💥Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS1-08.Urbanisation:problems and remedies

  • Global Smart City Index, 2020

    Four Indian cities -New Delhi, Mumbai, Hyderabad, and Bengaluru – witnessed a significant drop in their rankings in the global listing of smart cities that was topped by Singapore.

    Try this PYQ:

    Q.Which one of the following is not a sub-index of the World Bank’s ‘Ease of Doing Business Index’?

    (a) Maintenance of law and order

    (b) Paying taxes

    (c) Registering property

    (d) Dealing with construction permits

    Global Smart City Index

    • The Institute for Management Development, in collaboration with Singapore University for Technology and Design, has released the 2020 Smart City Index.
    • Its key findings rest on how technology is playing a role in the Covid-19 era.
    • The 2020 Index was topped by Singapore, followed by Helsinki and Zurich in the second and the third place respectively.
    • Others in the top 10 list include Auckland (4th), Oslo (5th), Copenhagen (6th), Geneva (7th), Taipei City (8th), Amsterdam (9th) and New York at the 10th place.

    India’s performances

    • In the 2020 Smart City Index, Hyderabad was placed at the 85th position (down from 67 in 2019), New Delhi at 86th rank (down from 68 in 2019), Mumbai was at 93rd place (in 2019 it was at 78) and Bengaluru at 95th (79 in 2019).
    • This drop can be attributed to the detrimental effect that the pandemic has had where the technological advancement was not up to date.
    • From 15 indicators that the respondents perceive as the priority areas for their city, all four cities highlighted air pollution as one of the key areas that they felt their city needed to prioritise on.
    • For cities like Bangalore and Mumbai, this was closely followed by road congestion while for Delhi and Hyderabad it was basic amenities, the report said.

  • [pib] Highlights of the Swachh Survekshan 2020

    Image Source: TH

    Indore was declared the cleanest city in India for the fourth consecutive time in the Swachh Survekshan, 2020 — India’s annual survey on cleanliness.

    Note the following things about Swachh Survekshan:

    1) Nodal Ministry (It is Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs)

    2) Authority carrying out the survey

    3) Various parameters of the survey

    Swachh Survekshan

    • It is an annual survey of cleanliness, hygiene and sanitation in cities and towns across India.
    • It ranks India’s cities, towns and states based on sanitation, waste management and overall cleanliness.
    • It was launched as part of the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, which aimed to make India clean and free of open defecation by 2 October 2019.
    • The first survey was undertaken in 2016 and covered 73 cities; by 2019 the survey had grown to cover 4237 cities and was said to be the largest cleanliness survey in the world.

    Survey methodology

    • The surveys are carried out by the Quality Council of India. The criteria and weightage for different components of sanitation-related aspects used for the survey were:

    a) Municipal documentation (solid waste management including door-to-door collection, processing, and disposal, and open defecation free status. These carried 45 per cent of the total 2,000 marks.

    b) Citizen feedback – 30 per cent (450 + 150 marks)

    c) Independent observation – 25 per cent (500 marks)

    Highlights of the 2020 Rankings

    • Surat in Gujarat and Navi Mumbai in Maharashtra bagged the second and third spot respectively among the cleanest cities with more than a million populations.
    • Maharashtra’s Karad, Saswad and Lonavala bagged the first three positions for cities having a population less than one lakh.
    • Among the cities with a population between one and 10 lakh, Chhattisgarh’s Ambikapur was declared the cleanest, followed by Mysore in Karnataka.
    • In fact, Chhattisgarh has ranked the cleanest state in the category of states having more than 100 Urban Local Bodies (ULB). It was followed by Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh.
    • In 2019, Chhattisgarh was in the third position in the category. The survey found that Chhattisgarh is the first and only state where every city achieved Open Defecation Free (ODF)++ status.

  • False urban rural binary

    The article brings out the issues in the rural-urban binary, which leads to the disparity in the allocation of resources to the urban areas.

    Congestion and health issues in cities

    • The congestion in large cities has turned out to be their worst enemy during this pandemic.
    • Congestion is most evident in slums in large cities and poses a grave health and environmental challenges.
    • Yet, the Centre’s allocation for the rural component of the Swachh Bharat Mission is about seven times more than for urban areas.
    • Class I cities have 1.4 beds per 1,000 people. (with the population more than 1 lakh)
    • However, the urban support under the National Health Mission is just three per cent of the total allocation, while 97 per cent of the funds are set aside for rural areas.

