The phenomenal increase in the urban population of the developing countries has already thrown up a host of social, economic, managerial and environmental problems. It is hardly difficult to foresee the frightening proportions that these problems would assume in the years to come, says former Governor Jagmohan

Mega cities or future’s
mega slums?

THE present century has been called the age of urbanisation. At its commencement, the world was predominantly rural; only 8 per cent of its population lived in urban settlements. By 1950, the percentage had risen to 29 and by 1990 to 45.

From 1950 to 1990, the cities grew more than twice as fast as villages. The current decade, 1990-2000, will see an increase of about 83 per cent in the world urban population, and the cities will add, on an average, about 81 million people annually. By the turn of century more people will be living in urban than in the rural settlements.

In the words of the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements: "It is in the cities, towns and hamlets of the new urban world that a majority of us will live and work in the new century where most of the pollution will be generated and natural resources consumed, where political and social conditions are likely to boil over into conflict, and where, ultimately, the roots of global security — true human security — will lie."

To house a massive population and to meet its civic needs and also its social and cultural aspirations, will present to the human race one of the gravest challenges that it has ever faced. The affluent western societies may muster financial, technical and managerial resources to meet these challenges. But what will happen to the developing countries where most of the aforesaid increase in the urban population is taking place and where at least 600 million residents are already living in life-threatening homes and neighborhoods?

In 1950, the developing countries had about 39 per cent of the world urban population. By 1990, this percentage had gone up to 63. And by the turn of the century, this percentage may be about 70. Thus, the greatest burden will fall on those who are least able to bear it.

The phenomenal increase, specially in the urban population of the developing countries, has already thrown up a host of social, economic and managerial and environmental problems. It is hardly difficult to foresee the frightening proportions that these problems would assume in the years to come. Unfortunately, none of the developing countries has shown any ingenuity in tackling the problems. Nor have they shown courage and cohesion to secure redressal of the gross inequities of the presentday international order which enables 18 per cent of the world population, living in the developed countries, to corner about 82 per cent of the world resources.

India is no exception to the general trend towards rapid urbanisation. Although the percentage of urban population to the total population has not risen sharply it has moved from about 14 per cent in 1951 to about 26 per cent in 1991. In sheer number it has shown a phenomenal increase.

Presently, the urban population of India is about 260 million. It is likely to touch, by the turn of the century, the 306 million mark. By 2050, India’s urban population, according to present trends, is estimated to be about 66 per cent of its total population.

During the last 50 years, India has, on an average, been adding about five to six million people to its towns and cities. There are already four megacities (five million plus), 19 metro-cities (one million plus) and 300 large towns, besides 3,396 small and medium-size urban settlements.

By 2001, the number of metro-cities is estimated to go up to 40, and four of the Indian cities — Mumbai, Delhi, Calcutta and Chennai — will be among the 30 largest cities in the world. A United Nations study of 1990 puts Mumbai agglomeration as the sixth largest city of the world.

The ESCAP (Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific) estimates that between 1990 and 2020, India’s present densities being maintained, urban areas will be two-and a-half times more extensive than they are now.

In the circumstances in which India was placed in August, 1947, with all the burdens of colonialism and past injustices and inequities on its back, it should have evolved a clear urban vision which should have been a part of its equally clear national vision — a vision that should have been rooted in its civilisational and cultural pattern resting upon ‘ancient nobility of temper’ and values of truth, justice, balance, harmony, contentment and compassion. But, unfortunately, those at the helm of affairs, though still carrying with them the motivation of the freedom struggle, did not show any real ingenuity. They became more imitative than creative. They failed to regenerate that power of the Indian mind which had once brought into being a pre-eminent civilisation and a style of life peculiarly its own.

Clearly, in the arena of city-management, there were two major failures of India’s post-Independence leadership; one was the failure to evolve a sound and solid urban vision and the other was the failure to implement whatever little thought was brought to bear on the problem.

What do I mean by the urban vision? Let me answer by inviting attention to the most ancient city of India, namely Varanasi, about which Sherring has observed: "When Babylon was struggling with Nineveh for supremacy, when Athens was growing in strength, before Rome had become known, she had already risen to greatness."

If, under an inspiring urban vision, Ganga waters had once again been made crystal clear, its ghats had been rebuilt elegantly, if a vast green vista had been developed along the river front, if the temples had been renovated with an ‘ancient touch’ and provided with open spaces around, and if the excessive trade and industry had been relocated, Varanasi would not only have regained its glory and become a place for truly elevating human spirit but also emerged as a thriving and a dynamic centre of modern civic life.

It would have become a symbol of resurgent India, a signpost of its re-awakened mind. Now, in the absence of elevating vision, Varanasi has lapsed into a beehive of filth, congestion and urban blight, holding into its bosom, all the ugly by-products of a civic culture of apathy and indifference, with the winds of casualness and callousness blowing all around.

Ludhiana, Punjab, affords another type of example. It commenced its march towards urbanisation in 1830, when shawl weavers, from the Kashmir valley started settling here. It saw a phenomenal expansion after 1947. Its population increased from about 48,000 in 1901 to about 1, 50, 000 in 1951. Its present population exceeds 1.5 million. It is the biggest money spinner in Punjab and a hosiery capital of the country. It annual production in this area alone is about 10 billion. And yet it is a city which has 50 per cent of its structures raised without any planning or regulation. About 40 per cent of the population has no access to piped water-supply and 65 per cent has no access to modern sanitary facilities. The level of air pollution is four times more than ‘toleration limit’. How is it that environment? was this the type of urban settlement which we envisaged at the dawn of out freedom? Clearly, there was no urban vision, no deep and incisive thinking. Otherwise, such a callous disregard of human misery and suffering would not have come about, and there would have been no spectacle of penury and prosperity existing side by side as seen in Ludhiana.

