna Angadippuram4 Tirur Municipality Kondotty5 Ponnani Parappanangadi6 Valancheri7 Kuttippuram8 Thenhipalam9 Tirurangadi

10 Areakode11 Thavanoor12 Chelembra13 Triprangode14 Thalakkad15 Pallikkal16 Edappal17 Wandoor

Note: Of the above, Kottakkal and Nilambur have attained

urban status very recently (November 2010).



URBAN PROFILE 57

The projected and existing urban areas andtheir proposed hierarchy are given in Table 8.8 and

the future urban profile of the district shown in Fig8.5.

Existing Urban Centres

1 Malappuram

2 Tirur

3 Perintalmanna

4 Manjeri

5 Ponnani

In the next 10 years

1 Kottakkal

2 Nilambur

3 Angadippuram

4 Kondotty

5 Parappanangadi

In the next 20 years

1 Kuttippuram

2 Thenhippalam

3 Tirurangadi

4 Areekode

5 Tavanur

6 Chelembra

7 Triprangode

8 Talakkad

9 Pallikkal

10 Edappal

Fig 8.5: Future Urbanisation Profile 2021



URBAN PROFILE58

Table 8.8: Urban Centres and their proposedHierarchy

Table 8.9 Changing urban profile of the District

Year

Tota

l nu

mbe

r of

U

rban

are

as

Mun

icip

al

Corp

orat

ion

Mun

icip

aliti

es Non

m

unic

ipal

to

wns

Out

gro

wth

1971 1 0 1 4 01981 4 0 4 1 31991 5 0 5 0 12001 5 0 5 0 12011 11 0 7 4 02021 22 0 22 0 0

The changing urban profile of the district from1971 to 2021 is shown in Table 8.9.

8.7 URBAN VISION 2021

It is envisaged that there will be 22 urban LSGs

in Malappuram district by the year 2021. Besides the

existing 5 urban settlements Kottakkal, Nilambur,

Angadipuram, Kondotty, Parappanangadi and

Valanchery are expected to attain urban status by 2011

and the next 11 settlements to become urban by 2021.

8.8 INFERENCE

From the above study it can be concluded that

the level of urbanization of the State shows a declining

trend in general. Malappuram District shows even a

lesser level of urbanization when compared to the

State average. The percentage of urban population in

the district is somewhat steady in the past two decades.

It indicates that the increase in the urban population

only by natural growth and the migration from the rural

areas is only marginal. Malappuram is one of the least

urbanized districts in the state, which occupies twelfth

place among the fourteen districts leaving only Idukki

and Wayanad districts behind it. Considering the

criteria like existing urban areas, census urban areas,

grade of LSGs and hierarchy of settlements, the future

urban profile is derived. The number of urban centres

in the district is expected to become 22 by the year

2021.

Sl No

Period of achievement of

proposed status

Proposed Hierarchy

1 Existing 2

2 Existing 1

3 Existing 2

4 Existing 2

5 Existing 2

6 2011 3

7 2011 3

8 2011 3

9 2011 3

10 2011 4

11 2011 3

12 2021 4

13 2021 3

14 2021 3

15 2021 3

16 2021 4

17 2021 4

18 2021 4

19 2021 4

20 2021 4

21 2021 4

22 2021 3

Triprangode

Talakkad

Pallikkal

Edappal

Wandoor

Thavanur

Chelembra

Ponnani

Kottakkal

Nilambur

Kondotty

Parappanangadi

Valanchery

Angadippuram

Kuttippuram

Thenhippalam

Tirurangadi

Areacode

Urban Centres

Malappuram

Perintalmanna

Manjeri

Tirur

admin

Text Box

CHAPTER 9 >>

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >



Chapter 9ACTIVITY PATTERN

The activity pattern identifies the economic

activity for which the settlement under consideration

is most suitable. This is derived from the settlement

studies (based on spatial analysis- study of the spatial

distribution of various aspects). The aspects under

consideration are land use concentration pattern,

functional character (determined based on population

distribution and land use) and urban profile (derived

from occupational structure and hierarchy of

settlements). These three aspects are considered

together in judging the most suitable activity pattern

for the LSG under consideration.

9.1 DESCRIPTION OF LAND USE CONCENTRATION

From the study of the land use pattern of the

district it is seen that urban activities are concentrated

more in the existing urban LSGs and those LSGs along

the national highways and important state highways.

In majority of the LSGs agricultural land use is there.

Plantation activities are concentrated more in a few of

the north eastern LSGs, and there is a concentration of

forest area in the eastern part of the district. Water

bodies are seen more in the low land areas. The land

use concentration pattern has been analyzed in detail

in Chapter 5 Land Use.

9.2 DESCRIPTION OF FUTURE URBAN PROFILE

The future urban profile of the district is

determined based on criteria like existing statutary

urban areas, census urban areas, grade of LSGs,

hierarchy of settlements and perspectives in urban

development. It is estimated that the number of urban

centres will become 22 in the next 20 years. This has

been explained in detail in Chapter 8 Urban Profile

59ACTIVITY PATTERN

9.3 DESCRIPTION OF FUNCTIONAL

CLASSIFICATION

The function of a settlement is the major

activity within the settlement. The functional

character of each settlement is determined based on

the land use, population distribution and average plot

size within the settlement. It is classified as rural, semi

rural, semi urban and urban. The details are shown

Chapter 6 Functional Character.

9.4 DETERMINATION OF ACTIVITY PATTERN

The activity pattern of the settlements of the

district is determined based on the land use

concentration pattern, functional character of the

settlement and the future urban profile of the district.

This is presented in the Fig 9.1 and Table 9.1

Table 9.1: Activity pattern of the Settlements of

the District

Sl No.

Name of Panchayats/Municip

alitiesActivity Pattern

1 Alangode AGR+ANM HUSB2 Athavanad AGR+ANM HUSB3 Cheriyamundom AGR+ANM HUSB4 Cherukavu AGR+ANM HUSB5 Chokkad AGR+ANM HUSB6 Edappal AGR+ANM HUSB7 Elamkulam AGR+ANM HUSB8 Kalpakancheri AGR+ANM HUSB9 Kannamangalam AGR+ANM HUSB

10 Kuzhimanna AGR+ANM HUSB11 Mangalam AGR+ANM HUSB12 Marakkara AGR+ANM HUSB13 Nannambra AGR+ANM HUSB14 Nediyiruppu AGR+ANM HUSB15 Niramaruthur AGR+ANM HUSB

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 8



ACTIVITY PATTERN60

62 Koottilangadi PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)63 Kuruva PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)64 Mankada PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)65 Maranchery PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)66 Melattur PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)67 Moorkanad PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)68 Morayur PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)69 Makkaraparamba PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)70 Nannamukku PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)71 Oorakam PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)72 Pandikkad PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)73 Ponmala PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)74 Pookkottur PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)75 Porur PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)76 Pothukall PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)77 Pulamanthole PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)78 Pulikkal PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)79 Pulpatta PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)80 Puzhakkattiri PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)81 Thazhekode PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)82 Thuvvoor PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)83 Tiruvali PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)84 Trikkalangode PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)85 Urangattiri PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)86 Vallikunnu PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)87 Vattamkulam PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)88 Veliyankode PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)89 Vettathur PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)90 Muthuvalloor PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)91 Amarambalam PRI ACTIVITY(PLANTATION)92 Chaliyar PRI ACTIVITY(PLANTATION)93 Chungathara PRI ACTIVITY(PLANTATION)94 Edakkara PRI ACTIVITY(PLANTATION)95 Karulai PRI ACTIVITY(PLANTATION)96 Mampad PRI ACTIVITY(PLANTATION)97 Moothedom PRI ACTIVITY(PLANTATION)98 Nilambur PRI ACTIVITY(PLANTATION)99 Vazhikkadavu PRI ACTIVITY(PLANTATION)100 Kondotty TER ACTIVITY101 Kottakkal TER ACTIVITY102 Kuttippuram TER ACTIVITY103 Ponnani (M) TER ACTIVITY104 Tanur TER ACTIVITY105 Tirur (M) TER ACTIVITY106 Tirurangadi TER ACTIVITY107 Vazhayoor TER ACTIVITY

16 Parappanangadi AGR+ANM HUSB17 Perumanna Klari AGR+ANM HUSB18 Perumpadappu AGR+ANM HUSB19 Peruvalloor AGR+ANM HUSB20 Ponmundom AGR+ANM HUSB21 Thanlur AGR+ANM HUSB22 Thavanoor AGR+ANM HUSB23 Thenchippalam AGR+ANM HUSB24 Triprangode AGR+ANM HUSB25 Valanchery AGR+ANM HUSB26 Valavannur AGR+ANM HUSB27 Vazhakkad AGR+ANM HUSB28 Kalady AGR+ANM HUSB29 A.R. Nagar AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB30 Angadipuram AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB31 Areekode AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB32 Edarikkode AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB33 Malappuram (M) AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB34 Manjeri (M) AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB35 Munniyoor AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB36 Othukkungal AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB37 Ozhur AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB38 Pallikkal AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB39 Parappur AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB40 Perintalmanna (M) AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB41 Purathur AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB42 Thalakkad AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB43 Thennala AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB44 Thirunavaya AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB45 Vengara AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB46 Vettom AGR+SSI+ANM HUSB47 Chelembra PRI ACTIVITY48 Wandoor PRI ACTIVITY49 Aliparambu PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)50 Anakkayam PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)51 Cheekkode PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)52 Edapatta PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)53 Edavanna PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)54 Edayoor PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)55 Irimpiliyam PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)56 Kalikavu PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)57 Karuvarakundu PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)58 Kavannoor PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)59 Keezhattur PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)60 Keezhparamba PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)61 Kodur PRI ACTIVITY(AGR)



ACTIVITY PATTERN 61

Fig 9.1: Activity Pattern of the settlements of the district

It is seen that as per the activity pattern derived,

the predominant activity is primary activity (agriculture)

in 44 LSGs, in 9 LSGs the predominant activity is

plantation. In 28 LSGs a mix of Agriculture and animal

husbandry activity is predominant. In another 18 LSGs

SSI along with agriculture and animal husbandary activity

is predominant. Ponnani and Tirur municipalities and

the grama panchayats of Kondotty, Kottakkal,(presently

municipality), Kuttippuram, Tanur, Tirurangadi and

Vazhayoor exhibit Tertiary activity pattern.

