-
CENTRES
Progammes & Centres
Location
Two decades after the National Urban Transport Policy came into effect, Indian cities continue to prioritise infrastructure for private vehicles—at the cost of people-centric and sustainable mobility
Image Source: Getty
Historically, the conceptualisation and implementation of urban mobility systems in Indian metropolises have prioritised vehicular throughput over people’s travel needs. This planning paradigm has led to a disproportionate allocation of resources and policy formulation efforts. These have favoured the unimpeded journey of private automobiles, to the detriment of public transport users, pedestrians, and cyclists.
In the past two decades, scholarly discourse and policy orientation have evolved considerably, emphasising sustainable urban mobility paradigms. National-level interventions, including the National Urban Transport Policy (NUTP) introduced in 2006, aim to:
A critical appraisal of recent urban transport infrastructure projects reveals the persistent influence of engineering-centric objectives, with a salient focus on technical viability, construction expediency, and fiscal optimisation.
In line with the NUTP, the 2015 Smart Cities Mission and the diverse metro, rail, and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) initiatives have recalibrated urban transport planning by augmenting public transit infrastructure and promoting Non-Motorised Transport (NMT). These endeavours signify a stated intention to address the inherent and escalating challenges of congestion, environmental degradation, and socio-spatial inequities in urban mobility. However, a critical appraisal of recent urban transport infrastructure projects reveals the persistent influence of engineering-centric objectives, with a salient focus on technical viability, construction expediency, and fiscal optimisation. While these factors are relevant, they cast a shadow on more essential commuter-centric imperatives, such as minimising travel and mode transfer durations, assuring seamless intermodal connectivity, and enhancing the overall user experience. This methodological bias risks compromising the efficacy of public transport interventions, neglecting the end-users’ lived realities and mobility patterns. For instance, inadequate pedestrian infrastructure, last-mile connectivity issues, and station inaccessibility can substantially diminish the appeal of even the most technologically sophisticated transit networks.
Most urban transport projects in Indian cities fail to provide seamless mobility. Mumbai’s Western Express Highway (WEH)—a 25.33-kilometre multilane arterial thoroughfare, connecting Mahim Creek in central Mumbai with Dahisar in the northwestern periphery—exemplifies this trend. While initially conceived as a high-speed corridor to expedite north-south transit, the WEH currently grapples with persistent congestion and diminished mean speeds. Data from the Mumbai Traffic Police indicates that the corridor now accommodates 2.2 to 3 million vehicles per day, a substantial increase from the 0.5 to 1 million vehicles recorded a decade prior.
The incongruence between roadway capacity and the proliferation of vehicular traffic has engendered severe bottlenecks at numerous nodal points. These impediments can be attributed to multiple factors—including suboptimally designed grade separators, concurrent and uncoordinated infrastructure development, deteriorating pavement surfaces, and a deficiency in lane adherence and last-mile connectivity. Consequently, the ‘expressway’ functions less as a high-speed urban artery and more as a daily impediment within the metropolitan transportation network.
The incongruence between roadway capacity and the proliferation of vehicular traffic has engendered severe bottlenecks at numerous nodal points.
A parallel trajectory is witnessed in Bengaluru, where the state government has sanctioned a highly contentious bi-level elevated corridor project linking JP Nagar and Hebbal. Conceptualised as a 37 km elevated thoroughfare, the project carries an estimated cost of INR 9,800 crore. Karnataka’s Deputy Chief Minister (CM), D.K. Shivakumar, described it as a “futuristic and transformative” infrastructure endeavour.
Urban mobility scholars and transport strategists have expressed significant reservations regarding the long-term ramifications of such a capital-intensive, private vehicle-centric development. Critics contend that the project, rather than mitigating urban transit challenges, stimulates further demand for personal vehicles, undermining advancements in public transport ridership, NMT, and climate resilience. This phenomenon, commonly referred to as ‘induced travel demand’, frequently culminates in transient congestion relief, followed by a resurgence in traffic volumes that negates the intended benefits of infrastructural expansion.
