With Prime Minister Mr. Modi laying
out an ambitious plan for India, urbanization in India has seen an upward
trajectory. We have a lot of investment being pumped into urban development
programs. Modi’s Smart Cities Initiative and AMRUT urban missions will see
investments exceeding 50,000 crore rupees going into India’s
cities. Meanwhile, with a lot of buzz being created about urbanization and
smart cities – some companies have created dedicated business units to tap the
market. Each one of them, trying to market their product as the backbone of any
smart city.
With so much money going into urban
development, before anything else, it becomes essential to review our attitude
as a nation first, to truly built a smart city and remain true to the
definition thereof. We are a nation, with most of our leaders bred upon wrong
dynamics of leadership. With little to no regard, about demographics of
state/population they represent or natural/industrial resources they are to
work with, every leader seems to think they hold a hammer of the same size, and
unfortunately everything looks like a nail!
Such are the concerns related to
tackling urban planning, that every plan will quickly turn into a potential
candidate for reforms. There is a more basic need to reform our attitude
towards urban planning and community - possibility of which has proved to be a
Sisyphean Construct that governments across the globe, including India, are
rolling up the hill.
In the Indian context, the
landscape of regulatory environment is primarily an outcome of the division of
subjects, where the Union and the State governments could frame laws, as
provided in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India. The problem of
‘stock’ and ‘flow’ of the regulations, is such a complex maze – and it is
further thickened by the plethora of laws and regulation therein, which have simply
failed to keep pace with time. We are trying to build smart cities – but are
working with erstwhile regulations, the basic construct of this approach is
appalling.
Another major issue emanates from
the way the appointments in the regulatory agencies, and also the
organizational structure, are made and held. On this count infusing professionalism through right selection and capacity building are the key
issues – this will revitalize the waiting and decision time, and also the
payment flow to vendors or stakeholders involved. There is huge
information asymmetry that adversely impacts the regulatory environment. While
enterprises above a threshold may have the wherewithal to deal with the complex
regulatory environment, to build smart cities, small and medium enterprises
will play a much greater role – and greater coordination amongst ministries and
the policy makers is the need of the hour.
With heavier regulation, chances
are higher for corruption and sprouting of larger unofficial routines to get work
done, but no better quality of public or private goods. One essential step
forward for better urban planning is more democratic and limited governments -
both at the Central and State level, with lighter and streamlined regulations
to comply with.
If these fractures are not
corrected, urbanization and development of smart cities will reduce to an
obstacle race with one principal worry - uncertainties about the number of
obstacles, the nature of obstacles and the location of the obstacles. This
uncomfortable realisation will drive away investments and stakeholders.
Functional autonomy with necessary accountability is a better recipe for
urbanization and development of Smart Cities – to tackle the lethargy in the
system and adapt to present day realities, for achieving desired objectives.
