Eric, in my research / experience i have found that Sub-district, Mandal, Taluka, Tehsil means same and are division of District when it comes to Census. But for Revenue dept boundaries are drawn and managed by district administrative bodies who report to state administration only.
So for census - District and Sub-district are well defined boundaries, and I understand from 2011 Census India has bought a started numbering system which should make future data reconciliation easier But for land revenue depaetment - it really depends on the local administrative reach and function, and is managed and controlled by state admin bodies. For eg. Surat has some discrepancy when it comes to Revenue and Census boundaries. This was something I came across and even local admin bodies in Surat were not aware On Thursday, August 7, 2014 at 8:15:45 PM UTC+5:30, Eric Dodge wrote: > > This is very interesting Sharad. > > I've been looking for maps of what I've been calling administrative > blocks, that is, the units overseen by block development officers. MGNREGA > data is aggregated at this level and I've been hoping to use the data to do > some mapping exercises. > > The census sub-districts are called differently across states (tahsil, > taluk, mandal, etc). You can see the list here: > > > http://censusindia.gov.in/Tables_Published/Admin_Units/Admin_links/subdistrict_nomeclature.html > > I know that in all the states where census sub-districts are called taluk, > mandal, or CD block (with the exception of TN), the census sub-district is > identical to the administrative block. > > I've already completed a mapping exercise for Bihar using the census > sub-district map and the data matched up pretty well. If the IND_adm3 data > is indeed the administrative blocks then I could do a similar exercise with > Madhya Pradesh. I'll take a look to see if the data lines up correctly. > > Has anybody dug into this issue any deeper? I've heard that tehsil comes > from the revenue side whereas taluk, mandal, etc comes from the > administrative side but that doesn't explain why the census uses different > sub-district units across states. > > Best, > Eric > > > On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Sharad Lele <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> If I am right, then Justin may want to rename his layer as >> CDBlocks_2001... >> >> Sharad >> >> >> On Thursday, August 7, 2014 4:28:17 PM UTC+5:30, Sharad Lele wrote: >>> >>> I think I have the explanation for why I am seeing a good match and you >>> are not: >>> >>> The problem lies in defining what is the 'sub-district' unit (in >>> IND_adm3). Administratively speaking, it is tehsil, below which lies CD >>> block. Unfortunately, census gives information by CD block. So there are >>> more 'sub-district' units in Census than tehsils in the country. GDAM seems >>> to have followed the tehsil concept. >>> >>> To check: Karnataka is one state in which tehsil and CD block are one >>> and the same. That is why the sub-district layer IND_adm3 matches perfectly >>> for Karnataka, but not for other states. There might be some other states >>> where this holds good, I don't know. >>> >>> Anyway, so if one really wants CD block level boundaries, we have to >>> look at Justin, I guess. >>> >>> But the GDAM boundaries are not 'wrong'. >>> >>> Sharad >>> >>> On 07-Aug-14 9:48 AM, Devdatta Tengshe wrote: >>> >>> In Continuation of my previous email, here is a CSV file which shows >>> just how bad the GDAM dataset is. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Devdatta >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Devdatta Tengshe <[email protected] >>> <javascript:>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Sharad, >>>> >>>> I just download the GDAM data again, to confirm what you have said. >>>> >>>> I'm going to have to disagree with you about the quality of the >>>> IND_adm3 data. >>>> >>>> >>>> Acoording to the 2001 Census, there are 5454 Sub Districts in India >>>> <http://www.socialjustice.nic.in/pdf/tab11.pdf>. The GDAM dataset has >>>> just 2299 features. >>>> >>>> So clearly these taluk features do not correspond to the 2001 Census. I >>>> cross checked for some areas I have ground knowledge of, and I can say >>>> that >>>> this dataset is not from any specific era. Some tehsils in the file were >>>> created post 2001, while others created in the 90's were not present. >>>> >>>> In my opinion the GDAM data is pretty much unusable. >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Devdatta >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 11:36 PM, Sharad Lele <[email protected] >>>> <javascript:>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I have downloaded and checked the GADM boundaries (my version is >>>>> 2011). The taluka boundary layer probably holds good today, becuase few >>>>> talukas get split. Districts get split regularly (every so many years) so >>>>> the district boundary layer in this GADM set is quite of date (may apply >>>>> to >>>>> 2001 or so). The spatial registration (positional accuracy is ~1km, and >>>>> the >>>>> spatial detail is of course not as good as the boundaries given in a >>>>> Survey >>>>> of India 50k topo, but then that is an unfair standard, so by a more >>>>> generalized standard, the quality is okay. >>>>> >>>>> Sharad >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Monday, August 4, 2014 7:20:38 PM UTC+5:30, Dilip Damle wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Mr Thakkar, >>>>>> >>>>>> Please also look at another post (more than one) on this group about >>>>>> Taluk Shapefiles by Justin Meyers >>>>>> >>>>>> So far as I know GADM is the source that has Taluk files. >>>>>> I am not sure about its completeness and accuracy as on today >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.gadm.org/ >>>>>> >>>>>> On Monday, August 4, 2014 6:23:07 PM UTC+5:30, D Thakker wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> thanks Dilip for your hardwork. >>>>>>> I have been on a lookout for all taluka / tehsil shape file, so how >>>>>>> do I be in a loop as I am very keen to see the repository mail / list. