Understanding ‘Rural’ and Village Society

  • Abhishek Bhutoria
Part of the Springer Geography book series (SPRINGERGEOGR)


Nepal is predominantly characterised and perceived by her rural and village societies. It is only about one-fifth of the total population that forms the city and urban spaces. Despite the dominance of rural and its associated historical manifestation in the Global South, we still lack a comprehensive understanding of what it is or of what it constitutes or how it is perceived or lived. The rural of South Asia hasn’t been defined of what it is but of what it is not and the phenomena of ruralism constructed on an interlinked social, cultural, political, economic and environmental matrix; same as of urbanism, still, it finds itself with a reputation of unestablished discourse. It is certain that urban spaces play a critical role in the contemporary world and especially in the underdeveloped and developing nations; however, the environment, perception and design of the ‘rural’ and village society which is a continuum of a different space that we have termed as ‘urban’ is yet to be explored with comparable intensity. In the meantime, it is certain that such a complex subject cannot be understood without a framework; hence, this study attempts to understand ‘rural’ as a nested arrangement of space, people, a social system (not separated from economic and political system), production, development and a way of living where a village society breathes and sustains itself. In that attempt, the study also aims to comprehend the methodology of understanding the rural system and the village society, as this would determine the framework on which the understanding will be constructed. Along with this, the study presents a case methodology for understanding Nepali village from the lens of architecture in order to comprehend the household, environment, social processes and perception of the villagers about their belief, design, production, continuity and change. This study therefore is an introductory understanding of rural and village society and offers a way forward for a more detailed, comprehensive and interlinked understanding of the frameworks discussed here.


Rural Village Society Nepal Space Theoretical framework Methodology 


  1. Aiyappan A (1945) Iravas and culture change. Superintendent Government Press, MadrasGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson P (2007) Handbook of ethnography. SAGE, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  3. Bhattacherjee A (2012) Social science research: principles, methods and practices. University of South Florida, TampaGoogle Scholar
  4. Burrell G, Morgan G (1979) Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis. Heinemann, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Carter T, Cromley EC (2014) Invitation to vernacular architecture. The University of Tennessee Press, KnoxvilleGoogle Scholar
  6. Davidson A (2014) Gramsci, the peasantry and popular culture. J Peasant Stud 11(4):139–154Google Scholar
  7. Falk W, Pinhey T (1978) Making sense of the concept rural and doing rural sociology: an interpretive perspective. Rural Sociol 43(4):547–558Google Scholar
  8. Giddens A (1986) The constitution of society. Polity Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  9. Gould P, Olsson G (1982) A search for common ground. Pion, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Gray J (1995) The household’s world: purity, power and dominance in a Nepali village. Oxford Press University, DelhiGoogle Scholar
  11. Halfacree K (1993) Locality and social representation: space, discourse and alternative definitions of the rural. J Rural Stud 9(1):23–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harvey D (2009) Social justice and the city. University of Georgia Press, AthensGoogle Scholar
  13. Jodhka S (2002) Nation and village. Econ Polit Wkly 37(32):3343–3353Google Scholar
  14. Kuhn T (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  15. Lefebvre H (1992) The production of space. Blackwell, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  16. Molotch H (1993) The space of Lefebvre. Theory Soc 22(6):887–895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Moon V (1979) Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, writings and speeches. Education Department, Government of Maharashtra, BombayGoogle Scholar
  18. Murdoch J, Pratt A (1993) Rural studies: modernism, postmodernism and the post-rural. J Rural Stud 9(4):411–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. O’Reilly K (2005) Ethnographic method. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Pandey V (2003) Re-presenting rural: from definition to discourse. Sociol Bull 52(1):32–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pigg S (1992) Inventing social categories through place: social representations and development in Nepal. Comp Stud Soc Hist 34(3):491–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pratt A (1991) Discourses of locality. Environ Plan 23(2):257–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sayer A (1989) The ‘new’ regional geography and problems of narrative. Environ Plann D 7(3):253–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Shneiderman S (2009) The formation of political consciousness in rural Nepal. Dialect Anthropol 33(3–4):287–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Smith N (1984) Uneven development. Blackwell, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Srinivas M (1975) Village studies, participant observation and social science research in India. Econ Polit Wkly 10(33/35):1387–1394Google Scholar
  27. Srinivas M (1976) The remembered village. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  28. The World Bank (2018) Rural population (% of total population). The World Bank, viewed 28 July 2019.
  29. UN DESA (2014) World urbanisation prospects: 2014 revision. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Williams R (1973) The country and the city. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Woods M (2005) Rural geography. SAGE, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Abhishek Bhutoria
    • 1
  1. 1.Independent ResearcherKathmanduNepal

Personalised recommendations