Author : Ramanath Jha

Expert Speak India Matters
Published on Feb 04, 2022
Although the Budget pushes for urban planning, will the architecture of Indian federalism continue to limit its execution?
National Budget 2022-23: What is in it for urban local bodies? This brief is a part of the Budget 2022: Numbers and Beyond series.
On 1 February, 2022, India’s Finance Minister (FM) unveiled the INR 39.45 lakh crore national budget for the year 2022-23 in the Parliament. One of the key highlights of the budget was the proposal to hike capital expenditure by 35 percent and direct this largely towards the creation of multi-faceted infrastructure across the country, driven by ‘seven engines’. This article specifically looks at the provisions made in the budget in regard to Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) and cities, and attempts a critical analysis of what impact they could have on the future growth of cities. In this context, it would be appropriate to recall that the last National Budget (2021-22) provided substantial outlays for urban infrastructure. These comprised the Jal Jeevan Mission (Urban), money for controlling air pollution in million-plus cities, urban public transport through expansion of metro rail network and augmentation of city bus service, modernisation of ports, provision for faecal sludge management and wastewater treatment to improve urban hygiene and augmenting the urban healthcare system through the PM Atmanirbhar Swastha Bharat Yojana. Whereas there appeared a clear recognition that in the background of mounting urbanisation, Government of India (GoI) ought to step in and assist the ULBs, an earlier article had sounded a warning that financially frail ULBs may not be able to sustainably maintain the created assets.
Orderly urban development attains criticality for national well-being and the achievement of the country’s economic potential and larger livelihood opportunities.
This year’s National Budget (2022-23) is low on fresh financial provisions for activities exclusively related to urban development, proposing a tiny 3 percent increase over the last budget. The FM, this time has turned her attention in regard to cities on urban planning and wants a complete overhaul of the manner in which urban planning is currently addressed. Paras 68 to 73 of FM’s Budget Speech deal directly with urban development. The FM refers to the rising urbanisation in the country and believes that by the time India completes 100 years of independence, half of India’s population would be urban. Therefore, orderly urban development attains criticality for national well-being and the achievement of the country’s economic potential and larger livelihood opportunities. For this purpose, she proposes, on the one hand, to nurture the megacities and their hinterlands so that they become current centres of economic growth. On the other hand, Tier 2 and 3 cities must be assisted to take on a similar mantle in the future. To reposition cities for such a role, she envisages that the cities would have to be reimagined as centres of sustainable and inclusive living with opportunities for all. For this to happen, urban planning cannot continue with a business-as-usual approach. This obviously would necessitate a radical departure from today’s planning practices. She, therefore, proposes to set up a high-level committee of reputed urban planners, urban economists, and institutions to make recommendations on urban sector policies, capacity building, planning, implementation, and governance. The FM further proposes to provide support to the states for urban capacity building. She also wants the modernisation of building byelaws as well as the implementation of Town Planning Schemes (TPS) and Transit-Oriented Development (TOD). The latter kind of development would allow people to live close to their working place. GoI intends to provide financial support for mass transit projects and leverage the AMRUT scheme for formulation of action plans and their implementation for facilitating TOD and TPS by the states.
All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) will be tasked to take the lead to improve syllabi and quality and access of urban planning courses in other institutions.
Furthermore, for developing India-specific knowledge in urban planning and design and to deliver certified training in these areas, up to five existing academic institutions in different regions will be designated as centres of excellence. The FM recommends that these centres should be given endowment funds of INR 250 crore each. In addition, All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) will be tasked to take the lead to improve syllabi and quality and access of urban planning courses in other institutions. Further paras in the Budget Speech deal with clean and sustainable mobility, more encouragement to urban public transport, clean tech and governance solutions, and special mobility zones with zero fossil-fuel policy. She has also mentioned a ‘battery swapping policy’ to deal with space constraints in cities for setting up charging stations at scale. In regard to urban development, while there are several items as named above that have been spoken of in the budget, it is decidedly urban planning that is the central thrust of FM’s effort to set cities right. She seems to have taken cognizance of NITI Aayog’s report ‘Reforms in Urban Planning Capacity in India’. The report was critical of the shortage of urban planners in the country and the deficits in capacity. According to the report, 63 percent of the 7,933 urban local bodies in India did not have master plans for their settlements, and therefore, had no road map on how to move ahead with the settlement’s further challenges of development. The FM’s thrust on urban planning is well taken. There is much that is wrong with urban planning, and it is widely agreed that independent India’s urban planning strategies have not moved in sync with the country’s socio-economic needs and technological innovations. While the FM proposes to work with the states in reimagining cities, a central factor that seems to have been side-stepped is the disruptive role of the states themselves. This was as much admitted by the Constitution’s 74thAmendment Act in its ‘Statement of Objects and Reasons’. It stated, “In many States, local bodies have become weak and ineffective on account of a variety of reasons, including the failure to hold regular elections, prolonged supersession, and inadequate devolution of powers and functions. As a result, Urban Local Bodies are not able to perform effectively as vibrant democratic units of self-government.” The Constitution, therefore, sought to define the functional domain of urban local bodies (ULB) through the insertion of Schedule 12 in the Indian Constitution. The Schedule listed 18 functions, the very first of which was urban planning. Quite clearly, the resolve of the Constitution appears to be that urban planning should be a ULB function and that the ULB should be the ‘Planning Authority’. This was in keeping with the overall drive of the 74th Amendment, aiming to make ULBs empowered local governments.
According to the report, 63 percent of the 7,933 urban local bodies in India did not have master plans for their settlements, and therefore, had no road map on how to move ahead with the settlement’s further challenges of development.
The fact is that, despite the cited constitutional provisions, urban planning continues to remain tightly under the control of the states. Neither have they shown any appetite to alter the situation through radical reforms that are most likely to loosen their grip over ULBs. Since local government is a state subject under the Constitution, GoI may only be able to recommend, after due deliberations of the expert committee it seeks to appoint, a model of urban planning for the states to follow. However, till now, a slew of recommendations made by the Central government in regard to urban reforms that comprise, amongst others, a model municipal law, model rent control law, model Nagar Raj bill, have all been conveniently ignored by the states. The recommendations for urban planning are likely to meet the same fate unless Government of India is prepared to incentivise them with heavy doses of finance that flow in if the plan endorsements are implemented and are denied the money if the states are not prepared to walk the road of urban planning reform. Unfortunately, the Central government is not willing to spend that kind of money nor is it eager to substantially shore up the financially emaciated and functionally disempowered ULBs. The harsh realities of the urban conundrum may once again flatten the urban reform balloon.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.

Author

Ramanath Jha

Ramanath Jha

Dr. Ramanath Jha is Distinguished Fellow at Observer Research Foundation, Mumbai. He works on urbanisation — urban sustainability, urban governance and urban planning. Dr. Jha belongs ...

Read More +