Smart Cities Mission, 2015
Shravani Thota
ABSTRACT
“Innovation is the driver of economic growth” is a term we often come across but has there been any scope of participating in policy making activities and contributing innovatively?
Every time a large-scale development project is announced by the Central Government ,the citizens ask themselves “ Are our voices being heard? Are our requirements known and served?”
The Smart Cities Mission, 2015 is not the first mission with an intent to transform the urban landscape. Integrated Development of Small and Medium Towns (IDSMT), 1979 and Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM), 2005 were announced with much the same goals and have transformed Indian cities to an extent but problems continue to exist. Every city has its special identity, culture and needs. The earlier schemes followed the top-bottom approach and weren’t specific to the requirements of the people , they were plagued by complex structures and administrative failures.
The Smart City Mission relies on three principles- “ Sustainability, Economic Activity and Inclusiveness” and intends to progress further hand-in-hand with technological advancement.
“Does the Smart City Mission learn from India’s past?”, “ How is the mission different?” are only a small part of the questions we try to answer through this paper.
INTRODUCTION
According to The World Bank, as of 2019, India’s population stood at a massive 1.366 billion. The period 2001-2011 has seen an urban population growth rate at 31.8%[1]. The above numbers become relevant because the contribution of urban population towards the GDP of India was 63%(2019) and a joint report by CBRE and CREDAI suggests that by 2030, three-fourths of the GDP will be derived from the urban areas [2]. While the thriving urban spaces of the country are projected to drive the country’s economy only next to the USA and China, the nation’s cities continue to be plagued by several problems ranging from suboptimal infrastructural facilities to lack of technological advancement, from impediments to ease of setting up businesses to traffic congestion.
Being a global player, India also entered the Paris Agreement on Climate Change and set amongst others, an ambitious goal of generating 40% of its power from Renewable Energy sources by 2030. The nation expressed it’s conformity with the idea of “Sustainable Development” on various occasions.
As India transcends from being a developing to a developed country, this period not only offers opportunities of growth but also the challenges that come along.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi, on the 25th of July,2015- declared the Smart Cities Mission. He mentioned the problems that plague Indian cities while also urging the nation to find “innovative, sustainable and smart solutions”. His speech reemphasized on stating that this policy would rely on the bottom-up approach, that is, the Municipalities are largely responsible for development of their cities.
Through this paper, we sought to discuss all about the Smart Cities Mission,2015 through the lens of policymaking. Studying different case studies, we dissect the policy and discuss the challenges, motives and impacts while parallelly discussing the roles played by all the stakeholders through the journey of this mission.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The “Smart City Mission, 2015” being an ongoing mission has a lot of dynamic information attached to it and a little literature. As the mission progresses through different stages, new data and patterns emerge and hence we have relied largely on Journalistic sources.
First, we learnt about the policy itself from the official documentation provided by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs. We have studied the “Smart Cities Mission Statement & Guidelines” deeply to capture the aspirations of the policy. We have also relied primarily on the above to understand the genesis and implementation of the policy.
The Annexures of “Smart Cities Mission Statement & Guidelines” provide an evaluation pattern for the SCPs, et al. These have been examined critically to understand what counts as important to the policy and how much weightage has been given to each of these aspects. As the paper progresses, these aspects will be quoted and discussed.
Second, we have studied the following research papers :
AN OVERVIEW OF THE SMART CITIES MISSION IN INDIA - By Centre for Policy Research
India's Smart Cities Mission: An Assessment - By RUMI AIJAZ AND KRISTIAN HOELSCHER ( ORF ISSUE BRIEF - December 2015)
Report on Smart City Mission-India - By SESEI (Seconded European Standardization Expert for India )
We have accessed data from these research papers, garnered knowledge from the detailed analysis of various aspects of the policy.
Third, we have looked up the official websites and social media handles of various SCMs like Visakhapatnam, Bhubaneswar ,Varanasi and Jabalpur to evaluate their engagement and accessibility. We also studied primary information pertaining to the projects taken up by these Smart Cities.
