ADVERTISEMENTS:
The objectives of the present case study are:
(i) To compute road transport connectivity and levels of economic development in each district of Rajasthan, and
(ii) To find out the relationship between connectivity and economic development.
Connectivity audits Measurement:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Transport network is “a set of geographic locations inter-connected in a system by a number of routes” (Kansky, 1963). Then, “the connectivity of a network may be defined as the degree of completeness of the links between nodes”. (Robinson and Bamford, 1978). Thus, each point is known as a vertex (node) and the lines or curves connecting vertices are referred to as edges (arcs). In the present paper, connectivity has been calculated by three indices, i.e., beta (P) index, cyclomatic number (U) and connectivity index (C). These indices have been computed from the following formulae: β = e/n; U = e – n + x and C = e/1/2 n (n – 1). In these formulae, e, n and x respectively refer to edges, nodes, and non-connected sub-graphs.
The results are given in Table 8.1:
The connectivity values obtained through beta index in Rajasthan varies from 2.12 to 5.00. However, beta index is unsuitable for comparing unequal nodes. Since there are districts with variable number of nodes, we need to compute the other measures of connectivity as well.
The index of cyclomatic number, for example, varies from 23 for Ajmer to 5 for Banswara districts. Five districts of Ajmer, Nagaur, Jodhpur, Kota and Alwar have cyclomatic numbers more than 20. In districts of Dungarpur, Banswara, Pali and Jhunjhunu, low connectivity is observed. All other districts of Rajasthan can be considered as areas of medium connectivity. However, this index is also unsuitable for comparing networks of unequal sizes. Since there are networks of unequal sizes, we have computed another connectivity index.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Connectivity index expresses the number of links in a network as a ratio of the maximum number of links possible. Higher values of the index indicate low level of connectivity and vice versa. Accordingly, high connectivity is observed in Nagaur, Jodhpur, Kota, Ganganagar, Ajmer, Sikar, Alwar, Jaipur, Bharatpur, Jaisalmer, Bhilwara and Jhalawar. All these districts have connectivity index less than 2. On the other hand, Dungarpur, Banswara, Jalore and Jhunjhunu have very low connectivity.
The discussion indicates that none of the above mentioned measures are suitable for a state like Rajasthan. Therefore, composite connectivity scores (CCS) have been computed by adding respective ranks of beta, cyclomatic number and connectivity index. On the basis of CCS, Rajasthan has been divided into three categories of high, medium and low connectivity, based on deviation from the median value (Figure 8.6):
(i) High Connectivity Region – comprises Ajmer, Alwar, Jaipur, Udaipur, Barmer, Bharatpur, Nagaur and Kota.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
(ii) Medium Connectivity Region – includes Ganganagar, Bikaner, Jaisalmer, Jalore, Chittorgarh, Jhalawar and Jhunjhunu.
(iii) Low Connectivity Region – includes Churu, Sikar, Tonk, Sawai Madhopur, Bundi, Sirohi, Pali, Dungarpur and Banswara.
Levels of Economic Development:
The following indicators have been selected for determining the levels of economic development in Rajasthan:
(i) Density of population,
(ii) Per cent of total workers to total population,
(iii) Per cent of villages electrified to total number of villages,
(iv) Per capita district income, and
(v) Per cent of net sown area to total area.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The indicators are not exhaustive and would require refinement in any future work. But these are indicative of the situation in some meaningful ways. All the twenty-six districts have been ranked separately for each variable according to their levels of development. Thus every district has five rank values.
The computations are given in Table 8.2:
In order to facilitate analysis, three categories of high, medium and low economic development have been determined on the basis of composite scores and the same have been depicted in Figure 8.7.
By comparing Figures 8.6 and 8.7, we find that seven out of the twenty-six districts of Rajasthan record high connectivity and high level of development. In the same way we find that four out of twenty-six districts have low-level development profiles and low connectivity. There are four other districts where the level of development as well as the order of connectivity are both medium.
This means that in eleven other districts, the levels of development do not correspond with their degrees of connectivity. The rank correlation coefficient between levels of development and degrees of connectivity is 0.26, which is statistically insignificant. This means that the factors governing the development of road connectivity are not related to the factors governing the regional pattern of economic development.
There are at least six districts, viz., Jodhpur, Udaipur, Barmer, Bhilwara, Bikaner and Jaisalmer, where the order of connectivity is relatively high although the levels of development are low. Similarly, in four districts, viz., Jhunjhunu, Tonk, Pah and Sawai Madhopur, the levels of development are high although the connectivity indices are of low order. In short, we had a null hypothesis at hand.