planning for urban governanace

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK


AIM: To enhance effective governance at urban institutional level

AIM AND OBJECTIVES

OBJECTIVES

To study governance in urban infrastructure projects

Identification of problems and issues at urban institutional levels

To provide suggestions that would increase the share of public participation

at governance level


IMPORTANCE OF URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMMES IN

INDIAPERFORMANCE AUDIT OF

IMPLEMENTATION OF JNNURM IN AP

EVOLUTION OF URBAN GOVERNANCE

SCENARIO OF URBAN INSTITUTIONS IN HYDERABAD

SUGGESTIONS TO OVERCOME THE ISSUES

INTR

ODUC

TION

TO

UR

BAN

GOVE

RNAN

CE

JNNURM

AMRUT

PROS AND CONS

HISTORY

MCH

GHMC

METHODOLOGY


• The term “institutional framework” refers to a set of formal organizational

structures, rules and informal norms for service provisions. Such a

framework is the precondition for the successful implementation of a

project.

• A lack of a sound institutional framework is the root cause of many

failures in service delivery.

INSTITUTIONAL FRAME WORK ?

REFERENCES: Challenges in Developing an Institutional Framework


• It is a system by which a state, nation or community is governed. It is

something that makes the law of the land and ensures that all the people in that

nation or community are treated fairly by those laws.

• It makes laws for the social and economic welfare of all members of the

community.

• Governments can be classified into several types. Some of the more common

types of governments are:

REFERENCES: MOCOMI.COM, SLIDEPLAYER.COM

GOVERNMENT ?

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKGOVERNANCE ?

• The exercise of political, economic and administrative authority in the

management of a country’s affairs at all levels.

• Governance is a broader notion than government. Governance involves

interaction between formal institutions and civil societies. "Governance" is the art

of public leadership. There are three distinct dimensions of governance:

The form of political regime.

The process by which authority is exercised in the management of a country’s

economic and social resources.

The capacity of governments to design, formulate, and implement policies and

discharge functions.

REFERENCES: INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES, NOVARTIS FOUNDATION FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKGOOD GOVERNANCE?

Good governance occurs when societal norms and practices empower and

encourage people to take increasingly greater control over their own development

in a manner that does not impinge upon the accepted rights of others.

The criteria that constitute good governance:

• Legitimacy of government (degree of "democratization"),

• Accountability of political and official elements of government (media freedom,

transparency of decision-making, accountability mechanisms),

• Competence of governments to formulate policies and deliver services,

• Respect for human rights and rule of law (individual and group rights and

security, framework for economic and social activity, participation).

REFERENCES: UNDP Internet Conference Forum on "Public Private Interface in Urban Environmental Management“, Policy Affairs Centre

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKURBAN GOVERNANCE ?

• Urban governance can be defined as the many ways that institutions and

individuals organize the day-to-day management of a city, and the processes used

for effectively realizing the short term and long-term agenda of a city's

development.

Urban Governance Indicators:

• Decentralization – Financial, political

• Planning and predictability

• Effectiveness

• Private sector

REFERENCES: UNCHS Expert Group Meeting on Urban Poverty and Governance Indicators

• Freedom,Justice,Fairness,EquitY

• Accountability and Transparency

• Responsiveness

• Participation

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKGOOD URBAN GOVERNANCE?

•It is a process by which quality of life in the cities can be improved. It is inextricably linked to

citizen welfare and enables the community to access the benefits of urban citizenship including

adequate shelter, security of tenure, safe water, sanitation, a clean environment, health, education and

nutrition, employment and public safety and mobility.

REFERENCES: The Governance Working Group of the International Institute of Administrative Sciences 1996.

URBAN GOVERNANCE INSTITUTIONS

• There are a large number of institutions at state and city levels associated with governing urban

areas – cities and towns. They include:

• State Level – Departments of urban administration, housing, water supply, public health,

environment, welfare, education, health, home, planning, etc. State Finance Commission, State

Election Commission, are the other institutions

• City level - Urban Local Bodies, City Police Department, Pollution Control Boards,

• Parastatal Agencies –DUDA, Development Authorities, Housing Boards, etc

(JNNURM & AMRUT)

IMPORTANCE OF URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE IN INDIA

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKINTRODUCTION

• Infrastructure is the basic structure, services and facilities required for the proper

functioning of an economy.

• It refers to the structure require to support the society such as Transportation,

Agriculture, Water Management, Tele - communication, Industrial and

commercial development, power, petroleum and natural gas, Housing and other

segments such as mining, disaster management services and technology related

infrastructure.

• Urban Infrastructure refers to the physical structure present in cities and towns.

• Infrastructure development is a key role to play in both Economic growth and

poverty reduction.

Source: urban infrastructure –in-India by kanishka-87


• In the 1950s the general perception of the policy makers was that India is pre-

dominantly an agriculture-based economy.

• The importance of urban infrastructure has seen a dramatic change from the 1950s

till now.