    Issues with the present urban development programs

    • The Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (2005-2014) allocated the bulk of funds to large cities: 70 per cent to large cities and 30 per cent to smaller towns.
    • Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation (AMRUT) and the Smart Cities Mission, focus on Class I cities.
    • Both these schemes provide funds for the more developed cities that already have relatively better infrastructure.
    • But these schemes overlook the nearly seven crore people who live in smaller towns.
    • These are towns that lag behind in services and infrastructure as compared to the big cities.

    Consider the question “The rural-urban binary has led to the policy formulation in which there is a huge disparity in the allocation of resources and attention on the urban area. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    The pandemic has forced us to reflect on the unequal and unplanned development of urban settlements and the absence of infrastructure to provide for the teeming millions.  The challenges of urban poverty and congestion cry for more attention, more government support.

    Original article:

    https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/coronavirus-covid-19-pandemic-india-urban-cities-6520574/

  • Migrants and COVID

    In this Article, we highlight some facts about migration in India, summarize key relief measures announced by the government and directives issued by the Supreme Court for the migrant population in relation to the lockdown.
    ———————————————————————————
    Reference source: https://www.prsindia.org/theprsblog/migration-india-and-impact-lockdown-migrants

  • Using knowledge-era technology to bridge the urban-rural gap

    This article puts forward the idea of using knowledge-era technology to minimise the difference between rural and urban areas. In the first part, it elaborates the reasons and circumstances that led to the neglect of rural areas and development in urban areas. In the next part, the idea of using knowledge-era technologies to close the gaps between rural and urban areas is explored.

    Why Urbanisation is spreading and how it led to the neglect of rural areas?

    • Better opportunities: The tendency to migrate to urban areas has been a natural consequence of better opportunities that got created there — in contrast to life in rural areas becoming increasingly unsustainable.
    • Centralisation: The industrial-era dynamics that led to centralisation in support of mass production or massive scale-up was clearly a major one.
    • This, in turn, also led to the concentration of higher education/capacity building processes to urban centres where there was job growth, quite to the detriment of the much larger rural area.
    • Problems in education and training: The education and training environment became myopic, essentially meeting the manning requirements to run systems created by others.
    • Our education with its inherent problems led to little confidence in creating one’s own systems to address needs independent of others.
    • Demographic dividend: India’s importance grew primarily because of her demographic dividend and the large market that her people constituted and not because of the systems and technologies.
    • Neglect of rural India: Rural India suffered severe neglect in the process, probably as a result of poor job opportunities there and education having lost its role as an enabler of local development.
    • However, the country is learning to create systems and technologies to address her needs. The exercise is, by and large, urban-centric.

    UPSC asked about the quality of urban life in 2014, and the trends of labour migration in 2015. This article touched upon both of these themes.

    Using the knowledge-era technology to close the urban-rural gap

    • We are now in the knowledge era.
    • And knowledge-era technologies, in contrast to industrial-era technologies, promote democratisation (social media, for example) and facilitate decentralisation (work from home).
    • It should thus be possible for an adequately educated and trained youth residing in a rural domain to support a significant part of the manufacturing and service needs of urban areas.
    • Just as an urban youth can support a significant part of the knowledge and application needs in rural areas.
    • With technologies like additive manufacture, internet of things, and artificial intelligence, well-trained people can address needs in both urban and rural areas from wherever they are.
    • Thus, the knowledge era should, in principle, become a significant income leveller between the urban and rural domains, with a large rise in the overall national income.
    • As we focus on capacity building of rural youth, the opportunities in rural areas should, in principle, become higher than those in urban areas since the rural segment can now benefit from all three sectors of the economy- agriculture, manufacturing and services.

    The idea of “cillage”

    • In the knowledge era, with emphasis on capability and capacity building of rural youth in terms of holistic education, appropriate technology and enhanced livelihood, there is a possibility for a more balanced distribution of income as well as population.
    • This would, however, need knowledge bridges to be built between cities and villages, and the creation of an ecosystem which has been conceptualised as a “cillage” — a synergistic combination of city and village.
    • Bridging the knowledge gap between a city and a village would also bridge the income gap between the two.
    • This will also lead to a faster bridging of the gap between the average individual income in India and that in industrially advanced countries.
    • Democratisation promoted by knowledge technologies, if properly leveraged, can in principle reduce disparities, which, unfortunately, are on the rise today.

