Towards urban dystopia

Nearly a quarter of a century after reforms, it is beyond question that the gap between the southern and western regions of the country (as well as pockets of the north) on the one hand and the eastern and central regions on the other has widened. The Twelfth Plan document details the divergence in per capita incomes. But a corollary to this is less acknowledged — the disturbingly uneven development of urban India. A recent McKinsey report titled ‘India’s Economic Geography in 2025: States, Clusters and Cities’ says that 49 urban clusters in 183 relatively developed districts will account for more than three-fourths of India’s growth in the coming decade. The report candidly observes that a company targeting a large consumer base may stick to about 20 ‘high affluence’, metro-oriented clusters (out of the 49) “rather than building a broadbased national footprint”. Central and eastern India will remain excluded. An Assocham study on the job situation in the second quarter lends credence to the emerging picture of unequal growth. The ongoing slowdown led to job losses in cities such as Kochi, Nagpur, Dehradun, Allahabad, Ranchi, Jalandhar and Visakhapatnam, while Chennai, Bangalore and Mumbai were jobs positive. This puts paid to the general perception of ‘Tier II’ cities being centres of activity. We seem to be headed towards urban dystopia, with growth centres coming apart as well.

The Centre’s plan to build 100 smart cities along industrial corridors and in the periphery of urban centres, seems aimed more at creating a new template for urban development than correcting the regional and big city biases. The challenge is to create thriving townships ‘in the middle of nowhere’ and make erstwhile industrial townships in the Gangetic plain, now ghost towns, come alive. For this, it is not enough to provide electricity, roads and land, crucial though they are. What distinguishes the south and the west from the rest of the country is not just governance, but also their superior social infrastructure in terms of education, opportunities for women and health facilities.

The push to ‘Make in India’ must address the gap between regions. It is not enough to have States competing with each other to attract investments, because it is evident that the developed regions enjoy a head start. Nor can we go back to the pre-reform era model of public enterprises developing backward regions in the absence of private investment. Industry and government should collaborate to create the necessary institutional climate — which means going beyond the brick and mortar of smart cities to improving law and order, access to quality education, affordable housing and modern healthcare. The gap in human development between a Bihar and a Maharashtra is no longer sustainable. Even if Bihar, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh continue to record an average GDP growth of nearly 9 per cent (much less so in per capita terms), as in the Eleventh Plan, it is not enough. A multi-pronged, multi-stakeholder approach is called for to address regional inequalities.

COMMENT NOW