Urban nightmare

EDITORIAL

Does the concept of urban livability ring a bell? Creators of this concept, an NGO named Institute of Competitiveness, in association with industry association CII, drew up a list of 37 cities and tier II towns to assess how liveable they were. To their surprise, they found that the notion was relatively unheard of, even among urban planners. But to the consternation of many, including residents of Delhi, the idea of the Capital being the best Indian city to live in, will come as a bit of a surprise. Mumbai follows Delhi, while Jamshedpur lies at the bottom of the heap. The parameters, perhaps, skew the results in favour of big cities: living standards, socio-cultural environment, education, medical facilities and recreational options, among others. Which is just as well. Our urban areas are facing serious issues of congestion, pollution and unsustainable gro­wth. The policy challenges in growth and urbanisation are manifesting themselves in insufficient infrastructure and a fall in productive potential of cities. In other words, the poor management of rapid growth affects our socio-economic development. Large parts of cities today have ‘escaped’ mainstream planning. Half of the populations of Delhi and Mumbai live in unauthorised areas. The considerable ‘illegal’ developments by way of layouts, unauthorised constructions and slum clusters are a frightening reality that threaten the very future of urban areas, the credibility of the planning system and regulations. Identifying and developing ideal locations for foreign investment and dreams of becoming a global powerhouse are crushed under energy, sanitation, transport and environmental degradation issues. City planning and regulation play a crucial role in determining the growth of a nation. While policy initiatives are decided by state governments, the executors of those initiatives are poorly funded municipalities, which have neither the financial muscle nor the political will to effect change. With nearly 300 million urban residents, India ranks second in the world in terms of total urban population. Curiously, it also figures among the least urbanised countries in the world. While the 21st century has seen roughly 50 per cent of the world population living in urban areas, the Indian average of 27.78 per cent is well below even the Asian average of 36.7 per cent, according to the study. In India, 300 towns with a population of above 100,000 inhabitants represent 65 per cent of India’s urban population. The rest are spread over 3,396 smaller towns. So it is a pity that Indian cities, which contribute to more than 20 to 25 per cent of the GDP, should be in such a pitiable situation. Only in bare comparative terms do the larger cities measure up to something. On absolute norms, they are largely unlivable. Therefore, certain conclusions are in order. India needs to amalgamate functions of its municipalities and there is a greater need for inter-municipal cooperation and shifting of some crucial functions to the second tier of the local government. Secondly, the distribution of functions has to be clarified and improved. Some experts believe – perhaps rightly – that budgets among municipalities could be linked and a consensus built on the best methods of regional development. It is clear that unless urgent steps are taken, we have trouble lying ahead. If we don’t treat our urban centres as economic hubs for social change, the medium and larger cities have the potential of making life hell for their residents.