9.5 INFERENCE

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

CHAPTER 10 >>



Chapter 10NODES

In the Kerala context where urban rural

continuum persists, nodes have more importance than

it has in any other part of the country. Nodes are the

junctions formed by meeting of two or more roads.

The commercial development around these junctions

make them activity nodes and hence the name nodes.

Extensive field survey has been carried out to

identify the nodes and their l inkages. The nodes

NODES 63

identified are weighed and the major ones are

proposed to be linked to the District Road Network.

The following criteria have been adopted for

identification of nodes.

Nodes are identified on all importantintersections of roads in all the LSGs where there isa concentration of commercial activities.

Junctions with intense commercial activity or

physical development for a minimum distance of 250m

in all legs together or

In case of linear development, commercial

activity or physical development for a distance of

250m.

A list of important nodes identified within the

district and their hierarchy is given in the Table 10.1

and the spatial distribution of the nodes is shown in

Fig 10.1.

10.1 NODES

Table 10.1 Hierarchy of nodes

Sl No. Name of node Order of nodes Weightage of nodes Name of LSG

1 Manjeri 1st order 23.25 Manjeri (M)2 Areakode 18.25 Areakode 3 Malappuram 18 Malappuram (M)4 Kondotty 16.5 Kondotty

5 Perinthalmanna 15.5 Perinthalmanna (M)6 Kottakkal 15 Kottakkal 7 Tirur 14 Tirur (M)8 Vengara 13.75 Vengara 9 Edavanna 12.25 Edavnna

10 Kuttippuram 11.5 Kuttippuram 11 Nilambur 11.25 Nilambur 12 Puthanathani 10.5 Mankara

2nd

orde

r 3r

d or

der

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 9

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >



NODES64

13 Vylathur 9.75 Ponmundam 14 Angadipuram 9 Angadipuram 15 Valanchery 8.75 Valanchery 16 Wandoor 8.5 Wandoor 17 Karinkallathani 8 Thazhekode 18 Pandikkad 8 Pandikkad 19 Edappal 8 Edappal 20 Pookolathur 8 Kuzhimanna21 Changaramkulam 7.75 Alangode 22 Chamravattam 7.25 Ponnani (M)23 Chemmad 7 Tirurangadi 24 Valavannur 7 Valavannur 25 Anakkayam 6.75 Anakkayam 26 Valluvambram 6.75 Pookkottur 27 Kavannur 6.75 Kavannur 28 Vadapuram 6.75 Mampad 29 Edarikkode 6.75 Edarikkode 30 Kadampuzha 6.75 Marakkara 31 Tiruvali 6.75 Tiruvali 32 Kolappuram 6.75 AR Nagar 33 Chelari 6.5 Munniyur34 Parappanangadi 6.5 Parappanangadi 35 Vazhikkadavu 6.5 Vazhikkadavu36 Pulamanthole 6.5 Pulamanthole37 Makkaraparamba 6.5 Makkaraparamba 38 Kalikavu 6 Kalikavu 39 Koottilangadi 6 Koottilangadi 40 Pookottumpadam 6 Amarambalam 41 Mankada 6 Mankada 42 Karakunnu 6 Trikkalangode 43 Vadakkemanna 6 Kodur 44 Kolathur 6 Moorkanad 45 Pulpatta 6 Pulpatta 46 BP Angadi 5.25 Thalakkad 47 Padaparamba 5.25 Kuruva 48 Thirunavaya 4.5 Thirunavaya 49 Tanur 2.25 Tnur 50 Pulikkal 2 Pulikkal 51 Othukkungal 2 Othukkungal

4rd order

5th Order



Fig 10.1 spatial distribution of nodes

NODES 65

Manjeri is the first order node; Malappuram,

Areakode, Kondotty, Perintalmanna, Kottakkal and

Tirur are the second order nodes whereas Vengara,

Edavanna, Kuttipuram, Nilambur and Puthanathani are

the next lower order nodes.

10.2 SUGGESTED HIERARCHY OF NODES

A node is considered as a commercial centre.

Hence a threshold population is fixed for each grade of

nodes. The population to be served by a second order

node is fixed as 4,50,000 and that by a third order node

as 80,000. Based on this the sizes of service area polygon

are worked out and the future higher order nodes are

identified. However no second order nodes are further

Thus the suggested hierarchy of nodes are

as shown below.

Fig 10.2 Suggested Hierarchy of nodes

Identified since the service area identified do

not have the threshold population. The third order

nodes thus determined are

1. Valanchery

2. Valluvambram

3. Chemmad

4. Vylathur

5. Valavannur

6. Chamravattom

7. Edappal



Table 10.2 Proposed Hierarchy of Nodes

NODES66

10.3 INFERENCE

The nodes are formed at the road junctions.

The intensity of development at these nodes in most

of the cases is depending upon the hierarchy of roads

meeting at these junctions. The pattern of distribution

of the nodes shows that there is at least one

comparatively higher order node in most of the LSGs,

which serves the entire LSG and a number of lower

order nodes severing the immediate surroundings.

Based on existing hierarchy of nodes and areas un

served by major nodes, the proposed hierarchy of

nodes of Malappuram district is derived. Accordingly,

Manjeri is the existing first order node, Malappuram,

Areekode, Kondotty, Perintalmanna, Kottakkal and

Tirur are the second order nodes. Altogether there are

12 third order nodes of which 5 are existing third order

nodes 7 are proposed third order nodes.

Sl No.

Name of node

Order of

nod

Weightage

of nodes

Name of LSGI

1 Manjeri

1st order 23.25 Manjeri (M)

2 Areakode

2nd order 18.25 Areakode

3 Malappuram 18 Malappuram (M)4 Kondotty 16.5 Kondotty 5 Perinthalmanna 15.5 Perinthalmanna (M)

6 Kottakkal 15 Kottakkal 7 Tirur 14 Tirur (M)8 Vengara 13.75 Vengara 9 Edavanna 12.25 Edavnna 10 Kuttippuram 11.5 Kuttippuram 11 Nilambur 11.25 Nilambur 12 Puthanathani 10.5 Mankara 13 Valanchery 8.75 Valanchery 14 Valluvambram 6.75 Pookkottur 15 Chemmad 7 Tirurangadi 16 Vylathur 9.75 Ponmundam 17 Valavannur 7 Valavannur 18 Chamravattam 7.25 Ponnani (M)19 Edappal 8 Edappal 20 Angadipuram 9 Angadipuram 21 Wandoor 8.5 Wandoor 22 Karinkallathani 8 Thazhekode 23 Pandikkad 8 Pandikkad

3rd

orde

r 4r

d or

der

24 Pookolathur 8 Kuzhimanna25 Changaramkulam 7.75 Alangode 26 Anakkayam 6.75 Anakkayam 27 Kavannur 6.75 Kavannur 28 Vadapuram 6.75 Mampad 29 Edarikkode 6.75 Edarikkode 30 Kadampuzha 6.75 Marakkara 31 Tiruvali 6.75 Tiruvali 32 Kolappuram 6.75 AR Nagar 33 Chelari 6.5 Munniyur 34 Parappanangadi 6.5 Parappanangadi 35 Vazhikkadavu 6.5 Vazhikkadavu36 Pulamanthole 6.5 Pulamanthole37 Makkaraparamba 6.5 Makkaraparamba 38 Kalikavu 6 Kalikavu 39 Koottilangadi 6 Koottilangadi 40 m 6 Amarambalam 41 Mankada 6 Mankada 42 Karakunnu 6 Trikkalangode 43 Vadakkemanna 6 Kodur 44 Kolathur 6 Moorkanad 45 Pulpatta 6 Pulpatta 46 BP Angadi 5.25 Thalakkad 47 Padaparamba 5.25 Kuruva 48 Thirunavaya 4.5 Thirunavaya 49 Tanur 2.25 Tnur 50 Pulikkal 2 Pulikkal 51 Othukkungal 2 Othukkungal

5th

Ord

er

4rd

orde

r

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

CHAPTER 11 >>



Chapter 11CONNECTIVITY

11.1 INTRODUCTION

CONNECTIVITY 67

11.3 RAIL NETWORK

The ‘Shoranur – Mangalore’ and ‘Shoranur-

Nilambur road’ are the two rail links in the district. The

history is that railway line connecting Kadalundi and

Tirur which form part of Shoranur – Mangalore line was

the first rail link opened for traffic by the Madras

Railway Company on 12th March 1861 and it was

extended to Kuttippuram on lst May 1861. The Shoranur

– Nilambur feeder railway line was opened for traffic

in February 192. This railway line was constructed

mainly for the transportation of forest produces. The

total length of the Railway line in the district is 91 km.

