As urbanisation picks up pace across India, albeit not matching global levels, this is one question that we are forced to confront frequently.
In my opinion, India is so bad at planning cities because we have no ‘one’ effective, central urbanisation plan at all. We do not have state-level urbanisation plans either. And till recently, we did not even have effective, functional district level comprehensive urbanisation plans. Though there have been ministries and departments, but their power to make deep dents in the system was negligible.
Sounds shocking, right? The only plans we have had so far have been after random, haphazard growth in Indian cities has already happened. Then, authorities would scramble to make it work, turn it revenue-positive and make it look less dis-organised. This story repeated itself countlessly over and over, time and again. It was only post 1991–92, after the 73rd and 74th constitutional amendments were carried out, that Rural local bodies and Urban local bodies gained prominence.
But why is there such a mess? Three prime reasons - basically a rural nation + no effectively funded centralised plan + huge regional variations.
. . . . .
REASON 1. Primarily a Rural nation - In 1951, India had only 5 cities with a population more than 10 lacs, and only 41 cities with more than 1 lac people. Villages were more than 5.6 lacs. Today in 2016–17, more than 65 percent of our people live in rural areas, or just-above rural towns. These are the prime focus of all governments, due to sheer numbers, and the political meaning it carries. The fact that rural folks are primarily agriculturists makes it simpler for the policy-makers to focus largely on them. The figures are tell-tale.
In my opinion, India is so bad at planning cities because we have no ‘one’ effective, central urbanisation plan at all. We do not have state-level urbanisation plans either. And till recently, we did not even have effective, functional district level comprehensive urbanisation plans. Though there have been ministries and departments, but their power to make deep dents in the system was negligible.
Sounds shocking, right? The only plans we have had so far have been after random, haphazard growth in Indian cities has already happened. Then, authorities would scramble to make it work, turn it revenue-positive and make it look less dis-organised. This story repeated itself countlessly over and over, time and again. It was only post 1991–92, after the 73rd and 74th constitutional amendments were carried out, that Rural local bodies and Urban local bodies gained prominence.
But why is there such a mess? Three prime reasons - basically a rural nation + no effectively funded centralised plan + huge regional variations.
. . . . .
REASON 1. Primarily a Rural nation - In 1951, India had only 5 cities with a population more than 10 lacs, and only 41 cities with more than 1 lac people. Villages were more than 5.6 lacs. Today in 2016–17, more than 65 percent of our people live in rural areas, or just-above rural towns. These are the prime focus of all governments, due to sheer numbers, and the political meaning it carries. The fact that rural folks are primarily agriculturists makes it simpler for the policy-makers to focus largely on them. The figures are tell-tale.
 |
| Indian urbanisation has a long way to go yet |