Aside from the road projects, BRT has witnessed dismantling within several Indian metropolises in recent years. A salient illustration is Indore, where the state government announced its intentions in December 2024 to decommission the 11.5km BRTS corridor. Attributing this decision to exacerbating vehicular congestion and perceived suboptimal efficacy, Madhya Pradesh CM Mohan Yadav posited that the removal would facilitate enhanced vehicular flow and urban mobility.
Concurrently, Bhopal dismantled its BRTS in late 2023, citing analogous concerns about traffic impedance and underperformance. Pune has followed a similar trajectory, with the Pune Municipal Corporation removing a 300-meter segment of the BRTS corridor along Nagar Road in October 2024. This action was precipitated by persistent low ridership, frequent road mishaps, and operational inefficiencies that compromised the corridor’s capacity to achieve its intended objectives.
The aforementioned trend of BRTS discontinuation is witnessed in other Indian metropolises as well. Delhi, an early adopter of BRT in India, abrogated its corridor as early as 2015 due to widespread public dissatisfaction and logistical complexities associated with lane segregation and enforcement protocols. Similarly, Jodhpur suspended its BRTS operations in January 2021, merely five years after its inauguration in 2016.
The failure to contextualise BRT systems within the specific urban fabric and prevailing travel patterns, coupled with attenuated inter-institutional coordination, continues to impede the long-term viability of bus-based rapid transit solutions in Indian cities.
These instances reflect more pervasive systemic deficits such as inadequate strategic planning, deficient integration with extant multimodal transport networks, negligent enforcement mechanisms, and a prevailing inclination towards private vehicular infrastructure development. The failure to contextualise BRT systems within the specific urban fabric and prevailing travel patterns, coupled with attenuated inter-institutional coordination, continues to impede the long-term viability of bus-based rapid transit solutions in Indian cities. This scenario calls for a fundamental reimagination of public transport frameworks, prioritising user-centric design, adaptability, and alignment with overarching sustainable mobility imperatives, beyond mere infrastructural deployment.
Nearly two decades after the NUTS came into force, the situation in India remains the same, as cities continue to prioritise vehicular infrastructure. It is imperative that urban transport planning in India undergoes a paradigm shift towards a more integrated, anthropocentric framework that prioritises commuter convenience, inclusivity, and universal accessibility as fundamental tenets of design and implementation. These instances underscore the need for a vital reorientation in urban mobility planning paradigms—one that prioritises high-throughput public transit systems, active mobility options, and synergistic land-use planning over infrastructure that predominantly caters to private automobiles.
Future investments must be congruent with national and sub-national environmental objectives, equity considerations, and the overarching goal of cultivating human-centric urban environments, rather than merely accommodating an increasing number of vehicles.
Metro systems must be designed comprehensively by incorporating first- and last-mile connectivity as an integral part of their plan. Additionally, continuous, accessible, and unobstructed pedestrian footpaths must be built across the city and transit stops/stations. Future investments must be congruent with national and sub-national environmental objectives, equity considerations, and the overarching goal of cultivating human-centric urban environments, rather than merely accommodating an increasing number of vehicles.
The NUTP encouraged the introduction of various schemes and missions such as the National Urban Renewal Mission (NURM), the Sustainable Urban Transport Project (SUTP), the Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation (AMRUT), the Smart City Mission (SCM), and the Green Urban Mobility Scheme (GUMS). However, these policies have failed to deliver a significant transformation in urban mobility planning, which remains private vehicle-centric. The way forward must be to enact specific central and state-level legislation to ensure time-bound and result-oriented policy implementation.
Nandan H Dawda is a Fellow at the Urban Studies Programme, Observer Research Foundation.
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.
Dr Nandan H Dawda is a Fellow with the Urban Studies programme at the Observer Research Foundation. He has a bachelor's degree in Civil Engineering and ...
Read More +
PREV