The main stations along the Shoranur-Mangalore rail

links in the district are Kuttippuram, Thirunavaya, Tirur,

N H 17 & 213 are the major National Highways in

the district. It has a total length of 221.35 km passing

through the district. The major state highways in the

district are Perumbilavu - Nilambur, Tirur - Manjeri,

Parappanangadi - Malappuram, and Kozhikode –

Nilambur – Gudallur roads. The state PWD maintains

the SH and other district roads. The total length of

roads maintained by the PWD is 1828 km. Apart from

these roads the LSGs of the district also own and

maintain a few roads totaling to a length of 12500 km.

11.2 ROAD NET WORK

The district‘s major regional l inkages of

national importance are the Kochi - Mangalore NH 17

and Palakkad - Kozhikode NH 213. Shoranur- Mangalore

line and Shoranur – Nilambur road line passing through

the district impart the rail link to the district. Calicut

international Air port, the only airport in the Malabar

region located at Karippur in Pallikkal panchayat of

Malappuram district gives international connectivity

to the district.

Tanur, Parappanangadi, Vallikkunnu and Kadalundi.

Cherukara, Angadippuram, Pattikad, Melattur, Tuvvur,

Todiyappulam, Vaniyambalam and Nilambur Road are

the stations in Shornur – Nilambur Road line. Tirur is

the most important station in the district; services are

available from this station to most of the towns within

the state and the country.

11.4 WATER TRANSPORTWater Transport is limited to Ponnani region.

Ponnani is a minor port in the estuary of the river

Bharathapuzha and is very shallow. The important

places connected by waterways are Ponnani, Tirur and

Tirurangadi. Tirur River which flows north-south forms

part of West Coast water transport system. The share

of water transport is negligible compared to other

modes of transport.

Railway Station,Tirur

Boat service in Bharathapuzha

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 10



The Calicut International Air Port located 24km

from the district headquarters is catering to the air

travel needs of the people of Malabar region. Services

are operated to the major destinations of the country

as well as the Gulf countries from this airport.

Calicut International Airport at Karippur

CONNECTIVITY68

Fig 11.1 Transportation Network (Existing) - Malappuram District

11.5 AIR TRANSPORT



11.6 FUTURE REGIONAL ROAD NETWORK

The future regional road net work is proposed

taking into consideration the hierarchy of settlements,

hierarchy of nodes and existing linkages. For this a

conceptual road network is formed by connecting the

higher order settlements to higher order nodes(shown

in Fig 11.2). This is compared with the existing road

network to identify the missing links. From the study it

is seen that majority of these connections are existing

roads, though some of them need strengthening or

modification to alignment.

Fig11.2 Conceptual Road Network based on hierarchy of settlements

69CONNECTIVITY



The table below shows the important connections shown in the conceptual road network.

CONNECTIVITY

Table 11.1 Important connections shown in the conceptual road network

Sl No. Name of RoadCategory of Road

1 Chamravattam Vattamkulam Ponnani- Palakkad Raod MDR

Thrisur - Kuttippuram SH

Mangalapuram Edapally NH

3 Kuttippuram Valanchery Mangalapuram Edapally NH

4 Valanchery Changuvetty Mangalapuram Edapally NH


Parappanangadi - Malappuram SH






Parappanangadi - Areakode SH

Chemmad - Thalappara MDR



Kottappuram - Kakkanchery MDR

Kozhikode - Palakkad NH

Tirur - Manjeri SH

Puthoor - Padapramba MDR

Padaparamba - Angadippuram MDR


Valanchery - Angadippuram MDR


12 Malappuram Perintalmanna Kozhikode - Palakkad NH

13 Malappuram Valluvambram Kozhikode - Palakkad NH


Tirurkad - Anakkayam MDR

Tirur - Manjeri SH

15 Kondotty Valluvambram Kozhikode - Palakkad NH

14 Perintalmanna Manjeri

10 Perinthalmanna Changuvetty

11 Valanchery Perintalmanna

8 Tirurangadi Thenchipalam

9 Thenchipalam Kondotty

6 Vengara Tirurangadi

7 Tirurangadi Kondotty

Node/Settlement

2 Kuttippuram VattamKulam

5 Tirurangadi Changuvetty

70



71

From Fig.11.2 it is seen that the link between

Vengara and Parappanangadi needs strengthening in a

small stretch near Kakkad. Similarly the Thenhippalam-

Kondotty road also need strengthening at some

stretches. The existing alignments viz. Tirur- Valanchery

and Tirur- Tirurangadi are very lengthy and need

modification. There are no existing alignments for

Valanchery- Malappuram and T irurangadi-

Valluvambram. For Manjeri- Wandoor there is an

existing unimportant road which needs strengthening.

Comparing the result of this study with that of

the Road Connectivity Plan For Malappuram- An MGP

Initiative prepared in 2006-07 it can be seen that the

alternate alignments for some of the lengthy or

circuitous routes are not feasible due to the difficult

terrain and this need further detailed study.

The proposed regional road network is shown

in Fig 11.3. The Proposed Roads are

1. Tirur – Valanchery

2. Valanchery – Malappuram

3. Tirur – Tirurangadi

4. Tirurangadi – Valluvambram

5. Wandoor – Nilambur.

16 Tirur Changuvetty Tirur - Manjeri SH

17 Changuvetty Malappuram Tirur - Manjeri SH

18 Malappuram Manjeri Tirur - Manjeri SH

Parappanangadi - Areekode SH

Edavanna - Koilandy SH

20 Areekode Edavanna Edavanna - Koilandy SH

21 Manjeri Edavanna CNG Road SH

22 Manjeri Valluvambram CNG Road SH

23 Nilambur Edavanna CNG Road SH

Perumpilavu - Nilambur SH

Perintalmanna - Vadapuram MDR

25 Tirur Chamravattam BP Angadi - Chamravattam MDR

Manjeri - Areekode MDR

Edavanna - Koilandy SH

Tiruvaly - Edavanna MDR

Tiruvaly - Wandoor MDR

28 Malappuram Vengara Parappanangadi - Malappuram SH

29 Tirur Valanchery No Alignment Existing

30 Tirur Tirurangadi No Alignment Existing

31 Valanchery Malappuram No Alignment Existing

32 Tirurangadi Valluvambram No Alignment Existing

33 Manjeri Wandoor Thrikkalangode- Wandoor MDR

19 Kondotty Areekode

27 Wandoor Edavanna

24 Perintalmanna Wandoor

26 Manjeri Areekode

CONNECTIVITY



Fig 11.3 Proposed regional road network

11.7 INFERENCE

It can be concluded that Malappuram District

is well connected to other parts of the State by road,

rail and air; the share of water transport is negligible

compared to other modes of transport.

CONNECTIVITY72

admin

Text Box

CHAPTER 12 >>

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >



Chapter-12SPATIAL STRUCTURE

12.1 INTRODUCTION

The spatial structure of a region is defined as

the geographical distribution of people and other uses

of land across the region and the pattern of trips

necessitated by these land uses. Spatial structure of a

region defines the functions within the sub regions

(LSGs), hierarchy and connectivity. The functional

Fig 12.1: Formulation of Spatial Structure

SPATIAL STRUCTURE 73

hierarchy of settlements, their activity pattern and

connectivity among the constituent LSGs taken

together gives shape to the spatial structure of an

area. This is obtained by overlaying the maps of

Activity Pattern, Hierarchy of settlements and

Connectivity.

Spatial Structure

Proposed Hierarchy

of settlements

Activity pattern

Proposed Road network

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 11

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >



12.3 HIERARCHY OF SETTLEMENTS

The higher order settlements also show a trend

of following the transport corridor. No new second

order settlements are proposed. The south east

quadrant is devoid of a higher order settlement mainly

due to the concentration of plantations in this area.

Fig 12.3 Proposed Hierarchy of settlements –Malappuram

District

The spatial structural integrity is the key to

robust economic development of any region. The major

factors affecting the spatial structure of a region are

activity pattern of settlements, connectivity and

physiographical limitations.

12.2 ACTIVITY PATTERN

The plantation and dry cultivation are

concentrated mainly on the high land region. The

midland region has a concentration of agriculture and

consists of small market centres (nodes) almost evenly

distributed in the region. The urban centres also show

dispersed distribution in the district.

Fig 12.2 Activity pattern –Malappuram District

SPATIAL STRUCTURE74

12.4 PROPOSED ROAD NETWORK

Physiographically, the district has distinct high

land on the eastern side, a mid land region and a coastal

strip on the west. This makes the connectivity in east-

west direction difficult. However, even with these

limitations, a few roads are running in the east west

direction (T irur Manjeri State High way, Calicut



SPATIAL STRUCTURE 75Nilambur Gudallore road, Valancheri Perintalmanna

road, Parappanangadi Malappuram road, Kottakkal

Perintalmanna road etc). As a result the north south

corridor which is very strong elsewhere in the state

with National Highway and Railway running in this

direction does not get a primacy. The proposed road

net work connecting the higher order settlements are

shown in Fig 12.4. Most of these roads are existing

unimportant roads which have to be up graded as per

the proposal.

