1) Urban sprawl in Hyderabad city between 1971-2010 led to a significant increase in built up area (from 3.98% to 17.98% of total area) and decrease in agricultural land (from 65.89% to 54.68%). This was driven by population growth and government policies promoting urbanization. 2) Shannon's entropy values showed urban growth became more scattered over time, particularly in rural belts surrounding the city as they transformed into urban areas. 3) The environmental impacts of urban sprawl included loss of green spaces, water pollution from effluents, and increased air pollution. There is a need for improved urban planning and environmental management to optimize resource use and infrastructure.

1. Urban sprawl of Hyderabad city: A few ecological concerns
Among the recent phenomena of urban transformation in the world ,urban sprawl is
one of the most debated and discussed issue due to its impact on natural resource base of the region,
namely Land,water,Soil and Vegetational cover .Consumption of green space, shrinkage of water bodies,
decreasing status of soil fertility and lastly, sometimes loss of aesthetic land scape or degradation of
landforms are some of the immediate consequences of urban sprawl overall the impact on ecological
sustainability of a city region is remarkable .Population growth and Government policies as drivers of
urbanization are the primary causes of urban sprawl.
Although many definitions of urban sprawl have been given ,the main features of most of
the definitions is uncontrolled spreading of a given city and its suburb ,over more and more rural or semi
rural lands at the periphery of an urban area. Urban sprawl is a term that describes the physical pattern
of low density expansion of large urban areas under market conditions into the surrounding agricultural
areas. Sprawl lies in advance of the principle lines of urban growth and implies little planning control of
land subdivision (Siddhartha .K & Mukherjee.S ,2003).
This involves in short run the conversion of open space around an urban area into builtup
and developed land and in the medium run a prospective exacerbation of some environmental
externalities which typically portrays cities (Syed Naushad Ahmed et al 2008).Another intriguing aspect
of sprawl is its distorted and unplanned expansion which creates a lot of bottlenecks in sustainable
urban planning.
The studies on urban sprawl have become more popular after the emergence of
Geoinformatics as a major tool of study. The spatial patterns of urban sprawl over different time periods
can be systematically mapped, monitored and accurately assessed from satellite data along with
conventional ground data(Lata et al 2001). Various studies on spatial pattern of urban sprawl in different
cities of india were attempted by a number of scholars (Singh et al 2002; Fazal ,2001;Sudhira et al
2002).Urabn sprawl around Modinagar and Aligarh have been mapped . Modinagar had grown form a
meager 150L to 1315L within a span of 30 years .Similarly Aligarh too expanded in its built up area by
147% between 1974-2001.Delhi,the capital city of india expanded by 73% over a period of three
decades. A stretch between Udupi and Manglore along NH-& developed by 156% between 1972-
1999.Dehradun city was also mapped for 2000 and 2005 built up area status and it was noticed that the
increase was by 23.5%(Syed Naushad Ahmed et al 2008).

2. Sulochana Shekhar in her paper on Changing Space of Pune –A GIS perspective brings out
the Land Use changes in Pune city from 1979 to 2001. The built up area increased from 19.47km2 in
1980 to 97.16km2 in 2001.On similar lines Udaipur city was also mapped for detecting Land Use
changes, whereby it was established that the urban sprawl was predominant along major transport
corridors (Manishika Jain). Hyderabad Urban Agglomeration(HUA) and Bangalore Urban Agglomeration
(BUA)regions have been compared to bring out the Land Use changes between 1971-2001 i.e over 30
years period(Neelakantan .K and others 2007).Quantitative analysis pertaining to urban sprawl has also
worked out by Sudhira et al(2003), Yeh et al ( 2001) and Lata et al (2001) by working out shanonn’s
entropy analysis. From two time period digital data ,the compactness and sparseness of the built up
area is calculated .If the value nears 0 it depicts compactness and if the value nears 1, then it means
sparseness ,therefore depicts sprawling activity. Kausalya Ramachandran and S.Padmaja in their study
on HUA region (2006) have measured Shannon’s entropy value to validate the urban sprawl of
Hyderabad.
In the light of above studies,an attempt is made in this paper to map the sprawling process
of Hyderabad city region between 1971-2010, to understand the state of environment around
metropolitan region.
The study region:
The study region extends over 4359 Km2, encompassing a large area all around
picturesque Hussain Sagar lake as city center. The region stretches beyond Hyderabad urban into
peripheral Ranga Reddy ,Nalgonda, Medak and Mahaboobnagar districts. Hyderabad urban area is
densely populated owing to the presence of educational institutions Government departments and
industrial units. With a semiarid climate that underline the importance of water bodies and reservoirs
that dot the region, the undulating terrain of Deccan Plateau with red & mixed red soils contribute to an
urban center that draws heavily from its surrounding rural economy. However due to rapid industrial
development the environment within the urban area and the hinterland has deteriorated (Kiran et al
2001).

