Officials of the NWFP Chamber preparing for a sitting.
divide as a complex web of connec- tions in a landscape where some areas are urban or rural, some neither, but has features of both, especially in the areas around urban centers or along the roads out of such centers (also known as peri-urban interface). In addition,much of the rural population depends on urban cen- ters for access to secondary schools, jobs, post and telephones, credit, agricultural extension services, farm equipment, hospitals and government services.
Conflict between the two interests There are still conflicts between rural and urban interests, but there are also conflicts between urban interests and the needs of the urban population. Some factors can be generalized
as having a key role in the increase of rural–urban differences. Decreasing incomes from farm-
ing, especially for small-scale pro- ducers who, because of a lack of land, water or capital, are unable to intensify and switch to higher value crops, means that increasing num- bers of rural residents engage in non-farm activities that are often located in urban centers. For those who continue farming, direct access to markets is essential in the wake of the demise of paratactic marketing boards – and markets are also usual-
ly located in urban centers. Better access to markets can increase farm- ing incomes and encourage shifts to higher value crops or livestock. Population growth and distribution patterns affect the availability of good agricultural land and con- tribute to rural residents moving out of farming and being attracted to the glamour of urban living. On the other hand, with the expansion of urban centers and the change from agricultural to residen- tial and industrial, these processes go hand in hand with conflict and trans- formations in the livelihoods of dif- ferent groups – with the poorest often losing out. Perhaps more significant than the
availability of natural resources in relation to population numbers and density are the mechanisms which regulates access to, and management of, such resources.
These include land tenure systems
and the role of local government in negotiating the priorities of different users and in providing a regulatory framework which safeguards the needs of the most vulnerable groups in the rural sector. We all need to think and try to
make it possible for more susceptible groups in rural areas to successfully plot a course through an increasingly complex landscape, as well as address
the lack of progress in recognizing and responding to this complexity and demands of rural community. Many of us are convinced to draw attention to the growing intensifica- tion of the divide in the rural–urban continuum, describing initiatives which respond to these differences and the progress made in understand- ing the specific characteristics of purely rural and also peri-urban areas. However, while there is greater
recognition of the spatial (and inter- sectoral) dimension of the ways in which different groups make a liv- ing, and its implications for poverty reduction, many ideas also underline the difficulties that low-income groups in rural communities face in dealing with government institu- tions. For example, rural communi- ties around Hanoi, Peshawar, Calcutta, Kuala Lumpur and Bangkok provide a key source of fresh food such as fish, meat and vegetables for the city’s residents. In response to the generosity of
the rural feeding machine, urban areas continue to expand while many farmers lose their land to the corre- spondent urban development agency’s residential or commercial develop- ments, though they rarely get com- pensation reflecting the real value of the land.At the same time, local gov- ernments in the rural districts around