Fig 12.4 Proposed Road network–Malappuram District

12.5 FORMULATION OF SPATIAL STRUCTURE

Overlaying the activity pattern, hierarchy of

settlements and road network gives an idea of the

spatial structure of the district.

From the analysis the spatial structure is conceived

as follows:-

The plantation and forest resources are

concentrated in the eastern highland region. In the

west, the coastal strip is segregated from the rest of

the district by railway line running in north south

direction. This is a constraint on connectivity. The

economic activities, various land uses, workers and

people are almost evenly distributed in the rest of the

district. The urban nodes are also evenly distributed

showing a dispersed urban growth. The transport

network (well developed) is in the form of a hub and

spoke with an outer ring strengthening this nature of

growth. Manjeri, Malappuram and Valluvambram

junctions come in the vertices of a triangle which forms

the hub. The spokes are approximately in the north,

south, east and west directions. Higher order

settlements (other than Manjeri and Malappuram) are

placed mostly at junctions where these hubs intersect

the outer ring. So the district has a sound spatial

structure which needs only a few improvements (like

standards of roads, alignment changes etc) by conscious

efforts.

Fig 12.5 Formulation of Spatial structure



Fig 12.6 Spatial structure–Malappuram District

SPATIAL STRUCTURE76

.

12.6 INFERENCE

As per the proposed hierarchy of settlements,


settlements and 9 third order settlements in the

District. The character wise analysis of these higher

order settlement shows that, the first order settlement,

Perintalmanna Municipality is urban in nature. The

spatial structure of the district includes distinct area

of forest resources, agricultural land and urban

activity area overlaid with higher order settlements

in an almost rational arrangement and the road system

connecting the different activities to the higher order

settlements and providing circulation among the

higher order settlements.

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

CHAPTER 13 >>



Chapter 13SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Malappuram is the district having the largest

number of LSGs in the state- 100 grama panchayats and

7 municipalities. The physiography of the district

deserve special mention as it have all the three

divisions, namely high land in the eastern and north

eastern parts, mid land in the central area and low land

on the western side adjacent to the lakshadweep sea.

The district has about 29% of its geographical area as

forest, mainly seen in the eastern part of the district.

The district has a rich history and cultural

heritage. It has a distinct position in the history of

freedom struggle. The district is well connected to other

parts of the state and the country through three modes

of transport, viz. road, rail and air.

Malappuram is the most populous district in

the state, and also shows the highest rate of growth of

population. It ranks fifth in the state in population

density. Two third of the total population live in 28.27%

of the area of the district, confined mostly to the low

land and midland areas.

The study of the occupational structure of the

district shows that around 76 % of the population are

non workers. The district is having the lowest rate of

work participation in the state. With respect to number

of workers, there is a drastic decline in the primary

sector, mainly agriculture. The only sector which shows

growth is the service sector. It is observed that the rural

areas of the district is also slowly withdrawing from

the primary sector and have started depending more

on the service sector.

The district is blessed with land and other

natural resources. In most of the LSGs there is a high

concentration of agriculture land use. The land use

analysis shows that urban development has taken place

mostly along the major transport corridors. This

indicates the necessity of proper planning intervention

in order to avoid haphazard growth.

The study of the functional character of

settlements show that out of the 107 settlements 68

are rural, 29 are semi rural, 6 are semi urban and 4 are

urban. This shows the comparatively lower level of

urbanisation of the district.

In the suggested hierarchy of settlements,


SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 77

settlements and third order settlements in the District.

The first order settlement, Perinthalmanna is urban in

nature. Malappuram Municipality, though the

headquarters of the district, belongs to the second

order group, followed by the other three municipal

towns in the district, viz. Manjeri, Tirur and Ponnani.

Of the nine third order settlements Kottakkal and

Nilambur have attained urban status recently;

Angadippuram, Kondotty and Valanchery are expected

to attain urban status by 2011 and Thenhippalam,

Tirurangadi, Areekode and Wandoor in 2021

respectively.

The District shows a lesser level of urbanization

when compared to the State average. The percentage

of urban population in the district is somewhat steady

in the past two decades. It indicates that the increase

in the urban population is only by natural growth and

the migration from the rural areas is only marginal.

Malappuram is one of the least urbanized districts in

the state, which occupies twelfth place among the

fourteen districts leaving only Idukki and Wayanad

districts behind it.

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 12

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 12

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >



SUMMARY OF FINDINGS78

Considering the functional character, future

urban profile and land use concentration in the LSGs,

suitable activity patterns are assigned to settlements

in the district. Activity pattern of 44 LSGs is agriculture,

in 9 LSGs the predominant activity is plantation. In 28

LSGs a mix of agriculture and animal husbandry activity

is predominant whereas there is a predominance of

small scale industries also in addition to these two in

another 18 LSGs; Ponnani and Tirur municipalities and

the grama panchayats of Kondotty, Kottakkal(presently

municipality), Kuttippuram, Tanur, Tirurangadi and

Vazhayoor exhibit Tertiary activity pattern.

The pattern of distribution of the nodes shows

that there is at least one comparatively higher order

node in most of the LSGs, which serves the entire LSG

and a number of lower order nodes serving the

immediate surroundings. Based on existing hierarchy

of nodes and areas un served by major nodes, the

proposed hierarchy of nodes of Malappuram district

is derived. Accordingly, Manjeri is the existing first

order node, Malappuram, Areekode, Kondotty,

Perintalmanna, Kottakkal and Tirur are the second

The district is well connected to other parts of

the state by road, rail and air; the share of water

transport is negligible compared to other modes of

transport. The future regional road net work is

proposed taking into consideration the hierarchy of

settlements, hierarchy of nodes and existing linkages.

For this a conceptual road network is formed by

connecting the higher order settlements to higher

order nodes (shown in Fig 11.2). This is compared with

the existing road network to identify the missing links.

From the study it is seen that majority of these

connections are existing roads, though some of them

need strengthening or modification to alignment. The

Tirur-Valanchery, Tirur-T irurangadi, T irurangadi-

Valluvambram, Valanchery- Malappuram and

Wandoor- Nilambur are the proposed roads. The

Proposed connectivity net work is shown in Fig 11.2

The spatial structure of the district is

determined by synergically linking the hierarchy of

settlements and nodes, connectivity and the activity

pattern of settlements. The spatial structure of

Malappuram, thus evolved is depicted in Fig 12.6 of

Chapter 12. It includes distinct area of forest resources,

agricultural land and urban activity area overlaid with

higher order settlements in an almost rational

arrangement and the road system connecting the

different activities to the higher order settlements

and providing circulation among the higher order

settlements.

Considering the criteria like existing urban

areas, census urban areas, grade of LSGs and hierarchy

of settlements, the future urban profile is derived.It

is envisaged that there will be 22 urban LSGs in

Malappuram district by the year 2021. Besides the

existing 5 urban settlements Kottakkal, Nilambur,

Angadipuram, Kondotty, Parappanangadi and

Valanchery are expected to attain urban status by 2011

and the next 11 settlements to become urban by 2021.

order nodes. Altogether there are 12 third order nodes

of which 5 are existing third order nodes 7 are proposed

third order nodes.

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >

admin

Text Box

ANNEXES >>



ANNEXE 1 79

ERNAD TALUK

1 Akampadam2 Amarambalam3 Chokkad4 Chungathara5 Edakkara6 Kalikavu7 Karulai8 Karuvarakundu

PERINTALMANNA TALUK

Annexe 1TALUKS AND VILLAGES IN MALAPPURAM DISTRICT

NILAMBUR TALUK

1 Areekode2 Cheekode3 Chembrasseri4 Cherukavu5 Edavanna6 Elankur7 Karakunnu8 Kavanoor9 Kizhparamba10 Kondotty11 Kuzhimanna12 Morayur13 Muthuvallur14 Nediyiruppu15 Pandallur16 Pandikkad17 Perakamanna18 Pookkottur19 Pulikkal20 Pulpatta21 Trikkalangode22 Urangattiri23 Vazhakkad24 Vazhayur25 Vettikkattiri26 Vettilappara

9 Kerala estate10 Kurumbalangode11 Mampad12 Nilambur13 Porur14 Pullippadam15 Tiruvali16 Thuvvur17 Vazhikkadavu18 Vellayur19 Wandoor

1 Aliparamba2 Anamangad3 Angadippuram4 Arakkuparamba5 Edapatta6 Elamkulam7 Kariavttom8 Keezhattur9 Kodur10 Koottilangadi11 Kuruva12 Kuruvambalam13 Mankada14 Melattur15 Moorkanad16 Nenmini17 Pulamanthole18 Puzhakkattiri19 Thazhekode20 Vadakkangara21 Valambur22 Vettathur

admin

Text Box

<< CHAPTER 13

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >



PONNANI TALUK

ANNEXE 180

TIRUR TALUK

1 Ananthavoor2 Athavanad3 Cheriyamundam4 Edayur9 Kurumbathur10 Kuttippuram1 Ananthavoor2 Athavanad3 Cheriyamundam4 Edayur9 Kurumbathur10 Kuttippuram11 Mangalam12 Marakkara13 Melmuri14 Naduvattom15 Niramaruthur16 Ozhur17 Pariyapuram18 Perumanna19 Ponmala20 Ponmundom21 Purathur22 Thalakkad23 Thanalur24 Thanur25 Thirunavaya26 Triprangode27 Valavannur28 Vettom11 Mangalam12 Marakkara13 Melmuri14 Naduvattom15 Niramaruthur16 Ozhur17 Pariyapuram18 Perumanna19 Ponmala20 Ponmundom21 Purathur

