Tikender Singh Panwar
THE STORY SO FAR: Almost a decade has passed since the Indian government announced the concept of “smart cities” as the new lighthouses of urbanisation. The June 2015 announcement of 100 smart cities aimed to create models of urban development. However, these lighthouses of urbanity have now been relegated to the annals of India’s urbanisation history.
WHAT WENT WRONG WITH SMART CITIES?
The smart cities initiative was based on the Internet of Things (IoT), a framework that works well in advanced capitalist countries where basic utilities are already in place. In contrast, in India, where basic services are still out of reach for many, “smart cities” essentially mean providing fundamental amenities to residents. The plan included two key components — pan-city proposals which include IT-enabled services like mobility and waste management; and Area-Based Development (ABD) which was restricted to specific zones within a city, focusing on retrofitting, redevelopment, and greenfield projects. Additionally, governance of these projects bypassed local governments, relying instead on Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) registered under the Companies Act, and managed like private companies. City councils were excluded, based on the assumption that private company-like structures could deliver better results.
WHAT HAPPENED IN SHIMLA?
Shimla was not included in the initial list of smart cities. However, after legal challenges posed by Shimla in the Himachal Pradesh High Court, Shimla was also granted the smart city tag.
Shimla’s smart city plan adhered to guidelines, including pan-city initiatives and ABD projects. The city had proposed a mix of retrofit and redevelopment projects within ABD. The retrofit project had targeted improving citywide pedestrian crossings, vehicular mobility on circular roads, and three transport corridors in addition to underground ducting and parking provision. Additional features were also added that included eco-adventure tourism, and water security through stormwater and spring water management. A total of 244 acres of land was supposed to be retrofitted. Redevelopment projects focused on Lower Bazar, Ganj Bazar, and Krishnanagar. The aim was to replace dilapidated, unsafe buildings with modern, resilient, earthquake-safe structures that could boost tourism.
The total estimated investment for Shimla was ₹2,906 crore, with funding sources as follows — ₹897.80 crore from Public-Private Partnerships (PPP); ₹101.77 crore through municipal bonds; ₹205.57 crore from external borrowings; and ₹348.49 crore from State and Union government schemes, and the rest from other sources. However, as of now, according to the Smart City dashboard, only ₹707 crore (24% of the original budget) has been spent: ₹53 crore on completed projects and ₹654 crore on ongoing ones. The proposed PPP contribution has not yet materialised.
WHAT HAS BEEN THE OUTCOME?
None of the funds have been utilised for the redevelopment of the Lower Bazar, Middle Bazar, or Krishnanagar. Traffic congestion has worsened, and despite initial plans, non-motorised mobility remains neglected. Instead, funds were spent on flower pots worth ₹2 crore. Moreover, large, visually intrusive structures were erected for escalators that remain non-operational, obstructing Shimla’s iconic valley views.
As the Smart City Mission approaches its final chapter, the lessons are glaringly evident. Projects devoid of meaningful urban governance and public involvement are bound to fail. With no ownership or accountability, the smart city vision has faded into oblivion.
Tikender Singh Panwar was once directly elected deputy mayor of Shimla. He was linked with the Leh Vision document and has written vision documents for a dozen cities. Author of two books, he is an urban specialist working in the design of inclusive cities.
The article was first published as ‘What is the status of the Smart Cities Mission?’ in The Hindu on January 22, 2024.
Disclaimer: All views expressed in the article belong solely to the author and not necessarily to the organization.
Read more at IMPRI:
Decoding Trump 2.0: What the World Must Prepare For
India Semiconductor Mission (2021): Fostering a Self-Reliant Semiconductor Industry
Acknowledgement: This article was posted by Arjun Brij, a policy research intern at IMPRI
