By BK. Joshi
We are told that the work of the Doon Smart City project is in its final phase. What this implies is that a substantial part of the project has been completed. How “Smart” has Dehradun become now?
The big question is: What characterises a Smart City? Conceptually, a Smart City is considered one that “integrates information and communication technology (ICT), and various physical devices connected to the Internet of things (IOT) network to optimize the efficiency of city operations and services and connect to citizens”. The Smart Cities Mission in India concedes that there is no one definition of a Smart City and it can vary from city to city. The objective according to it is “to promote cities that provide core infrastructure and give a decent quality of life to its citizens, a clean and sustainable environment and application of ‘Smart’ Solutions. The focus is on sustainable and inclusive development”. The core infrastructure elements in a Smart City have been identified as: “i. adequate water supply, ii. assured electricity supply, iii. sanitation, including solid waste management, iv. efficient urban mobility and public transport, v. affordable housing, especially for the poor, vi. robust IT connectivity and digitalization, vii. good governance, especially e-Governance and citizen participation, viii. sustainable environment, ix. safety and security of citizens, particularly women, children and the elderly, and x. health and education”. Based on the above objectives the Doon Smart City Project also aims to provide core infrastructure development for the city, ‘Smart’ application solutions like tax payment, e-governance, etc., for the citizens, boost the economy of the state and ensure a safe and decent quality of life for the people.
How then does Dehradun stack up as a Smart City in terms of the above criteria? Some developments have surely taken place and are visible. These include a new look Parade Ground area, earmarked paid parking spaces along some major roads, repair of road surface and footpaths along Rajpur Road and building underground ducts for cables along Rajpur Road. We still see long traffic jams on the roads. We still see newly installed traffic lights at road junctions either not working due to power shutdowns or permanently in amber mode with consequent free for all among vehicles. Occasionally we also see traffic police manually controlling traffic even when signal lights are working. We still see heaps of uncollected rubbish lying by roadsides. We still have potholes on roads. We still have severe water logging on roads and thoroughfares after a heavy shower. Power supply continues to play hide-and-seek throughout the day. With power supply down, access to internet is disrupted. One could be in the midst of some important work when power supply and internet may suddenly decide to take a break so that one is left twiddling one’s thumbs waiting for them to make a comeback. There is no visible improvement in city governance and interface between the citizens and the local government. The list can go on. These certainly are not signs of a Smart City, nor of a Good City.
A prerequisite for any planning is a clear idea of the population for which plans are being made. Unfortunately, with the national population census due in 2021 not having been conducted, and with no sign of it being conducted in the near future, we have no idea of the current population of Dehradun. How long can we plan with population figures that are more than a decade old? During this period, apart from natural increase in population the city limits have been expanded by including peripheral and rural areas within municipal limits adding many people to the population of the city. Moreover, many more people may have also moved into the city from outside and made it their home. So, what is the total population for whom the Smart City project is aiming to provide core infrastructure and Smart Solutions? We have, at best, “guesstimates” but no firm figures for the population of either the municipal area of Dehradun or of the area covered by the Smart City project. And what is the total number of vehicles – two-wheelers, three-wheelers and four-wheelers – plying on the roads of the city? What kind of road and parking space do they need? So how then do we estimate the size and dimensions of the core infrastructure to provide “a decent quality of life to its citizens, a clean and sustainable environment and application of ‘Smart Solutions’? We are left shooting in the dark hoping that somehow our shot hits the mark.
If we look at the problem from the perspective of the ordinary citizens of the city, for whom all solutions and projects are ultimately meant, we may come to the conclusion that what they are looking for is a clean friendly city where basic services – electricity, water, transport – function without much disruption and they are able to go about their daily life and business without undue hassles. They would place their bets on a Good city with a receptive and functional city government rather than a Smart one.
The problem with current city planning is that solutions are being imposed from above instead of emerging from below. The Smart City project was conceived at the level of the Central Government and implemented nationally. Inevitably, therefore, project guidelines and details had to be uniform across the country in order for it to be monitored centrally. A Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) was created for its implementation. The city government may have been represented at the apex level in some form, but it did not have the ownership of the project and its activities; it remained on the periphery. Ownership remained with the SPV. Instead of a centralised “one size fits all” approach we should have a city-specific approach. Without the city government being central to any urban development and renewal project we cannot be assured of its success. Now, it may be argued that city governments, as presently constituted, are extremely weak entities ill-prepared to handle such a responsibility. They can, therefore, not be expected to take on the responsibility of such a complex project. Hence, the need for an SPV. This is in fact a self-defeating argument. If we want our urban areas to face the challenges that confront them, make cities a better place to live and improve the quality of life of their citizens, then they have to be geared up organisationally and in terms of quality of skills available. This requires a different paradigm of urban governance than the one currently practiced.
Our existing system and structure of municipal government was effective as long as the population of our urban centres was small, urban life simple and problems less complex. Without a radical transformation in structure, approach and mindset we cannot expect our urban local bodies to tackle contemporary and emerging problems. This, therefore, should be the most important change that we should be working towards.
(BK Joshi is former Vice Chancellor, Kumaon University and currently Honorary Director, Doon Library & Research Centre).