22 Thalakkad23 Thanalur24 Thanur25 Thirunavaya26 Triprangode27 Valavannur28 Vettom

1 Alancode2 Edappal3 Kalady4 Maranchery5 Nannamukku6 Perumpadappu7 Thavanoor8 Vattamkulam9 Veliyancode

TIRURANGADI TALUK

1 AbruRahiman Nagar2 Ariyallur3 Chelembra4 Kannamangalam5 Moonniyur6 Nannambra7 Neduva8 Othukkungal9 Pallikkal10 Parappanangadi11 Parappur12 Peruvallur13 Thenhipalam14 Thennala15 Tirurangadi16 Urakam17 Vallikunnu18 Vengara



Annexe 2POPULATION PROJECTION-KERALA

Table 1 Population of Kerala

The population of the State is calculated based

on the decreasing rate method since the growth rate

of population of the State has been decreasing for the

last four decades. The tables below (Table-1) show

the population details of Kerala over a century.

The variation in the growth rate of population over a century is shown in the figure-1

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

Series1 11.75 9.16 21.85 16.04 22.82 24.76 26.29 19.24 14.32 9.43

1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001

Fig. 1 Growth rate of Population-Kerala

ANNEXE 2 81

Year

19011911192119311941195119611971198119912001

Total population

6396262714767378021279507050

11031541135491181690371521347375254536802909851831841374

Growth rate

11.759.16

21.8516.0422.8224.7626.2919.2414.329.43

% Decrease inPopulation Growth rate

-22.06138.66-26.6242.328.496.18

-26.83-25.56-34.17



Growth rate of population - Projection

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

Growth rate of ppn

Year

Series1 11.75 9.16 21.85 16.04 22.82 24.76 26.29 19.24 14.32 9.43 6.21 4.08

1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991 2011 2021

Figure-2: Projected Growth rate of population - Kerala

The projected population details are shown in the table -2

Population of KERALA

ANNEXE 282

Year

1901191119211931194119511961197119811991200120112021

Total population

6396262714767378021279507050

110315411354911816903715213473752545368029098518318413743381719635198589

Growth rate

11.75

9.1621.8516.0422.8224.7626.2919.2414.32

9.436.214.08

% Decrease inPopulation Growth rate

-22.06138.66-26.6242.32

8.496.18

-26.83-25.56-34.17-34.17-34.17



ESTIMATION OF NINE FOLD CLASSIFICATION OFWORKERS FOR 2001

Annexe 3

ANNEXE 3 83

LSGI name

Urangattiri

Keezhparamba

Cheekkode

Areekode

Kavannoor

Kuzhimanna

Pulpatta

Muthuvaloor

Vazhakkad

Vazhayoor

Cherukavu

Pulikkal

Kondotty

Nediyiruppu

Morayur

Pookkottur

Anakkayam

Pandikkad

Edavanna

Trikkalangode

Chaliyar

Chungathara

Pothukal

Edakkara

Moothedom

Vazhikkadavu

Karulai

Nilambur

Chokkad

Cultiva-

tors

704

305

471

411

748

838

922

401

519

247

235

541

199

493

478

741

979

1516

765

1063

562

875

903

564

874

1417

498

392

562

Agr lbrs

2766

737

1570

1454

2040

1438

2600

1336

1247

1022

682

1211

807

1226

1363

1684

2303

3670

3162

5445

1589

2869

2341

1899

2867

4705

1624

1303

1423

Livestock,

Forestry,

Fishing,

Hunting,

Plantation,

Orchards,

and allied

activites

1717

198

129

136

235

184

212

109

338

352

199

440

81

162

261

240

794

306

523

401

2132

1667

1252

687

657

768

1057

734

1960

Mining

and

Quarring

162

219

365

158

232

531

623

313

375

709

1091

1177

206

192

338

125

193

210

159

169

40

45

35

139

32

44

73

48

108

Manufac-

turing,

Processing

Serviciing

and

repairs in

Household

industries

145

44

112

197

206

108

166

97

142

190

102

66

110

79

113

154

258

389

311

212

133

170

130

92

168

353

118

309

285

Manufa-

cturing,

Processing,

servicing and

repairs in

other than

household

industries

339614792556662711548676

178114231375

5881207

882676732834803

1019682152574430561222508408

1700329

Trade

and

commerce

1078

794

656

963

903

960

1042

557

896

1042

1368

1110

1102

1150

998

1055

1714

1380

1379

1116

656

1212

911

1157

623

1668

733

3009

1060

Transport ,

storage

and

Communic-

ations

407

325

301

477

494

518

488

256

552

933

1086

645

843

709

699

703

952

933

968

949

280

523

395

397

256

589

478

1282

442

Other

Services

2134

1518

1667

2404

2223

1637

1761

1419

1652

1604

1949

1872

1440

1665

1585

1835

2638

3309

1967

2143

776

1882

1414

1467

952

2176

979

3068

1602



ANNEXE 384

LSGI name

AmarambalamKalikavuMampad

TiruvaliPorur

WandoorThuvvoor

KaruvarakunduMankadaMakkaraparamba

KoottilangadiKodur

KuruvaPuzhakkattiriAngadipuram

PulamantholeMoorkanad

EdapattaMelattur

KeezhatturVettathurThazhekode

AliparambuElamkulam

VeliyankodePerumpadappuNannamukku

AlangodeMaranchery

ThavanoorVattamkulam

EdappalKaladyMarakkara

EdayoorValanchery

Cultiva-

tors

507557455

543590

949672

442822302

404564

764730955

775689

730606

102010451011

1070644

265307728

640323

548743

546483612

395417

Agr lbrs

177416151732

23332328

31921790

10112406

546

1058738

199016262974

25422205

24532073

236820143195

31821793

799381953

14271074

14211873

129912551181

1517812

Livestock,

Forestry,Fishing,

Hunting,Plantation,

Orchards,

and alliedactivites

20521852

881

289274

534552

3426251278

360526

381225327

216226

208144

833204159

115167

16731523

210

293557

361208

276317845

218166

Mining

andQuarring

63102100

260165

157171

106131330

231130

38869

163

97308

7621

11846

126

107113

41025

13032

318317

126281254

404234

Manufac-

turing,Processing

Serviciingand

repairs in

Householdindustries

726268186

233522

780308

381266

55

11099

287220336

201249

155393

161329305

439284

149215264

132221

337234

228295108

216176

Manufa-

cturing,Processing,

servicing andrepairs inother than

householdindustries

731310701

589610

1541687

629680294

685596

761931

1342

689649

379522

815373505

797491

929818747

9571111

8851208

1068779495

4901040

Trade

andcommerce

131410031160

1013801

17791197

1580933578

14071580

145811672191

12661319

610777

1122806

1296

15301016

180415901415

17581877

14151805

20111241

971

14462104

Transport ,

storageand

Communic-ations

588416725

469424

1047469

815408339

861771

790512976

502444

202439

372305431

532350

590476656

623658

715720

877628

1194

6221086

Other

Services

154315142074

15991257

21371277

191417731071

22521763

214915683077

19541651

7961176

163011841686

20191217

134213321736

17991753

18121720

182915901636

16372215



ANNEXE 3 85

596537405

435619

475250325

197109

276602

552292142

498198

183428490

128471

482297

201406479

521280

329308

464360236

389453

448629411

33196

126

11231094

820

6761074

963433542

581280

652931

522579309

1185443

565788

1096

772972

522732

8171629

901

1176956

732577

1121935364

548645

7752580

792

1607420

514

320415191

12694

1128762

6143

4767

395118

11431

1062

173

280492

254254

1169198

9234

4328

1123731

15461

52382313

4557

39

4631052

655

2088672

441373474

782549

365327

4081186

905

887825

120416701041

19611338

5461613

896693

1028

13091476

8121738

11651038

475

670752

69020291704

14132061

1684

116326991647

17041105

13721065

918

23501653

1275985

106934541596

17121700

286619052007

10921528

11681922

169313112287

37073436

23384005

258825161574

15031370

98566703854

23544259

4260

9281363

625

985460

441526464

1059746

638465

4691115

599

938717

1066731975

821806

5431132

460355601

9071080

4821053

679325348

616803

51226561734

12603235

1634

187823581564

24561458

143212901205

16731176

11621138

142721981345

21832109

242316061896

17962546

15572542

259220061398

22412795

15412400

15831494

927

18962302

139652504604

46364790

3088

AthavanadKuttippuramIrimpiliyam

KottakkalPonmala

OzhurPonmundomPerumanna Klari

ThanlurNiramaruthur

CheriyamundomValavannur

KalpakancheriTanurMangalam

ThirunavayaThalakkad

VettomPurathurTriprangode

ChelembraPallikkal

OorakamVallikunnu

ThenchippalamPeruvalloorKannamangalam

MunniyoorParappanangadi

NannambraTirurangadi

VengaraA.R. NagarThennala

ParappurOthukkungal

EdarikkodeManjeriMalappuram

PerinthalmannaPonnani

Tirur

1061437224

225351

308332256

15231072

272666

110663222567

490350

47662864

420

206151

1311841

136105214

2634441

304271

24080

193

416515

450644525

985270

415

190456378

128136

477107

67

204143

7684

71522185

182143

183431181

115280

118657

133105117

624505

138157

133248

71

347206

45322212

342262

210



ANNEXE 486

Annexe 4LIST OF LSGs WITH CI OF VARIOUS LAND USES

GREATER THAN ONEName of LSG Forest Water bodies Residential Agriculture Plantation Res/Agr Mix Other

