52 SOCIAL SCIENTIST disparities like other imbalances and distortions in the economy, are the manifestations of the concentration of wealth and income in the hands of a few who prefer to direct them in already developed areas where private profit could be maximised. Spatial Organisation in India During the British period, the colonial hinterland was exploited to the benefit of the metropolitan country. The process of "growth* was confined to a few enclaves which assisted in the process of exploitation of the hinterland. Since independence, the organisation of space has undergone some changes. But these changes have taken place in a haphazard manner. The. hierarchical organisation continues to be biased in favour of a few metropolitan cities and large urban centres. The decennial population growth rate in the period 1961-1971 has been 39.25 per cent for urban and about 20 per cent for rural. Within the urban sector, cities with a population of over half a million are growing at 53.5 per cent per decade, those in the population range of 5000-10,000 are growing only at a rate of 1.42 per cent. This indicates that while the productive system of the country continues to be strongly rooted in agriculture in rural areas, the hierarchical system of settlements is increasingly becoming centralised in favour of cities. Most of the small towns are languishing with a poor economic base and are less viable in terms of industrial base as compared to cities. The metropolitan centres are the stronger partners in the commercial relationship between the town and the country and like the metropolitan country in an empire, are poised to exploit the rural hinterland. Income distribution, flow of capital, concentration of economic power, continue to be biased in favour of larger cities. The location of functions and facilities continues to be mostly urban-biased. The disparity between rural and urban incomes is very wide. The gap is widening over time. Both in rural and urban sectors, the beneficiaries, by and large, are the upper income groups. This is due to the highly skewed nature of asset distribution in the country. The land ownership pattern as revealed by the agricultural census of 1970-71. highlights the inequalities ha the countryside. Large holdings of 10 hectares and above, constituting just 4 per cent of the total number of holdings, account for 30.7 per cent of the total, land under operational holdings. But inequalities in the urban sector are more glaring. The disparity in incomes and wealth is further reflected through the disparity in the availability of social amenities in the rural and ufban sectors. For example, the rural literacy rate in 1971 was 23 per cent against 52 percent for the urban areas. Fewer than a third of allopathic, doctors serve the rural peoplb. The death rate in rural areas j^ twice a& mwh as in cities and the life expectancy ten years less than in the urbati areas.