    How to realise the idea of cillage?

    • Integrated and holistic approach: Developing a “cillage” ecosystem would need a rooted and integrated approach to holistic education and research, technology development and management, as well as technology-enabled rural livelihood enhancement.
    • It would take a while for the rural youth to become empowered enough to convert the challenges into opportunities in rural areas.
    • The emergence of a new-age society is an inevitability.
    • How soon the rural domain can embrace it and how concurrently, comprehensively that can happen, is the real challenge.
    • That will decide whether India will gain in the knowledge era or lag as it did in the industrial era.

    Look at one more question from 2015-“Smart cities in India cannot sustain without smart villages. Discuss this statement in the backdrop of rural-urban integration”.  The ideas discussed here in this article help us to deal with such questions.

    Can Covid-19 speed up the realisation of cillage?

    • The process could also be seen as the migration of a set of experiences and skills to villages.
    • We can look at this as a potential two-way bridge for a new relationship between cities and villages.
    • It will be the bridge in which not all need to return to cities, but can rather meet the needs of cities as well as villages by remaining in villages.
    • Several initiatives will be needed to realise such a possibility.
    • Facilitating a number of new skills, technologies and support systems that can further leverage current capabilities of these people for starting a new enterprise would be important.
    • Immediate arrangements to facilitate their livelihood, and leveraging their present capabilities could help retain at least some of these people in villages.
    • It could trigger a faster movement towards an inevitable long-term equilibrium.
    • Going forward, we should take knowledge activities to a higher level so that the products and services created by these people become more competitive.
    • Looking at disruptive technologies for exploiting local opportunities should follow.

    Conclusion

    Given that the new normal after Covid-19 would, in any case, be quite different, the right course would be to channelise the stimulus caused by this crisis towards accelerating the shift to a new normal. This will not only help a more dispersed population, but will also reduce disparities and lead to faster growth of the economy.

  • [pib] Ease of Living Index and Municipal Performance Index 2019

    The surveys to determine the Ease of Living Index (EoLI) and Municipal Performance Index (MPI) 2019 has been initiated by the Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs. Both these indices are designed to assess the quality of life of citizens in 100 Smart Cities and 14 other Million Plus Cities.

    Municipal Performance Index

    • With the MPI 2019, the Ministry has sought to assess the performance of municipalities based on five enablers namely Service, Finance, Planning, Technology and Governance.
    • These have been further divided into 20 sectors which will be evaluated across 100 indicators.
    • This will help Municipalities in better planning and management, filling the gaps in city administration, and improving the liveability of cities for its citizens.

    Ease of Living Index

    • EOLI is aimed at providing a holistic view of Indian cities – beginning from the services provided by local bodies, the effectiveness of the administration, the outcomes generated through these services in terms of the liveability within cities and, finally, the citizen perception of these outcomes.
    • The key objectives of the EOL Index are four-folds, viz.
    1. Generate information to guide evidence-based policy making;
    2. Catalyse action to achieve broader developmental outcomes including the SDG;
    3. Assess and compare the outcomes achieved from various urban policies and schemes; and
    4. Obtain the perception of citizens about their view of the services provided by the city administration.
    • For the first time, as part of the EOLI Assessment, a Citizen Perception Survey is being conducted on behalf of the Ministry (which carries 30% of the marks of the Ease of Living Index).
    • This is a very important component of the assessment exercise as it will help in directly capturing perception of citizens with respect to quality of life in their cities.
    • This survey, which is being administered both online and offline, has commenced from 1st February 2020 and will continue till 29th February 2020.
    • The offline version involving face-to-face interviews will commence on the 1st of February and will run parallel to the on-line versions.

  • Fastest growing cities in India

     The Economist has put Malappuram at the top of the “Top ten fastest-growing cities” in the world.