Fourth, We have included in our study, relevant and reliable information from newspaper articles. A lot of numerical data was obtained from these sources as well.
The paper is structured in such a way that it talks of the policy in a balanced tone mentioning it’s positive impacts as well as shortcomings. We have relied a lot on case studies to be able to explain certain aspects of the policy and impacts vividly.
The paper tries to explain how various stakeholders and concepts like culture and technology shape the “Smart Cities Mission” and its impacts.
POLITICS BEHIND THE POLICY
Our independent analysis states that PM Modi first came to the forefront as the Prime Ministerial Candidate due to his popularity mainly among the urban youth. Though only 18% of the electorate seats are truly urban, in 2014 BJP bagged 54 urban seats with a vote share of 38%, higher than its national vote share of 31% and the urban vote share is important both for Congress and the BJP. [3]
Though the SCM in its final form has significantly divulged from the promise of greenfield development of BJP’s 2014 manifesto, the political interest besides intent for development may have been consolidating the urban vote bank for the BJP. As the rural youth inevitably move to the urban areas, SCM is an excellent opportunity for the national party to continue to have a stronghold on it’s popular vote banks- youth and urban population.
COMPETITION MODE,THE SVPs- INTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS
The Smart City Mission was announced in a competition route and the Prime Minister during his announcement said that much is left to the Municipalities to decide how to develop their cities.
Stage-I of the selection of Smart Cities is an intrastate competition whereby cities of a state compete amongst each other and the states shortlist the cities according to the scores they have attained based on the prescribed criterion.
Stage-II requires the 100 potential smart cities to submit their Smart City Proposals (SCPs) which should state the model chosen, mention the consultations made with residents and other stakeholders of the city. A revenue model is required to be proposed wherein attracting private partnerships is encouraged. Scoring is based on the evaluation pattern prescribed by MoUD and smart cities are declared in stages.
Once a city is declared a Smart City under SCM, a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) has to be created at the city level. The SPV will plan, appraise, approve, release funds, implement,
manage, operate, monitor and evaluate the Smart City development projects.[4]
The SPV consists of members from the Central Government, State Government and the ULBs on its Board. The SPV needs to be supplied with steady revenue to sustain itself and should be allowed to work independently to produce efficient results. There is a claim that this transfer of “rights and obligations” from the ULBs to the SPVs recentralize power with the state much against the fundamental claim of SCM being strong on the bottom-up approach.
PARTNERSHIPS, CONVERGENCE WITH OTHER SCHEMES
Once a city is declared a Smart City under SCM, SPV receives ₹100 Cr from the Central Government as a tied grant annually and the states are required to match the same amount.
The SPV will be a limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013 at the city-level, in which the State/UT and the ULB will be the promoters having 50:50 equity shareholding. [5] The mission guidelines suggest that private financing can be sought and private and financial institutions may be given an equity stake.
Project execution can be done through joint ventures, PPPs, turnkey contracts etc. and is expected that a number of schemes are taken up on PPP basis. Despite the push towards corporate financing, data collected shows that the projects under SCM largely relied on public funds as the mission progressed.[6] The SCM, AMRUT, SBM , Digital India et al have common goals- SCM is area based while other schemes are project based. It has been guided that convergence between these schemes with SCM be sought at the city planning level.
INCLUSIVITY
The Mission focuses on sustainable and “inclusive” development where the poor and disadvantaged are not left behind. The mission sought to create employment opportunities while improving the quality of life for all. The Mission statement suggests housing opportunities be expanded for all and housing be created in the greenfield areas of which at least 15% is affordable.
In Spite of the core motivation of the mission there are fears at the ground. Under redevelopment, slum demolition is considered, if the residents are not able to prove their tenure, there is a danger of them ending up homeless. It has further been criticized that pushing funds into ABD(Area Based Development) instead of catering to basic infrastructure of the other less developed parts of the city will further deepen the divide within the city.
Positive examples of inclusivity as a part of SCM are “Park For Differently Abled” in Hyderabad and the “‘All Abilities Children Park” in Visakhapatnam.
