With power comes responsibility. But what happens if an organisation is in power but has not been given proper responsibilities? Welcome to the world of urban local bodies, then, for that is the problem at that heart of administrative set-up at the city level, which has led to poor governance of India’s cities.

Damaged roads, inadequate public transport, poor sewage systems, project delays, law and order are but just some of the everyday problems urban India stares at every day – and helplessly at most times. And these problems will continue to exist, in fact fester as more urban centres get stretched enough to be categorised as cities, till city governments, or urban local bodies (ULBs) as they are called, are not given sufficient powers, according to experts.

Despite coming being elected by the people and having the mandate to administer cities, ULBs have to run to their respective state governments for permissions and grants in order to be able to execute critical infrastructure and development activities. Not only does it lead to delays but also leaves the public confused and frustrated.

According to experts, the primary reason for this is that state governments are not very comfortable with the idea of devolving power to local authorities. The 74th Amendment Act, which pushed urban governance across the country to the centre stage, has not been effectively implemented. While it increased the list of functions that could be performed by local bodies, it was to be at the discretion of state governments.

As a result, different ULBs have different mandates, and most of them have been limited to garbage collection and disposal, street lighting, and construction and maintenance of roads.

Explaining the situation in Gurgaon, the financial capital of the national capital region and one of India’s fastest growing urban centres, Municipal Corporation of Gurgaon (MCG) councillor Nisha Singh says, “We have very limited powers to undertake development activities. For instance, any project requiring funds over '1 crore can only be sanctioned by the state (Haryana) government.”

She says that seeking approval for projects was a major hiccup as all files need to pass through 23 desks on an average, which inevitably leads to delays (Read her view in the previous pages).

According to experts, such a situation, common to most Indian cities, is not only impractical but will ultimately leave the municipal bodies redundant.
Chetan Vaidya, director of School of Planning and Architecture, says: “It doesn’t make sense for state governments to make all the decisions sitting miles away for work that actually needs to be done at the local level. For effective development of cities, it is important that decisions are made and executed at the local level.”

Partha Mukhopadhyay, senior fellow at the Centre for Policy Research, says: “It is like hiring a person and not assigning him a job to do. Sooner or later, the person will quit and the position will ultimately be removed. Similarly, most of our city governments don’t really have many functions to perform. If this continues, there will be a time when these bodies will cease to exist.”

City-state power tussle

So what keeps state governments from passing on some of these responsibilities to the local bodies? Their obsession with power and, as a corollary, the unwillingness to part with it, say experts.

“Most responsibilities discharged by state governments involve huge sums of money and a great amount of power,” Mukhopadhyay says. “For instance, if water supply to an area is interrupted, the residents go to the local MLA, instead of their councillor, because water supply is the responsibility of the state. This helps the MLA maintain visibility among the local residents, which in turn will help him/her during elections.

“This is the reason city governance has been made a political power game, and why state governments would not like to devolve power.”

But state governments contend that they don’t pass the administrative baton down due to lack of capacity at the local level. “There is a grain of truth in this argument because our local bodies indeed do not have adequate resources to undertake overall administrative activities of cities. But then, they (state governments) cannot use this as an excuse forever,” says Jagan Shah, director of National Institute of Urban Affairs.

Instead, Shah says, states “must look at capacity building of the local bodies so that they can be given further responsibilities”.

According to the latest report of the UN Habitat, based on a study of 200 cities across the world, every city is unique in its own way and, hence, there needs to be a rethink on the idea of a state government making decisions for its cities, Shah points out. And for city governments to be empowered, it is important that their resources such as manpower, funding, etc are strengthened, he adds.

Overlapping roles of administering arms

Another major problem that affects the governance of cities is the presence of multiple local authorities. The presence of a municipal body, a development authority and a variety of other organizations results in confusion, say those dealing with the issue.

Due to the overlapping nature of work and the absence of clearly defined roles and goals, there are delays and lapses in projects undertaken by these authorities. “Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) and the MCG, the two authorities that manage the city, have overlapping roles and confusing jurisdiction. And this problem of multiplicity of authorities in not just restricted to Gurgaon but is common to most cities,” said Shubhra Puri, founder of Gurgaon First, a citizen’s forum active in the millennium city.

“In Gurgaon, the HUDA administrator has to shunt between Chandigarh and Gurgaon at least three times a month, if not more, to either get sanctions, approvals, or fight court cases,” Puri says. “MCG, the so-called apex body of the city, has very little land and control, rendering it helpless in discharging most civic responsibilities.

“Neither does it have enough power to decide on key issues involving the city, which is paying a heavy price (as a result).”

Empowered cities

In contrast are cities like Surat, Ahmedabad, Bhopal, Chennai and Pune – all good examples of how empowered local bodies can effectively manage the affairs and take development of a city to a different level.

“The most important factor that differentiates these cities from others in the country is the selection of officers who are active, dynamic and play by the book,” Jagan Shah says. “In addition, municipal commissioners of these cities work in tandem with the local bodies instead of competing with them. This kind of consensus building among authorities has significantly helped create a profound impact on the minds of residents as it boosts credibility of the authorities.”

According to him, engagement with citizens is another crucial factor missing in other cities.

Shah says it is not that these city governments have the freedom to make all decisions and are not dependent on state governments for permissions or grants but there is far more transparency in processes and a deeper engagement with the residents.

In order to be able to accelerate the pace of development and enhance governance of cities, it is important for local bodies to be given more responsibilities and facilitate training of manpower. “Responsibilities can be transferred but it is important that our local bodies show the wherewithal to handle these responsibilities. Training of officials is one aspect but more importantly residents need to start acknowledging the fact that it is not the caste, background, or religion of an individual that can affect the development process. Instead, people with the ability to deal with issues in a scientific manner should be brought into the system because that is the only way governance can be significantly improved.”

The world today is talking about not just sustainable but also smarter cities and in the present scheme of things the goal does not seem very achievable. It is important, thus, that attention is paid to empowering the local authorities – not just to keep them alive but also to ensure continuous development. 

THE 2-MINUTE CAPSULE

Who says what

• "It doesn’t make sense for state governments to make all the decisions sitting miles away for work that actually needs to be done at the local level.”

Chetan Vaidya, director, School of Planning and Architecture

• "States must look at capacity building of the local bodies so that they can be given further responsibilities.”

Jagan Shah, director, National Institute of Urban Affairs

• "We have very limited powers to undertake development activities. For instance, any project requiring funds over '1 crore can only be sanctioned by the state (Haryana) government.”

Nisha Singh, councillor, Municipal Corporation of Gurgaon

• "Most of our city governments don’t really have many functions to perform. If this continues, there will be a time when these bodies will cease to exist.”

Partha Mukhopadhyay, senior fellow, Centre for Policy Research