A.R. Nagar Alangode Aliparambu Amarambalam Anakkayam Angadipuram Areekode Athavanad Chaliyar Cheekkode Chelembra Cheriyamundom Cherukavu Chokkad Chungathara Edakkara Edapatta Edappal Edarikkode Edavanna Edayoor Elamkulam Irimpiliyam Kalady Kalikavu Kalpakancheri KannamangalamKarulai Karuvarakundu Kavannoor Keezhattur Keezhparamba Kodur Kondotty Koottilangadi

Built-up



ANNEXE 4 87

Kottakkal Kuruva Kuttippuram Kuzhimanna Makkaraparamba Malappuram Mampad Mangalam Manjeri Mankada Marakkara Maranchery Melattur Moorkanad Moothedom Morayur Munniyoor Muthuvalloor Nannambra Nannamukku Nediyiruppu Nilambur Niramaruthur Oorakam Othukkungal Ozhur Pallikkal Pandikkad Parappanangadi Parappur Perinthalmanna Perumanna Klari Perumpadappu Peruvalloor Ponmala Ponmundom Ponnani Pookkottur Porur Pothukall Pulamanthole Pulikkal



ANNEXE 488

Pulpatta Purathur Puzhakkattiri Tanur Thalakkad Thanlur Thavanoor Thazhekode Thenchippalam Thennala Thirunavaya Thuvvoor Tirur Tirurangadi Tiruvali Trikkalangode Triprangode Urangattiri Valanchery Valavannur Vallikunnu Vattamkulam Vazhakkad Vazhayoor Vazhikkadavu Veliyankode Vengara Vettathur Vettom Wandoor



89 ANNEXE 5

Annexe 5CONCENTRATION INDEX OF URBAN, AGRICULTURE,

FOREST AND PLANTATION LAND USE40 Kodur 1.23 1.38 0.08 041 Kuruva 1.17 1.42 0 042 Puzhakkattiri 0.32 1.49 0 043 Angadipuram 0.41 1.49 0 044 Pulamanthole 0.86 1.42 0 045 Moorkanad 0.63 1.45 0 046 Edapatta 0.25 1.48 0.07 047 Melattur 0.57 1.46 0 048 Keezhattur 0.49 1.47 0 049 Vettathur 0.47 1.18 1.05 050 Thazhekode 0.67 1.28 0.64 051 Aliparambu 0.21 1.49 0 052 Elamkulam 1.49 1.35 0 053 Veliyankode 0.29 1.32 0 054 Perumpadappu 0.44 1.39 0 055 Nannamukku 0.03 1.46 0 056 Alangode 0.17 1.5 0 057 Maranchery 0.07 1.07 0 058 Thavanoor 0.16 1.31 0 059 Vattamkulam 0.14 1.52 0 060 Edappal 0.02 1.17 0 061 Marakkara 2.29 1.31 0 062 Edayoor 2.34 1.31 0 063 Valanchery 2.06 1.33 0 064 Athavanad 2.17 1.33 0 065 Kuttippuram 2.44 1.08 0 066 Irimpiliyam 0.87 1.35 0 067 Kottakkal 3.95 1.16 0 068 Ponmala 1.06 1.43 0 069 Ozhur 0.49 1.49 0 070 Ponmundom 0.48 1.49 0 071

Perumanna Klari

3.45 1.21 0 072 Thanlur 0.26 1.5 0 073 Niramaruthur 0.28 1.49 0 074

Cheriyamundom

0.3 1.5 0 075 Valavannur 0.36 1.5 0 076 Kalpakancheri 1.78 1.37 0 077 Tanur 1.66 0 0 078 Mangalam 0.46 1.41 0 079 Thirunavaya 0.21 1.38 0 080 Thalakkad 0.07 1.48 0 0

UrbanAgricult

ureForest

Plantation

1 Urangattiri 1.23 0.85 1.9 02 Keezhparamba 0.71 1.26 0.42 03 Cheekkode 2.49 1.28 0 04 Areekode 3.81 1.14 0 05 Kavannoor 0.72 1.45 0 06 Kuzhimanna 3.58 1.19 0 07 Pulpatta 1.02 1.43 0 08 Vazhakkad 2.52 1.21 0 09 Vazhayoor 2 1.24 0 0

10 Cherukavu 3.65 1.19 0 011 Pulikkal 3.31 1.23 0 012 Kondotty 2.5 1.29 0 013 Nediyiruppu 2.99 1.25 0 014 Morayur 1.87 1.36 0 015 Pookkottur 1.09 1.43 0 016 Anakkayam 0.42 1.46 0 017 Pandikkad 0.46 1.47 0.02 018 Edavanna 1 1.3 0.33 019 Trikkalangode 0.51 1.48 0 020 Chaliyar 0.54 0.3 3.72 1.2221 Chungathara 0.68 0.72 2.09 1.6422 Pothukal 0.48 0.14 4.51 023 Edakkara 0.21 0.76 1.56 4.5924 Moothedom 0.04 1.14 0 6.4425 Vazhikkadavu 0.07 0.4 2.73 5.1626 Karulai 0.34 0.17 3.19 6.2127 Nilambur 0.19 1.2 0 4.0628 Chokkad 0.36 0.63 2.85 029 Amarambalam 0.43 0.44 3.51 0.0730 Kalikavu 0.41 1.16 0.94 0.9231 Mampad 0.38 0.8 1.3 4.7732 Tiruvali 0.93 1.44 0 033 Porur 0.68 1.46 0.03 034 Wandoor 0.45 1.46 0.09 035 Thuvvoor 0.16 1.51 0 036 Karuvarakundu 0.43 0.98 1.72 037 Mankada 0.78 1.37 0.31 038 Nakkaraparamba 0.9 1.44 0 039 Koottilangadi 1.01 1.4 0 0

Sl.No

Name of Panchayats

Concentration Index



ANNEXE 590

81 Vettom 0.66 1.35 0 082 Purathur 0.6 0 0 083 Triprangode 0.01 1.37 0 084 Chelembra 0.95 1.44 0 085 Pallikkal 4.37 1.12 0 086 Oorakam 2.97 1.25 0 087 Vallikunnu 0.38 1.3 0 088 Thenchippalam 2.84 1.24 0 089 Peruvalloor 6.26 0.94 0 090 Kannamangalam 6.39 0.94 0 091 Munniyoor 1.88 1.23 0 092 Parappanangadi 0.62 1.42 0 093 Nannambra 0.57 1.46 0 0

94 Tirurangadi 2.59 0 0 095 Vengara 3.53 0 0 096 A.R. Nagar 5 0 0 097 Thennala 3.65 0 0 098 Parappur 2.4 1.26 0 099 Othukkungal 1.17 1.4 0 0

100 Edarikkode 4.69 1.08 0 0101 Manjeri 0.63 1.47 0 0102 Malappuram 1.56 1.35 0 0103 Perinthalmanna 0.65 1.46 0.02 0104 Ponnani 1.25 0 0 0105 Tirur 0.8 0 0 0106 Muthuvallur 2.49 1.28 0 0107 Kalady 0.16 1.31 0 0



