Q: Urban settlements in India tend to replicate its rural caste-kinship imprints. Discuss the main reasons.

Model Answer:

Urban Settlements in India: Persistence of Caste-Kinship System

Urban settlements are expected to be impersonal, contract-based spaces where ascriptive ties weaken. Yet in India, cities often reproduce rural caste–kinship patterns. This reflects the specific trajectory of Indian urbanisation, where community continues to mediate access to opportunities and security.

1. Pattern of migration and rural–urban continuum
Redfield–Singer and M.N. Srinivas highlight the rural–urban continuum rather than a sharp break.
– Migration is predominantly chain and kin-based: early migrants sponsor relatives and caste fellows, creating “urban villages” and caste enclaves (M.S.A. Rao’s studies on Bangalore and Hyderabad).
– Strong circulation of people, remittances and ritual obligations keeps village networks alive, extending kinship fields across rural and urban spaces.

2. Economic organisation and informal labour markets
– In the largely informal urban economy, recruitment for petty trade, construction, domestic work or transport relies on trust; caste and kinship serve as low-cost screening mechanisms.
– Traditional caste-based skills (weavers, goldsmiths, leather workers) are relocated rather than dissolved, generating caste-clustered occupational niches.
– Andre Béteille notes institutional inadequacy of universalistic markets, making particularistic ties economically rational.

3. Housing, neighbourhoods and associational life
– Residential segregation often follows caste/region lines: community colonies, chawls and slums organised around jati/biradari offer protection, credit and cultural familiarity.
– Caste and regional associations in cities (studied by N. Jayaram) provide hostels, scholarships, dispute settlement and marriage alliances, thus reactivating rural solidarities.

4. Family, marriage and cultural continuity
– Despite exposure to diversity, marriage remains overwhelmingly caste-endogamous, often arranged through kin and caste networks; biradari panchayats operate even in metros.
– Urban temples, festival committees and community halls are frequently caste-based, reinforcing symbolic boundaries (Louis Dumont’s hierarchy–purity framework remains relevant).

5. Politics and control over urban resources
– Urban local politics mobilises voters as caste blocs; dominant rural castes (Jats around Delhi, Patels in Gujarat, Reddys in Andhra cities) extend control over peri-urban land, real estate and contracts.
– Rajni Kothari’s notion of “caste in politics” explains how caste becomes an organisational resource in competitive urban settings.

Thus, Indian urbanisation remains “rurban”, where caste-kinship adapt to new opportunities; future deepening of universalistic institutions alone can dilute these imprints.