    Anomalies in the data

    • The total fertility rate (TFR, the number of children a woman is likely to have in the childbearing age of 15-49) in Kerala is 1.8 as per NITI Aayog data from 2016 — below the replacement rate of 2.1.
    • Another Kerala city, Thrissur, is No. 13, and the capital Thiruvananthapuram is No. 33 on the UN list.
    • Tiruppur in Tamil Nadu — which has an even lower TFR of 1.6 — is No. 30.
    • Surat in Gujarat (TFR of 2.2) is No. 27. There is no representation on the list from high population growth states like Bihar and UP.

    What does “fastest growing” refer to? How is a “city” defined?

    • The list based on data from the UN Population Division refers to “urban agglomerations” (UA), which are extended areas built around an existing town along with its outgrowths — typically villages or other residential areas or universities, ports, etc., on the outskirts of the town.
    • The Census defines a UA as “a continuous urban spread consisting of a town and its adjoining urban outgrowths or two or more physically contiguous towns together”.
    • The NCT of Delhi is a UA that includes the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) areas, as well as 107 “Census towns” — erstwhile surrounding villages where more than 75% of the population is now engaged in non-agricultural pursuits.

    A pace of urbanization

    • The Economist has listed the rate at which the populations of the UAs are expected to increase between 2015 and 2020.
    • Since data on India and many other countries were not available for 2015 (the last Census in India was in 2011), the UN report used projections of UAs’ populations — estimates based on past population growth data.
    • The rate of growth between 2015 and 2020 thus calculated provides a measure of the pace of urbanisation.

    How does urban population grow?

    • Urban populations can grow when the birth rate exceeds the death rate when workers migrate to the city in search of jobs; when more areas get included within the boundaries of the city; or when existing rural areas are reclassified as urban.
    • The low fertility rate in Kerala means the increase in the population of Malappuram and other cities is not because women are having more children; rather it is because more villages are being transformed into towns, and city borders are expanding.
    • According to the Census definition, an urban area is either a census town (CT) or a statutory town (ST). An ST is any place with a municipal corporation, municipal council, or cantonment board.
    • A CT can be a village with “urban characteristics” — a population more than 5,000, population density more than 400 people per sq km, and with more than 75% of the population not engaged in agriculture for their livelihood.
    • When a village becomes a CT, its population is included in the urban population of the district.

    Could migration have caused the increase?

    • Migration can either increase or decrease the population of a town.
    • Kerala sees both emigration — migration from the state to other places — and immigration — the migration of workers to the state.
    • Also the remittances that emigrants send allow the residents of villages to move away from agriculture, which changes the status of a village to census town.

    Why these cities are growing so fast?

    • These cities are seeing rapid urbanisation, and the main reason is the inclusion of new areas in the UA’s limits.
    • In 2001, there were two municipal corporations within the UA of Malappuram. In 2011, the number of municipal corporations had doubled to four, and an additional 37 CTs were included within Malappuram.
    • The population of the UA (excluding the residents of the outgrowths) increased almost 10 times in the same period — from 1,70,409 to 16,99,060 — obviously because of the inclusion of existing urban areas in the town.
    • Similarly, Kollam UA grew from one municipal corporation in 2001 to 23 CTs, one municipal corporation, and one municipal council in 2011.
    • Its population increased by 130%, even though the population of the original ST of Kollam actually decreased by 4%.

    Why is this not seen elsewhere in India?

    • In Kerala, urbanisation is driven by a move away from agriculture, which leads to a change in a village’s Census classification status.
    • This is evident from the large number of CTs that were included in the UAs of the state since the last Census. On the other hand, except Delhi, the more populous cities in the North had fewer CTs in 2011.
    • While the pace of urbanisation has been slower in the North, some unnaturally high increases in the population can be expected after the 2021 Census — because in some cases, villages on the peripheries were brought within the administrative boundaries of the cities.

    Is it good for the economy?

    • Urbanisation leads to the growth of cities, which are sites of infrastructure like universities, hospitals, and public transport facilities.
    • There are more opportunities for the youth, which is why they attract young people and entrepreneurs.
    • In India, people moving to cities leave behind (to some extent) caste and class divisions that dominate life in the villages, and can hope to climb up the social ladder.
    • However, unplanned urbanisation can be “exclusionary”, making it difficult for migrants to live there given the high cost.
    • Unregulated housing, lack of reliable public transport, and longer commutes within these towns puts a strain on the meagre resources of migrants.

  • Urban Transformation – Smart Cities, AMRUT, etc.