WEIGHTAGE OF FACILITIESAnnexe 6A

Name of Facilities Weightage

Post Office HO 26.75

LP and UP 1

HS 1

HSS 1.13

Arts & Science College 4.65

BEd College 8.23

Teachers Training Institute 8.92

Engineering College/ College of Science and Technology/Poly Technic 9.73

Medical college ( Ayurveda/Allopathy/Homeo) 53.5

Banks(National/scheduled/cooperative bank) 1.02

Seed Farm 17.83

Market -Weekly 4.28

ITC/ITI 3.96

Taluk Hospital/District Hospital 17.83

CHC 11.89

PHC 1.13

ESI Hospital 35.67

Super speciality 107

Speciality Alone 35.67

Veteriinary Hospital 6.29

Krishi Bhavan 1.01

Fire station 21.4

Ferries/Boat jetty 107

Railway Station 8.23

Bus stand 3.45

Cinema A 21.4

Cinema B 6.69

Cinema C 1.62

Airport 107

University 107

Telephone exchange 1.57

ANNEXE 6A 91



92 ANNEXE 6B

Annexe 6B COMPOSITE FUNCTIONAL INDEX (CFI) OF

SETTLEMENTS

Sl.No Name of LSG CFI Sl.No Name of LSG CFI1 Thennala 9.17 37 Kalikavu 26.132 Kalady 10.13 38 Pookkottur 26.793 Niramaruthur 10.92 39 Perumpadappa 27.384 Ponmundam 12.21 40 Kuruva 27.705 Karulai 13.87 41 Makkaraparamba 27.966 Muthuvaloor 14.26 42 Urangattiri 28.047 Chaliyar 15.94 43 Kodur 28.048 Abdu Rahiman Nagar 16.36 44 Puzhakkattiri 28.269 Tanalur 16.89 45 Mambad 28.6710 Moothedam 16.93 46 Kizhuparamba 29.1911 Edappatta 17.36 47 Morayur 29.3712 Thiruvali 17.51 48 Moonniyur 29.6213 Kannamangalam 17.81 49 Alamcode 29.7114 Edayoor 17.89 50 Pulikkal 30.2315 Vettathur 18.36 51 Pulamanthole 31.0616 Porur 18.89 52 Vettom 31.0817 Nediyiruppu 18.96 53 Cheekkode 31.2318 Ozhur 19.00 54 Marancheri 31.2819 Cherukavu 19.44 55 Talakkad 31.4720 Nannamukku 19.49 56 Chelambra 32.5121 Perumanna Clari 19.62 57 Kavanoor 33.1622 Irimbiliyam 20.00 58 Purathur 33.8523 Ponmala 20.19 59 Vazhikkadavu 34.2024 Cheriyamundam 21.06 60 Valavannur 34.2425 Peruvallur 21.58 61 Pallikkal 34.2426 Urakam 22.13 62 Elamkulam 34.4527 Marakkara 22.85 63 Vengara 34.5328 Pulpatta 23.15 64 Edappal 34.9029 Veliyankode 23.59 65 Trikkalangode 35.0130 Thuvvur 23.74 66 Vattamkulam 35.8331 Kuzhimanna 23.77 67 Mangalam 36.7232 Triprangode 23.96 68 Thirunavaya 37.3633 Othukkungal 24.49 69 Chokkade 37.7934 Moorkkanad 25.26 70 Mankada 37.8535 Edarikode 25.75 71 Karuvarakundu 38.4936 Nannambra 26.03 72 Aliparamba 39.18



Sl.No Name of LSG CFI Sl.No Name of LSG CFI73 Vazhayur 39.37 90 Areekode 69.3974 Keezhattur 40.41 91 Vazhakkad 70.6375 Edakkara 41.97 92 Tirurangadi 70.7476 Amarambalam 42.92 93 Kuttippuram 73.2077 Koottilangadi 43.25 94 Anakkayam 74.9278 Vallikkunnu 44.23 95 Edavanna 76.6079 Pothukal 44.92 96 Wandoor 91.0580 Melattur 47.71 97 Parappanangadi 98.7781 Pandikkad 47.89 98 Thenhippalam 137.3982 Chungathara 50.56 99 Nilambur 162.4683 Kalpakancheri 50.87 100 Kottakkal 163.9884 Tavanur 52.20 101 Angadippuram 170.8485 Parappur 53.71 102 Kondotty 174.9086 Athavanad 56.04 103 Malappuram (M) 230.6087 Thazhekode 62.24 104 Manjeri (M) 231.4588 Valanchery 64.55 105 Tirur (M) 285.6689 Tanur 66.20 106 Ponnani (M) 310.90

107 Perintalmanna (M) 522.46

93 ANNEXE 6B



94 ANNEXE 7

Annexe 7EXISTING HIERARCHY OF SETTLEMENTS

Order of theSettlement

I

II

III

IV

Sl No.

24252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051

52.053545556

Name of theSettlement

KeezhatturVazhayurAliparambaKaruvarakunduMankadaChokkadeThirunavayaMangalamVattamkulamTrikkalangodeEdappalVengaraElamkulamPallikkalValavannurVazhikkadavuPurathurKavanoorChelambraTalakkadMarancheriCheekkodeVettomPulamantholePulikkalAlamcodeMoonniyurMorayurKizhuparambaMambadPuzhakkattiriKodurUrangattiri


IV

Sl No.

123412

3.045123456789

1011121314151617181920212223


Perintalmanna (M)Ponnani (M)Tirur (M)Manjeri (M)Malappuram (M)KondottyAngadippuramKottakkalNilamburThenhippalamParappanangadiWandoorEdavannaAnakkayamKuttippuramTirurangadiVazhakkadAreekodeTanurValancheryThazhekodeAthavanadParappurTavanurKalpakancheriChungatharaPandikkadMelatturPothukalVallikkunnuKoottilangadiAmarambalamEdakkara



95 ANNEXE 7


IV

777879808182838485868788899091929394959697

Perumanna ClariNannamukkuCherukavuOzhurNediyiruppuPorurVettathurEdayoorKannamangalamThiruvaliEdappattaMoothedamTanalurAbdu Rahiman NagarChaliyarMuthuvaloorKarulaiPonmundamNiramaruthurKaladyThennala

Sl No. Name of theSettlement


IV

Sl No.

5758596061626364656667686970717273747576


MakkaraparambaKuruvaPerumpadappaPookkotturKalikavuNannambraEdarikodeMoorkkanadOthukkungalTriprangodeKuzhimannaThuvvurVeliyankodePulpattaMarakkaraUrakamPeruvallurCheriyamundamPonmalaIrimbiliyam



96 ANNEXE 8

Annexe 8CENTRALIITY AND CONNECTIVITY

A - Centrality

Centrality: - Centrality is the locational

importance acquired by an area because of its position

in the geographical center or proximity to the

geographical center of a region. An area placed in the

centre of a region or near to the center possesses the

advantage that it is accessible (if there is no physical

barrier in between) equally from all parts of the region

under consideration. In practical terms a local body

located in the centre of a District has a potential deriving

out of its central location with respect to the District.

For deriving the proposed hierarchy of the settlement,

this criteria, the centrality of the settlements are also

to be taken into account. An attempt is made here to

quantify the centrality of an area to make this value in

analysis.

This centrality value is very much useful in

identifying the proposed hierarchy of various local

bodies. The most important part in the identification

of the hierarchy of settlements is assigning various

order (1st Order, 2nd Order, 3 rd Order etc.) to the

settlement and for of this centrality at different levels

are to be calculated. Practically it can be assumed that

centrality at three levels are existing. They are Regional

centrality, Sub regional centrality and Local Centrality

Regional CentralityRegional Centrality is the locational

importance, a settlement is deriving out of its proximity

to the geographical central position of the region. A

settlement falling at the centre of the region possesses

the maximum regional centrality value of 1 and it can

be termed as the central settlement. Those

settlements adjacent to the central settlement can be

said to possess the regional centrality value of 2. The

next layer of settlements adjacent to the settlements

having the regional centrality value of 2, possess the

regional centrality value of 3. In this way, the regional

centrality value of any settlement in a region can be

calculated. The figure below shows the variation of the

centrality value of various Local bodies of the District.

Regional Centrality

LSG

ManjeriPandikkadPulpattaTrikkalangodeAnakkayamPookkotturKalikavuEdapattaKavannoorEdavannaPorurThuvvoorKeezhatturKuzhimannaTiruvaliMankadaKoottilangadiOorakamMorayurMalappuramChokkadKaruvarakunduMelatturVettathurAreekode

Value ofCentrality

1222223333333333333344444



97 ANNEXE 8

LSG

AngadipuramKuruvaKannamangalamNediyiruppuMakkaraparambaKodurPonmalaVengaraOthukkungalParappurMuthuvalloorUrangattiriMampadWandoorKeezhparambaAmarambalamThazhekodePulamantholeMoorkanadPallikkalPulikkalPuzhakkattiriEdayoorTirurangadiPeruvalloorKondottyMarakkaraThennalaA.R. NagarKottakkalEdarikkodeCheekkodePerinthalmannaChaliyarKarulaiNilamburChelembraCherukavuVazhayoorVazhakkadAliparambu

Value ofCentrality

44444444444444555555555555555555555566666

ElamkulamIrimpiliyamParappanangadiThenchippalamValancheryAthavanadOzhurNannambraMunniyoorKalpakancheriPerumannaKlariMoothedomChungatharaKuttippuramThanlurTanurThirunavayaPonmundomValavannurVallikunnuPothukallVazhikkadavuEdakkaraNiramaruthurTriprangodeThalakkadCheriyamundomThavanoorTirurVattamkulamPurathurMangalamVettomKaladyAlangodeEdappalPonnaniNannamukkuVeliyankodeMarancheryPerumpadappu

66666666666666777777777788888899999

10101011111112



98 ANNEXE 8

Sub Regional Centrality

Sub Regional centrality is the locational

importance; a settlement is deriving out of its proximity

to the geographical centre of a sub-region. A region

can be divided into four sub-regions, Viz North-East

region, North-West region, South-East region and South

West region. A settlement falling in the center of a

sub-region will possess the maximum sub regional

value of 1 and this settlement can be termed as the sub

regional central settlement. Those settlements

adjacent to the central settlement can be said to

possess the Sub regional centrality value of 2. Similarly,

settlements adjacent to the settlements with centrality

value of 2 can be said to possess sub-regional centrality

value of 3. The sub-regional centrality value of any

settlement in sub regional can be assessed like this.

The figure below shows the variation of the sub

regional centrality value of various Local bodies of the

District.