As regards the ‘failure of will’, a number of instances could be cited. Here, however, I would restrict myself to only one example relating to slum clearance to show how the government could not implement whatever little it planned and programmed. This is what the First Five Year population Plan said about the urban slums: "Slums are a national problem. From the national point of view, it is better to pay for the cost of clearing slums than to continue to pay the mounting cost of slums and suffer the destructive effects upon human lives and property indefinitely."

About about 48 years of this provision of the First Plan, what is the position? At least 33 per cent as dreary and deadly as the old Irish and "Jewish ghettos". In metropolitan area of Mumbai, the percentage of slum-dwellers to the total population is now 55. This percentage rises to 80 if the population living in squalid and dilapidated chawls (shanties) is taken into account.

It is largely because of the failure of the urban vision and will that the Indian city has lost focus and become, to borrow T.S. Eliot’s phraseology, "a paralysed force, a shape without form, a shade without colour and a gesture without motion." Practically, in every aspect of city life — density of population; availability of land; housing; slums and squatters’ settlements; municipal services; open spaces; the scale and character of migration; employment; traffic/transport; energy; communication; crime; governance; civic set-up; health and environment — the current conditions present a grim picture.

From the above analysis of the current conditions, it should not be inferred that the conditions of our cities are too gloomy and their problems too formidable to admit of any solution. The magnitude and complexity of the problems merely underscore the need for abandoning and beaten track and evolving innovative programmes and policies which are a part of a grand vision of national renewal and reconstruction. I give below a brief description of two stories which show how our cities can be put on the road to reform and regeneration and how they can attain an equilibrium, provide real and lasting benefits to the poor, enhance productivity and bring about all-round peace and progress. One case pertains to clearance-cum-resettlement-cum-redevelopment project executed in Delhi and the other to acquisition and development of land on a large scale, with the revolving fund of Rs 5 crore, in the same city.

Before the project of clearance-cum-resettlement-cum-redevelopment was undertaken in the capital in 1976, there were 1,400 haphazard clusters, scattered all over the city in unsuitable and unhealthy sites.

It was from these sub-human conditions that the squatters were relieved and accommodated in the resettlement colonies. In about a year or so, about 1,45,000 residential and 10,000 shop plots were developed, and 200 km of main drains, 400 km of small drains, 650 culverts, 60 tubewells, 2,500 public hydrants, 80 km of water supply lines, 200 km of metalled roads, and 14,000 permanent lavatory seats were constructed.

The new colonies were appropriately integrated in the overall development pattern of the metropolis. Not only were residential clusters shifted but also avenues of industrial and commercial employment.

After execution of the clearance-cum-resettlement-cum-development project, Delhi looked a neat, clean, orderly and organised city with a personality and identity of its own. Areas around historical monuments were cleared, landscaped and developed as parks and community greens. Thus, not only was the architectural and cultural legacy of the metropolis preserved, but also small lungs were created all around.

Under the second project, large-scale acquisition of land was resorted to with the threefold objectives of regulating development, providing social justice, and raising resources from within the city by ensuring that the benefits of investment made by the public authorities in public utilities and other infrastructure accrued to them. All lands falling within the urbanisable limits of the Master Plan (1962-82) were notified for acquisition and the land values frozen by issuing preliminary notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. Simultaneously, a ‘revolving fund’ of Rs 5 crore (subsequently augmented to Rs 12 crore) was provided. The programme of acquisition, development and disposal was so designed that up to 1982, about 48,000 acres of land was acquired and seed capital of Rs 12 crore revolved to the extent of over Rs 265 crore, i.e. 22 times its original size.

This approach resulted in providing social goods to the public on a sufficiently large scale. Through the agency of the DDA (Delhi Development Authority) alone, 8,000 hectares of land were developed as green, comprising 52 city forests, 750 parks and 68 lakh trees. About 1.5 lakh houses were constructed, in addition to the housing units, created on about 70,000 plots, allotted to the public through the general sale or through cooperative societies.

The two measures, outlined above, show that choices are available, provided we have a vision and are creative and constructive, and not imitative and routine, in our approach. Unfortunately, during the last eight years, reverse gear has been clutched and our cities subjected, under the cover of economic reforms, to a ruthless onslaught of merciless forces of materialism and marketism.

The challenges that our cities face are, undoubtedly, overwhelming. But every challenge has in it a close, hidden, window of opportunity. It is for us to locate that window, open it and look through it to a new horizon. A new vision, a new inspiration and a new confidence in our creative capacity, are all that are needed. Then, new ideas will flow and new dynamism will move our machinery for implementation. Our new ingenuity could convert our liabilities into assets and lead us to a new brave world of urban opportunities.

The neglected migrant of today could become an urban pioneer of tomorrow. The urban lands, presently being raped and ravaged by speculators and racketeers, could be converted into a goldmine of physical and financial resources. The conventional idea of treating urban and rural settlements as separate and hostile entities could disappear and a new comprehensive blueprint of integrating all human settlements drawn up. The ‘out-of-time’ and ‘out-of-tune’ framework could be consigned to the dustbin of history and in its place a new set-up of urban governments brought about.

It must, however, be remembered that the maladies that afflict our cities are not merely localised wounds that could be cleaned, disinfected, bandaged and healed. They extend to a large area and have deep roots. Regeneration and reconstruction of our cities, in fact, involve the much wider task to national regeneration and reconstruction and of reforming the fundamental forces that govern our day-to-day life.