4. Data and Methods:
For evaluating urban sprawl with an impact on ecological sustainability of HUA region, a
land cover change study (LCCS) was undertaken for five time periods namely,1971,1998,2001,2005, and
2010. IRS 1D; LISS III satellite digital data after 1971 periods was analysed using ERDAS imagine
(version.9) and supervised land cover classification as performed. For 1971 land cover information, SOI
toposheet were studied and mapped using Arc GIS- Shannon’s entropy was calculated for various zones
between two time periods of 1971-2001.population numbers were derived from census reports.
Population growth:
Population growth is considered as the main driving force of urban growth and
urbanization. Hyderabad city region has a population of over 6.8 millions in 2011. The exponential
growth of population from 1901-2011 is given in the following graph1 and table1 . From 1971 onwards
there has been a steady increase of almost 1 million per decade in the study region. The density of
population in the MCH area was 21,046 persons in 2001, with a decrease towards peripheral areas to
about 1,324 persons /Km2.Average density of HUA was 7391 persons /Km2 in 2001.
Population growth accompanied by Government policies centering round urban areas like
National Urban Renewal Mission (NRUM) with a major mission to develop urban infrastructure .HUDA
too had under taken various programmes of road widening land acquisition for laying Outer Ring
Road(ORR),Development of Airports, MMTS,SEZs for multiplexes act as drivers for the process of urban
growth and urbanization.
(Graph1) POPULATION GROWTH OF HYDERABAD
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
190119111921193119411951196119711981199120012011
population in millions
population in millions

5. (Table1) POPULATION GROWTH OF HYDERABAD
Land Use Land cover 1971:
In the map(2) of 1971 region has a vast agriculture area which is nearly 65.89%of total
area. The map reveals that most of the built up area is located near the water body named as Hussain
sagar and it covers an area of 173.35 sq.km which constitutes 3.98% of total area and also reveals that
the most of the other land is found predominately in North and Northeastern part of the region
compared to southern direction.
In 1971 ,the city region was predominantly agricultural region with almost 66% of the
area ascribing to agricultural activities. This agricultural use was followed by otherland with a value
around 18%. Remaining 14% was divided between Built up, Water body and Vegetation.
SL.NO YEAR POPULATIONS IN
MILLIONS
%INCREASE
1 1901 0.448 -
2 1911 0.502 14.25
3 1921 0.406 -11.30
4 1931 0.467 15.02
5 1941 0.739 58.20
6 1951 1.131 52.00
7 1961 1.249 9.50
8 1971 1.796 43.80
9 1981 2.546 41.75
10 1991 4.344 70.25
11 2001 5.742 32.18
12 2011 6.809 18.58

6. (map2)
Land use Land Cover 2001:
Within the span of 30 years there are many changes that can be observed in the landuse
of region. Though the agriculture area is still predominating in this map covering an area of
1956.17sq.km(44.88%) but it has decreased by nearly 20% as compared to 1971 area .At the same time
there is a phenomenal increase in built up area and other land in this map covering 11.48% and 34.06%
to the total area respectively. Map(3) reveals that built up area is found around water body at the cost
of agricultural area. This map also shows that area under water body has decreased which covers an
area of 131.67 sq.km (3.02%).There is a decrease of agricultural area in the peripheral zone of the region
and development of otherland. Area under recreational parks could be mapped, which constituted
0.34% of total area.

7. (map3)
Landuse/ Land cover 2005:
This map(4) reveals that there is slight increse in area of water body and agricultural
area.Few patches of built-up area developed in entire region except in Southwest corner of the map and
there is also a decrease of otherland .Most of otherland has been converted either into built up area(or)
agricultural area (or) recreational parks.