CENTRALITYVALUE

1222223334455612222233

PANCHAYAT

ThuvvoorKalikavuKaruvarakunduEdapattaPorurPandikkadChokkadKeezhatturWandoorAmarambalamMelatturVettathurKarulaiThazhekodeValancheryIrimpiliyamKuttippuramEdayoorAthavanadMarakkaraMoorkanadKuruva

DIVISION

SE 11111111111111

SW 22222222



99 ANNEXE 8

3333333333344444444445555667122233333344445

TirurangadiMunniyoorKondottyKuzhimannaThennalaMorayurOthukkungalEdarikkodeParappurMuthuvalloorMalappuramVazhayoorVazhakkadParappanangadiOzhurNannambraPulpattaPerumanna KlariPookkotturVallikunnuCheekkodeThanlurTanurPonmundomManjeriNiramaruthurTirurVettomNilamburMampadChaliyarChungatharaEdavannaTiruvaliUrangattiriPothukallEdakkaraMoothedomTrikkalangodeVazhikkadavuAreekodeKavannoorKeezhparamba

3333333333333333333333333333

NE 444444444444444

CENTRALITYVALUE

333334444444455555555555566666712222223333

PANCHAYAT

ThirunavayaPonmalaKalpakancheriThavanoorKottakkalPulamantholeVattamkulamPuzhakkattiriTriprangodeThalakkadKodurValavannurKaladyAngadipuramMankadaElamkulamAlangodePurathurMangalamEdappalMakkaraparambaTKoottilangadiPonnaniPerinthalmannaCheriyamundomNannamukkuVeliyankodeMarancheryAnakkayamAliparambuPerumpadappuKannamangalamPallikkalPeruvalloorNediyiruppuVengaraA.R. NagarOorakamChelembraCherukavuThenchippalamPulikkal

DIVISION

2222222222222222222222222222222

NW 33333333333



100 ANNEXE 8

B - Connectivity

Connectivity is a term to denote how well an

area is connected to other parts of the region (inter

regional) or other regions (intra regional). Two

indicators are taken to assess the connectivity of an

area under consideration with other areas. First criteria

is the existence of a road of the category of NH, SH or

MDR and second is the grade of the rail way station

existing (if any) in the area under consideration. The

details of the rail way station and the type of roads in

each of the local body of Malappuram District are shown

in the table below.

Local Centrality

The Sub regions identified earlier can be

further divided into four parts (NE, NW, SE, SW) and

each area can be termed as a local area & the centrality

of a settlement deriving out of the proximity of the

settlement with the centre of the local area can be

termed as the local centrality. Like regional centrality,

different settlements can have the local centrality

value of 1, 2, 3 etc. The figure below shows the variation

of the local centrality value of various Local bodies of

the District.

Type of road

NHSH

MDRSHSHNHSHNH

MDRMDRNHSHNHSHSHSHSH

MDRNHSHSHSH

MDRNHSHNHSH

MDRSHSHSHSHSHNHNHNH

MDRNHSH

Grade ofRailway Station

D

F

F

B

LSG

A.R. NagarAlangodeAliparambuAmarambalamAnakkayamAngadipuramAreekodeAthavanadChaliyarCheekkodeChelembraCheriyamundomCherukavuChokkadChungatharaEdakkaraEdapattaEdappalEdarikkodeEdavannaEdayoorElamkulamIrimpiliyamKaladyKalikavuKalpakancheriKannamangalamKarulaiKaruvarakunduKavannoorKeezhatturKeezhparambaKodurKondottyKoottilangadiKottakkalKuruvaKuttippuramKuzhimanna



101 ANNEXE 8

While calculating the proposed hierarchy of the

settlements the presence of NH or SH is given a value

of 1 and the presence of MDR is given a value of 2.The

railway station of A grade is given a value of 1 and the

lower grades B,C,D etc is given values of 2,3,4 etc

respectively.


F

D

D

Type of road

MDR

NHMDRMDRMDRNHNHNHNH

MDRMDRMDRNHSHSH

MDR

NHMDR

SHMDRMDRSHNHNHSH

MDRSH


D

EFB

E

F

LSG

PulpattaPurathurPuzhakkattiriTanurThalakkadThanlurThavanoorThazhekodeThenchippalamThennalaThirunavayaThuvvoorTirurTirurangadiTiruvaliTrikkalangodeTriprangodeUrangattiriValancheryValavannurVallikunnuVattamkulamVazhakkadVazhayoorVazhikkadavuVeliyankodeVengaraVettathurVettomWandoor

Type of road

NHNHSH

SHMDRNH

SHSH

MDRNHNH

MDR

SHNHSH

SHSH

NHSHSH

MDRNHNHNH

MDRMDRSHNHNHSH

MDRSHNH

LSG

MakkaraparambaMalappuramMampadMangalamManjeriMankadaMarakkaraMarancheryMelatturMoorkanadMoothedomMorayurMunniyoorMuthuvalloorNannambraNannamukkuNediyiruppuNilamburNiramaruthurOorakamOthukkungalOzhurPallikkalPandikkadParappanangadiParappurPerinthalmannaPerumanna KlariPerumpadappuPeruvalloorPonmalaPonmundomPonnaniPookkotturPorurPothukallPulamantholePulikkal



ANNEXE 9-10102

Annexe 9DETERMINATION OF THIRD ORDER

SETTLEMENT FROM NE SUB REGION

Annexe 10 DETERMINATION OF THIRD ORDER SETTLEMENTFROM SE SUB REGION

Division

NE

NE

NE

NE

NE

NE

NE

NE

NE

NE

NE

NE

NE

NE

NE

LSG Name

Nilambur

Mampad

Chaliyar

Chungathara

Edavanna

Tiruvali

Urangattiri

Pothukall

Edakkara

Moothedom

Trikkalangode

Vazhikkadavu

Areekode

Kavannoor

Keezhparamba

Existing

Heirachy

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

Dist HQ

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Taluk

HQ

1.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Block

HQ

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

Centrality

(Sub

regional )

1

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

5

Rail way

sation

4

0

0

0

0

0

0

6

6

0

0

0

0

0

0

Road

1

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

Count

of 1

4.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

1.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

1.0

2.0

1.0

1.0

Count

of 2

0.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Count

of 3

1

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

Count

of 4

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

1.0

Administrative status Connectivity

Existing

Heirachy

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

Dist HQ

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

Count

of 1

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

2.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

2.0

1.0

Count

of 2

0.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Division

SE

SE

SE

SE

SE

SE

SE

SE

SE

SE

SE

SE

SE

SE

LSG Name

Thuvvoor

Kalikavu

Karuvarakundu

Edapatta

Porur

Pandikkad

Chokkad

Keezhattur

Wandoor

Amarambalam

Melattur

Vettathur

Karulai

Thazhekode

Taluk

HQ

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Block

HQ

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

1

0

Centrality

(Sub

regional )

1

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

4

4

5

5

6

Rail way

sation

6

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

6

0

6

0

0

0

Road

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Count

of 3

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

Count

of 4

1.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

3.0

3.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

Administrative status Connectivity



Order of the

Settlements

I

II

III

IV

ANNEXE 11 103

Annexe 11SUGGESTED HIERARCHY OF SETTLEMENTS

Sl No.

1

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Name of the Settlements

Perintalmanna (M)

Ponnani (M)

Tirur (M)

Manjeri (M)

Malappuram (M)

Kondotty

Angadippuram

Kottakkal

Nilambur

Thenhippalam

Wandoor

Valanchery

Tirurangadi

Areekode

Parappanangadi

Edavanna

Anakkayam

Kuttippuram

Vazhakkad

Tanur

Thazhekode

Athavanad

Parappur

Tavanur

Kalpakancheri

Chungathara

Pandikkad

Melattur

Pothukal

Vallikkunnu

Koottilangadi

Amarambalam

Edakkara

Keezhattur

Sl No.

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54


Vazhayur

Aliparamba

Karuvarakundu

Mankada

Chokkade

Thirunavaya

Mangalam

Vattamkulam

Trikkalangode

Edappal

Vengara

Elamkulam

Pallikkal

Valavannur

Vazhikkadavu

Purathur

Kavanoor

Chelambra

Talakkad

Marancheri

Cheekkode

Vettom

Pulamanthole

Pulikkal

Alamcode

Moonniyur

Morayur

Kizhuparamba

Mambad

Puzhakkattiri

Kodur

Urangattiri

Makkaraparamba

Kuruva

Order of the

Settlements

IV



ANNEXE 11104

Sl No.

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74


Perumpadappa

Pookkottur

Kalikavu

Nannambra

Edarikode

Moorkkanad

Othukkungal

Triprangode

Kuzhimanna

Thuvvur

Veliyankode

Pulpatta

Marakkara

Urakam

Peruvallur

Cheriyamundam

Ponmala

Irimbiliyam

Perumanna Clari

Nannamukku

Order of the

Settlements

IV

Sl No.

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93


Cherukavu

Ozhur

Nediyiruppu

Porur

Vettathur

Edayoor

Kannamangalam

Thiruvali

Edappatta

Moothedam

Tanalur

Abdu Rahiman Nagar

Chaliyar

Muthuvaloor

Karulai

Ponmundam

Niramaruthur

Kalady

Thennala

Order of the

Settlements

IV

admin

Text Box

< CONTENTS >