Source: http://smartcities.gov.in/
CULTURE
A distinctive feature of the Smart City Mission is that it wants every smart city to nurture an identity, a culture of its own. This can be in terms of local cuisine, sporting culture of the city, conserving the heritage sites of the area, manufacturing traditional goods etc.
An interesting case is that of Varanasi Smart City. The VSCL entered into a partnership with EFKON India. VSCL’s vision statement is- “To rejuvenate the oldest Indian living city of Varanasi as a great place to live and visit by conserving and showcasing its enriched heritage, culture, spirituality, and traditions through innovative social and financial inclusion solutions.” [6]
This was done by incorporating Intelligent Transport Management Systems, Spot Speed Detection Systems, Data Centers with Smart Governance and Network, et al. IT solutions have been taken up to facilitate better governance and traffic management to provide for citizens and visitors. These projects help improve tourism and uphold Varanasi as a thriving cultural center. The above is an example of culture driving policy and innovation.
SCM AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Environment lies at the core of the Smart City Mission. The project aims to make cities sustainable and increase their liveability. The mission recognizes the need to use the available resources “smartly” and necessitates the Urban Legislative Bodies to turn to Renewable Energy Sources. The Prime Minister urged the stakeholders to proactively seek solutions for Solid Waste Management. As of 2018, the Energy and Ecology sector had a budget of ₹22,535.8 Cr .Conserving resources is also an important feature and hence a lot has been invested on smart metering, Energy Grids, distribution and supply. Innovative IT solutions have been pushed forth in terms of smart metering, smart poles. One noteworthy project is “Smart Street bench of Coimbatore”- each solar tree covers an area of 80 sq. feet and is a part of the solar grid. It not only provides shade but also generates a minimum of eight units power per day.
Source: urbanupdate.in
Talking of the environment in terms of Transportation, only 13% of budget allocation was made to non-motorized transportation. Though the mission talks of sustainability on an overall level, it can be seen heavily inclined towards economic development alone and hence this aspect of the policy is a cause of concern.
EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS- THE CASE OF TAMIL NADU
Smart City Mission, as a policy, seeks inputs from all external stakeholders. It is a mentioned key responsibility of the SPVs to work closely with and benefit from inter-linkages with academic institutions and organisations. To monitor the mission, in the City Level, all the hundred Smart Cities are required to establish a Smart City Advisory Forum (SCAF) which is convened by the CEO of the SPV and includes the Mayor, MP, MLA, District Collector, technical experts and the local youths. SCAF must mandatorily and at least one member from the area who is a,
i. President / secretary representing registered Residents Welfare Association,
ii. Member of registered Taxpayers Association / Ratepayers Association,
iii. President / Secretary of slum level federation, and
iv. Members of a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) or Mahila Mandali / Chamber
of Commerce / Youth Associations. [8]
Tamil Nadu has the most number of Smart Cities (12) in South India but has been criticized for being very slow in implementing the proposed projects. Activists allege that the situation on ground in Tamil Nadu is plagued by myriad issues such as corruption at various levels of administration. The SCAF is completely non-existent and all cities except Chennai and Coimbatore have unfilled CEO posts of SPV where the commissioners of the city corporations stepped in to carry out the responsibilities. Cities except Chennai and Tirunalveli do not have a dedicated website for the mission. All of the above impediments create problems of loss of transparency and do not provide a platform for grievance redressal and strategic discussion. The scathing effects can be illustrated through numbers, as of March 2020, only 1 out of 16 projects were completed in Madurai, none out of 24 in Tiruppur. The same situation holds true with the rest of the cities. A push from the citizens on social media to conduct mandatory SCAF meetings which had to be convened by the local MP in absence of the CEO.
Coimbatore Consumer Cause, stated that no consultation has been taken from the civil societies and public before implementation of the projects, 24 lakes are located in the city of Coimbatore of which 9 are under beautification projects while rest are being used as landfills. In the case of Chennai, the corporation announced building of “missing link stormwater drains” while the civic bodies have demolished all the drains and plan to build from scratch. It has been alleged that SCM at the city level is following regressive practices in the name of development [9] largely because of unawareness of the present needs of the city.