8. (map4)
Landuse/ Land cover 2010:
This map(5) reveals that there is an increase of built up area covering an area of 783.63
sq.km constituting 17.98% to the total area an increase of 3% from that of 2005 coverage.There is a
decrease of otherland and slight increase in agricultural area and recreational parks. Area under
agriculture is more or less stable in the 2005 year period. Vegetation cover too is more or less the same
as of 2005 with a slight marginal increase. The area under recreational parks have increased by almost
7%. From this ,the relevance of recreational land use in overall urban land use can be established.

9. (map5)
change in LULC (2001-2010) :
In this map it can be observed that the 4.9% of the aea has changed from agriculture to
built up area in northern part of the region. Central part of the area doesn’t register any changes.
Conversion from other land to built-up area can be seen in entire region. Most of the conversion has
been done from otherland to agriculture area which can be seen in four corners of the map i.e.21.5% of
the area has been converted to agricultural area .This map also reveals conversion from other land to
recreational parks in peripheral zone of the region.

10. Change in Land Use Land Cover (LULC) as process of urbanization:
Industrialization and development of tertiary sectors are major factors which contribute to
urbanization .Since 1971,agriculture activity has decreased. Prime agriculture land in Northeast
,Southeast and Northwest sectors got converted into built up land. Dilsukhnagar,LB nagar, Kothapet,
Patanchervu township are some colonies, which got encroached onto agricultural land .Scrub vegetation
too got converted to built up around Jubilee hills ,Guchhi Bowli and Madhapur .In the process
encroachment onto water bodies has also taken place-industrial area like Saidabad,Chmpapet etc.
National Highways too have added impetus to growing pockets of various colonies like Bowenpally,
Alwal; BNR Nagar, Hayatnagar, Mehdipatnam and Himayat Sagar etc-Access roads have really
transformed the urban scenario of Hyderabad region.

11. Changes in LULC from 1971-2010:
This table(2) shows that there is nearly four times increase in the built-up area of
region from 1971-2010 i.e from 3.98% to 17.98% of the geographical area respectivly .This has
consequently led to the decrease in agriculture area from 65.89% in 1971 to 54.68% in 2010.
Vegetation which accounts for 6.87% in 1971 increased slightly and found to be 7.58%
in 2010 where as otherland accounting for 17.88% in 1971 decreased to 14.7% in 2010.
Table:2 LULC from 1971-2010 in Hyderabad region.
Area type 1971 1998 2001 2005 2010
Built-up 3.98% 8.75% 11.48% 14.0% 17.98%
Water body 5.38% 3.66% 3.02% 4.3% 5.07%
Agriculture 65.89% 64.93% 44.38% 54.3% 54.68%
Vegetation 6.87% 6.07% 5.27% 7.2% 7.58%
Other land 17.88% 16.60% 35.35% 20.2% 14.7%
Total Area 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
From the table 2 it is clear that there has been an increase in built up area at the cost of
otherland , with a simultaneous reduction in agricultural land. Area under waterbody and vegetational
cover has shown slight variations. In view of the above the depletion of natural resource base, it is
desirable to assess and monitor the environmental resources for a proper perspective urban planning .

12. (Graph:2) LULC from 1971-2010 in Hyderabad region
Shannon’s entropy for HUA region:
In order to understand the pattern of growth in the region, Shannon’s entropy method
was used ,Which facilitates analysis of pattern of growth –contiguous or scattered .For instance, if urban
growth in a given zone in compact ,the entropy value would be close to zero and if it is scattered ,the
entropy value would be close to unity (yeh & Li 2001,Sudhira & Ramachandran 2002 ;Lata etal 2001).
Table:3 Shannon’s entropy values for various zones of HUA region.
Sl.No Zone Shannon’s entropy value Remarks
1971 2000
1 City centre (0-5km) 0.362 0.328
Massive increase
in built-up area
2 Urban belt(5-10 km) 0.446 0.588
3 Rural belt(10-25 km) 0.414 0.540
4 Rural area (25-50km) 0.396 0.507
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
1971 1998 2001 2005 2010
builtup
waterbody
Agriculture area
vegetation
otherland