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Monday, August 4, 2014 9:50:26 AM UTC+5:30, Dilip Damle wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sharad, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am working on some things will revert in about a week or may be >>>>>>>> more. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thejesh, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Go ahead, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Actually there was one more source a Low Resolution (vertices) >>>>>>>> District map by VDS technologies. >>>>>>>> I have it as Polylines in Autocad. I seem to have lost the original >>>>>>>> file. >>>>>>>> If anyone has then please share it. (it does not seem to be on >>>>>>>> their site now) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sunday, August 3, 2014 11:32:43 PM UTC+5:30, Thejesh GN wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Actually its not a bad idea to list it on the wiki. Let me know i >>>>>>>>> will create an account. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Thejesh GN ⏚ ತೇಜೇಶ್ ಜಿ.ಎನ್ >>>>>>>>> http://thejeshgn.com >>>>>>>>> GPG ID : 0xBFFC8DD3C06DD6B0 >>>>>>>>> On Aug 3, 2014 10:15 PM, "Sharad Lele" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear Dilip and others: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I have been following this thread with interest, but to be honest >>>>>>>>>> am a bit lost now. Can someone post a summary of which maps >>>>>>>>>> mentioned so >>>>>>>>>> far have what features (which coverage, pertaining to which year, >>>>>>>>>> what >>>>>>>>>> attributes (such as census codes), etc.)? Would be most helpful. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sharad >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Friday, August 1, 2014 9:03:58 PM UTC+5:30, Dilip Damle wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> This is an old post. >>>>>>>>>>> However this is the appropriate place to add an additional >>>>>>>>>>> source. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I had downloaded the set from Grid Geneva many years ago. >>>>>>>>>>> The original complete source was named as GNV197 which is 24 MB >>>>>>>>>>> Titled as "HUMAN POPULATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE BOUNDARIES >>>>>>>>>>> DATABASE FOR ASIA" >>>>>>>>>>> I am attaching the South Central Asia E00 file. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> That set contains The disputed areas under the country name IN1 >>>>>>>>>>> and IN2 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> This dataset can not be easily found at present on the GRID >>>>>>>>>>> Geneva site http://www.grid.unep.ch/index.php?lang=en in the >>>>>>>>>>> same name. >>>>>>>>>>> may be it is still there somewhere with some other name. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> For copyright check the metadata file which is here >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://geonetwork.grid.unep.ch/geonetwork/srv/en/iso19139. >>>>>>>>>>> xml?id=835 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> rgds >>>>>>>>>>> Dilip Damle >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, January 4, 2012 9:52:57 AM UTC+5:30, Karthik >>>>>>>>>>> Shashidhar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> All the shapefiles for India that I have downloaded do not show >>>>>>>>>>>> PoK and Aksai Chin as part of India. Does anyone here have access >>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>> shapefiles that include these territories? Basically looking to >>>>>>>>>>>> publish >>>>>>>>>>>> (online) some maps, so want to make sure that it's accurate. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> (I looked through the group archives, and all sources >>>>>>>>>>>> mentioned there do not show these regions as part of India) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>>>>> Karthik >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Datameet is a community of Data Science enthusiasts in India. >>>>>>>>>> Know more about us by visiting http://datameet.org >>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "datameet" group. >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>> Datameet is a community of Data Science enthusiasts in India. Know >>>>> more about us by visiting http://datameet.org >>>>> --- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "datameet" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected] <javascript:>. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> Datameet is a community of Data Science enthusiasts in India. Know more >>> about us by visiting http://datameet.org >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >>> Google Groups "datameet" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ >>> topic/datameet/X5kzViRMJKs/unsubscribe. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>> [email protected] <javascript:>. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Democratizing Forest Governance in India >>> (In press with Oxford University Press India) >>> >>> -- >> Datameet is a community of Data Science enthusiasts in India. Know more >> about us by visiting http://datameet.org >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "datameet" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] <javascript:>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- Datameet is a community of Data Science enthusiasts in India. Know more about us by visiting http://datameet.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "datameet" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
