Why India Didn’t Produce a World Class City
Piyush Ranjan Rout, Ph.D*
India’s Growth story is now debated all over the world. Many of its growth stories are written and shaped in its cities home to world’s second largest urbanized population. Some of its modern city is home to worlds best Information Technology houses, Tourist Destination and making profits in operating metro system. Yet our cities represents symbol of ugly portrait of Modern India aspiring to become Singapore, New York or Shanghai. Knowing the fact not a single city is in Worlds best Livable Cities. This is an attempt to find ways why India didn't produce a World Class City and what really restricting us being world class?
Yet no two cities are at the same level of development in India. While some cities are dreaming to become Shanghai, New York, Singapore, there are others as poor as some African or South East Asian cities. Yet walking on the streets one will come across a railway line that divides city with open defecation, a river that has forgotten its identity long ago, hips of garbage finding own way, choked with vehicular emissions, informal hawkers & housing spreading and a vehicular path overtaken pedestrian path. Beneath the layer of these challenges is success story India’s urbanization.Over sixty years of independence India produced some or the finest infrastructure i.e. Delhi Metro, Delhi Airport, Ahmadabad Bus Rapid Transit System etc or champions like TATA’s, Infosys and Wipro making their presence felt worldwide. Same time many do argue why India didn't produce a world class city? A city that is within World Heritage Cities, Mercer Quality of Living and The Economist's World's Most Livable Cities.
In thirty years’ time Singapore transformed itself from a slum to world class city but we cant. Many will argue about our population but China too produced some of the finest cities. Perhaps the worried factor is somewhere in our governance. The reason for India lagging in producing world class cities is that systems don’t function when perverse incentives reward rather than penalize it. We need institutional changes to end those perverse incentives. The past years will go down in memory as the year of disillusionment ‘chalta hai and jugad’ cynicism,and further degradation of India’s urban story. Cynics say nothing serious will happen to our cities, unless we have major institutional changes in municipal governance, the existing perverse incentive that rewards no performing will continue.
Without effective leadership all dreams and investments will have no meaning. Today people are aware to pay taxes, cities have various modes of revenues and all most all municipal bodies are in some form of good money to govern than twenty years ago. But unprofessional way of running the engines of growth is hampering cities doing innovation in managing cities. So we need major institutional reforms to ensure effective leadership in municipal governance. First, we need a mechanism that allows everyone the opportunity of becoming Mayor. Second, the relation between Mayors & Executives, Third, we need a system by which Mayors will able to choose their executives, Fourth, we need to groom professional managing cities.
First, In a country where the position of President, Prime Minister, Governor, Chief Minister etc are not reserved nor restricted to chose their executives and no differentiation in tenure but it is applicable in election of local government Mayors. A Mayor term varies from one, two & half, five years; subject to reservation and has no power to choose their executives. The result we don’t see people like Ratan Tata, N.R.Murthy, Ajim Premji or Nandan Nilkeni etc like character as Mayors but in Corporate governance in making Indian Business world class. So some says Indian business are world call but not its cities. This will continue until unless we have an institutional change that allows everyone gets opportunity for contesting city’s top position, equal tenure and opportunity of choosing executives. This will make electoral victory a cruse for everyone getting opportunity, instead of a particular segment. If such a law enacted, we may well see Indian Mayors as strong as their international counterpart with more visionary and decisive. This reform can truly transform the existing perverse incentives to good governance.
Second, the administrative head of the municipal bodies in the cities are normally an officer of all India or state services with few years of experience appointed by state Governments. Technically in a democratic setup the Mayor should have edge over the state in choosing the executives. These administrative heads are assisted by a skeletal staff drawn from the state services with little exposure in urban management and city planning often run engines of growth. The execution of programmes follows principle of ‘Business as Usual’ leading to Rich Cities but Poor Governance.
The relation between Mayor and Municipal Commissioner resembles that one is elected by people and another appointed by State Government resulting most often both are in hurry for short term goals, satisfying each one’s bosses at the higher level than visioning for future of city. Many often the latter one is self proclaimed leader of cities over the people’s representatives neither accountable to public nor system, whereas people have the opportunity to account Mayor at least during elections. However, some tries to overcome these perverse incentives but they fails due to bad governance. In which they are uncertain of their future as Municipal Commissioners. Ultimately a good city suffers in between relation of two leaders, disallowing both Mayor & Municipal Commissioner to practice innovation in City Management on a uncertain tenure or rather future.
Third, given an opportunity to Mayors choosing their officials amongst the professional or identified civil servants will encourage more competitiveness amongst cities for performance. Once this incentive system is in place, Mayors themselves will devise all sorts of speedy procedures for long term goals with short term actions, which become precedents and so are adopted by all. The power of choosing officials alone does not ensure cities performance. But it is the biggest missing ingredient in today’s competitive city management, where one performs another perishes. Every city mayor would like to have a competitive Municipal Commissioner as their City Manager in running the Indian Cities like Corporate but delivering social products benefiting common mans.
Fourth, currently professional urban management is worried of recognition in India, because no one gets the opportunity of managing cities. Most of the professionals expertise either used as consultant or in the second-third orders of services supporting executives in Municipal Governments. Thus professionals prefer to work in private sector than entering municipal governance. If opportunity given, India do have large pool of professional ready to take off the challenge of managing cities. So Instead of using these processionals in lower orders, they need to be groomed for managing cities at higher levels with exposure to international & national best practices. This will further encourage students making Urban Management as their carrier like studying for management, engineering and medical sciences. Perhaps this will enable in coming decade India having professionals to manage cities like their global counterpart
Can India will continue its old system to afford missing the bust stop or it will undertake serious institutional reforms. Assuming that country will take reforms to ensure its objectives driven in National Urban Renewal Mission are achieved. In that case we need to overcome the old system of governance, restricting good leaders and lack of professional at the cities to ensure that India’s Growth story is not derailed. It is essential that democracy be practiced at all levels of Government enabling good Mayors serving cities, the uniformity in tenure, allowing mayors choosing their Executives and encouraging professional for managing cities.
Urbanization is reality and no one can ignore it, such a large urban population of the country can’t be handed over to people who simply don’t appreciate managing cities. One can’t expect a veterinary doctor treating human patient nor human doctor to animal; even if they survive the reaction may be difficult.
We have seen with strong Mayors many Asian cities have turned themselves into world class. Be it Singapore from a shanty town to global financial hub or Seoul most congested place to tourist paradise or China moving from Beijing to shanghai, Guangzhou etc. Cities are making their presence in global urbanization.
Finally we need to overcome the syndrome of Rich Cities with Poor Governance by ensuring our cities are competitive and our Mayors are decisive in leading their cities. Perhaps the future of India’s urbanization will be debated not as dreaming to reach Singapore, Hong Kong or New York but re inventing its own past glory of managing cities during Mohenjo-daro and Harappa (2500-1600 B.C.) era and ensuring within next decade some of its cities are part of the Heritage or Mercer or The Economist's Livable Cities.
*Views expressed in this paper are of the Author and not that of organisation he represents or belongs.piyushbbsr@yahoo.com