13. In case of transformation of rural belt, the process of urbanization in Hyderabad region has
the maximum impact. With this rapid strides of urban growth, the state of environment has drastically
got changed .Effluent inflows into fresh water bodies have not only created water pollution but also a
major air pollution in the surroundings . Along with this, the people with Below Poverty Line (BPL) have
also increased due to lack of proper socio-economic conditions .In the context of given environmental
set up it is highly desirable to focus on improving efficient transport network which can withstand
monsoon rains; social framework for improvement of slums and raise the level of BPL; Development
infrastructure for not only effective movement of people but also for sustainable living of urbanites
which is their birth right.
Conclusion:
The cities being dynamic, landuse too changes at an alarming rat e which ultimately
effects natural resources interms of land ,water and forest .There is a need for environmental auditing
which will optimize the resource utilisation and identifies environmental risks and lastly improves the
environmental awareness among the people.
References :
1) Census of India, http://www.censusindia.net.
2) Fazal,S.(2000). Urban expansion and loss of Agricultural lands- A GIS based study of Saharanpur
city, India, Environment and Urbanisation. Vol.12,No.2 IIED, London.
3) Fazal,S.(2001). Application of Remote sensing and GIS Techniques in urban sprawl and Land Use
mapping: A Case study of a growing urban center in India, Asian profile,Vol.29,No.1,Canada.
4) Ghose,S.(2004). Urban sprawl study and facility of mapping of Rishikesh using Remote sensing
and GIS: Dissertation, Human settlement Analysis Group, IIRS, Dehra Dun.
5) Hussain, M. I. (1983) Urban Expansion and Encroachment, The Geographer, 30, pp.82-93.
6) Irshad M.et al (1979). Urban encroachments on Rural lands : A Case study of Modinagar, The
Geographer,Vol XXIV,No 1.
7) Jothimani, P. (1997) Operational Urban Sprawl Monitoring using Satellite Remote Sensing:
Excerpts from the studies of Ahmedabad, Vadodara and Surat, India, Paper presented at 18th
Asian Conference on Remote Sensing, Malaysia.
8) Kaushalya Ramachandran(2008): Issue of Ecological sustainability of urban centers-A Case study
of HUA. Urban Environmental management (ed.Abha Lakshmi Singh, Shahab Fazal),BR
Pub.NDLI, PP 269-287.
9) Lata; K.M. et al ( 2001) .Measuring Urban Sprawl : A Case study of Hyderabad,GIS
Development ,Vol(5)12.
10) Neelakantan .K , Sumati Kulkarni and Raghavaswamy ,V.(2007) ECONOMY, POPULATION AND
URBAN SPRAWL A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF URBAN AGGLOMERATIONS OF BANGALORE AND
HYDERABAD, INDIA USING REMOTE SENSING AND GIS TECHNIQUES : Paper presented at
PRIPODE workshop on Urban Population, Development and Environment Dynamics in
Developing Countries, Nairobi, Kenya.

14. 11) Saikiran,D.M.Purnendu and Kaushalya Ramachandran (2001): GIS for non point source pollution
studies in Ranga Reddy and Medak districts of AP,India .ICORG.Proc. Spatial Information
Technology-Remote Sensing and GIS (ed IV Muralikrishna) BS Pub.Hyderabad,Vol2,PP 567-572.
12) Shekhar.S (2004), “ Urban Sprawl Assessment: Entropy Approach”, GIS development, May 2004,
Vol 8, issue 5.
13) Shekhar.S (2005), “Monitoring urban sprawl of Pune by using Remote sensing and GIS
techniques”, PhD thesis submitted to University of Pune, 2005.
14) Siddartha,K.& Mukherjee,S. (2003) Cities Urbanisation and Urban Systems,Pg.No.250.
15) Singh A.L(2002).Urban sprawl mapping using Remote Sensing and GIS technique : A Case study
of Aligarh city : India. The Geographer; Vol 49, No.2.
16) Singh RB et al (2002). Mapping environmental stress .in the context of land changes and urban
sprawl in Delhi metropolitan Region, The Geographer ,Vol G5,No2.
17) Sudhira,H.S and T.V Ramachandran(2003): Urban Sprawl pattern recognition and modeling using
GIS www.gisdevelopment.net/application/urban/sprawl/in03142.html.
18) Sulochana Shekhar , Changing Space of Pune – A GIS perspective , Paper Ref NO: MWF PN 116.
19) Turkstra J. (1996) Urban Growth and Land Use Options for Lower-Income Groups: A Case Study
of Villavicencio, Columbia. ITC Journal, 1, pp. 57 – 63.
20) Yeh; A.G.O. and X.Li(2001): Measurement and monitoring of urban sprawl in a rapidly growing
region using entropy. Photogrammetric engineering and Remote sensing,67(1): 83-90.