The mismatched dynamics between various stakeholders has ultimately led to handicap the pace and the quality of implementation of SCM in the state of Tamil Nadu.
PARTICIPATION OF THE CITIZENRY
The participation of the citizens is a critical part of the mission. Citizens are to be consulted on various projects and feedback should be sought from them according to the mission guidelines. Citizens’ participation is sought after right from the first stage of the mission where they need to be consulted for choosing areas for retrofitting and redevelopment.
The Stage-2 form of the challenge asks several questions for score evaluation on whether citizens are consulted to choose the best practices, strategies and implementation methods; how much social media has been used during consultation?; have the contrary voices been heard and taken into consideration?
It’s seen that there’s a clear push from the policy to seek citizens actively but the outlay as to how it has to be done has been left to the discretion of the implementers. This creates problems since there is no uniform measure of participation. Some SCPs considered twitter impressions, Facebook likes and shares as a form of participation or positive feedback but the quality of this feedback is questionable since it cannot be said surely that a citizen is in compliance when he shares a post while it may be a case she/he shares the post to express his discontent.
Another debate arises when the evaluation of citizen participation comes down to digital literacy. Those who do not have access to social media networks and government websites are left out from participating and the overall opinion/feedback obtained can be skewed.
On the positive note, it is observed that SVPs of Jabalpur, Bhubaneswar are doing commendable work on their Facebook and Twitter handles respectively- having garnered thousands of followers and updating on each project initiative. SVP-Vizag has a very accessible, simple feedback receiving, strategy seeking mechanism in place on its website.
TECHNOLOGY
Throughout this paper, we come across technology while we discuss almost every aspect of the mission. The SCM in many cities has illustrated performance on adopting smart methodologies incorporating IT, AI et al. Intelligent Transportation Management in Pune, Integrated Command and Control Center in Kakinada, Smart City Center in Surat are some noteworthy examples where technology is used to locate abnormal events, address them swiftly and use information for effective collaborations.
Talking of the budget allocation to the IT component only has a smattering 0.3% allocated. Taking note of the scale of innovation, it seems suggestable that reallocation of budget towards technology will help create smarter and sustainable solutions.
CONCLUSION
The Coronavirus Pandemic made the world realize the importance of going digital. The ongoing pandemic got to halt various projects under the SCM while also accelerating the growth of many others. Five years into the incorporation of the mission, the efforts fructify and provide visual demonstrations of success in cities like Visakhapatnam while cities like Chandigarh failed due to poor administration. The competition mode set cities up for further transformation through collaborative challenges like the recent “Cycles 4 Change”. The SPVs of various smart cities are successfully leading their cities into overall development while some others continue to lag behind. It is rather early to comment upon the future of the mission but the SCM has kickstarted the support and scaling of many innovative projects.
Though there may be differences between the intent and the practices of the mission, there is a scope for a lot more innovation and improvement through collaboration with all stakeholders.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
www.mohua.org
Page-12,10.1, Smart Cities Mission Statement & Guidelines
Page-12,10.2, Smart Cities Mission Statement & Guidelines
CPR SMART CITIES DATABASE, 2018
https://www.efkonindia.com/case-study-varanasi-smart-city-project.php?CaseStudies&VSC
Page-17, Smart Cities Mission Statement & Guidelines
https://thefederal.com/states/south/tamil-nadu/whats-delaying-tamil-nadus-smart-city-projects/
REFERENCES
AN OVERVIEW OF THE SMART CITIES MISSION IN INDIA - By Centre for Policy Research
India's Smart Cities Mission: An Assessment - By RUMI AIJAZ AND KRISTIAN HOELSCHER ( ORF ISSUE BRIEF - December 2015)
Report on Smart City Mission-India - By SESEI (Seconded European Standardization Expert for India )
Comments