• Its importance can easily be estimated by the fact that the percentage of urban

population increased from 17.28% in 1951 to 33% in 2015.

• The contribution of the urban population to the GDP has been calculated to be

around 35% and by 2050 it is estimated that cities would contribute 70% of

country’s GDP.

IMPORTANCE

Source: urban infrastructure –in-India by kanishka-87

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKJNNURM

Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JnNURM)

• JnNURM is a unique project dedicated to the redevelopment of India's cities.

• Cities and towns of India constitute the world’s second largest urban system. They contribute over 50% of country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and are central to economic growth.

• JnNURM was a massive city-modernisation scheme launched by the Government of India under Ministry of Urban Development.

• It was launched in 2005 for a seven-year period (up to March 2012)

Source: www.jnnurm.nic.in

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKAMRUT

Atal Mission For Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation (AMRUT)

• The scheme was launched by Prime

Minister Narendra Modi in June 2015 with the

focus of the urban renewal projects is to establish

infrastructure

• The scheme is dependent with public private

partnership model(PPP). It includes various other

schemes like Swatch Bharat Mission, Housing for

All 2022, along with the local state schemes

related to water supply and sewerage and other

infrastructure related schemes.

• The focus will be on core infrastructure services

Source :www.amrut.gov.in

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKDIFFERENCES

Source :www.amrut.gov.inSource :www.jnnurm.nic.in

JnNURM AMRUT1.JnNURM aims at creating ‘economically productive, efficient, equitable and responsive Cities

1.It aims at Providing basic services (e.g. water supply, sewerage, urban transport) to households and Build amenities in cities

2.It is a wide-ranging urban sector reforms to strengthen municipal governance in accordance with the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992

2.This will improve the quality of life for all, especially the poor and the disadvantaged.

3.The Mission shall comprise two Sub- Missions,(i) Sub-Mission for Urban Infrastructure and Governance(ii) Sub-Mission for Basic Services to the Urban Poor

3.AMRUT can be considered to be a remodelled version of the JnNURM wherein the government has worked on many flaws present under the earlier programme.

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKFOCUS

Source :www.amrut.gov.inSource :www.jnnurm.nic.in

JnNURM AMRUTUrban Renewal Water Supply Water Supply Sewerage facilities and septage managementSewage and Sanitation Storm Water drains to reduce floodingSolid Waste Management Pedestrian, non-motorized and public transport

facilities, parking spaces

Storm Water Drains Enhancing amenity value of cities by creating and upgrading green spaces, parks and recreation

centre's, especially for children

Urban TransportParking spaces Reform Management & supportHousing Capacity building.Development of heritage areas

Preservation of water bodies

Prevention & rehabilitation of soil erosion

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKCOVERAGE OF JnNURM

A Cities/UAs with 4 million plus population as per 2001 census 07

BCities/UAs with 1 million plus but less than 4 million population as per 2001 census

28

CSelected cities/UAs (state capitals and other cities/UAs of religious/historic and touristic importance)

28

• JnNURM concentrated the most populous

states in the country.

• The JNNURM which was the primary

urban development programme under the

UPA Government covered 63 urban

agglomerations/cities across the country

Source : jnnurm.nic.in


AMRUT

• 500 cities across the country having a population > 1 lakh.

Some cities situated on stems of main rivers

A few capital cities

Important cities located in hilly areas, islands and tourist areas

AMRUT would have to ensure that the projects are not concentrated in a few

states and major cities. The government needs to ensure that the scheme aids

small towns across the country.

Source : thekarmayogi.com

COVERAGE

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS.NO

NAME OF THE STATE/CITY

NO.OF CITIES/TOWNS

S.NO

NAME OF THE STATE/CITY

NO.OF CITIES/TOWNS

1 Andhra Pradesh

31 19 Chattisgarh 9

2 Telangana 11 20 Andaman & Nicobar

1

3 Uttar Pradesh

64 21 Arunachal Pradesh

1

4 Maharastra 37 22 Chandigarh 15 Tamil Nadu 33 23 Goa 16 Gujarat 31 24 Assam 47 Karnataka 21 25 Delhi 48 Rajasthan 30 26 Dadar &

Nagar Haveli1

9 West Bengal

28 27 Daman & Diu 1

10 Bihar 27 28 Jammu & Kashmir

3

11 Odisha 19 29 Madhya Pradesh

32

12 Haryana 19 30 Uttarakhand 613 Kerala 18 31 West Bengal 5914 Punjab 17 32 Pondichery 215 Manipur 1 33 Nagaland 216 Meghalaya 1 34 Tripura 117 Mizoram 1 35 Sikkim 118 Jharkhand 7 36 Himachal

Pradesh1Source: amrut.gov.in

COVERAGE contd…

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKFUNDING PATTERN & BUDJET ALLOCATION

JNNURMUrban Infrastructure and Governance Funding Pattern

Grant ULB/Parastatals/Loan from Financial InstitutionCentre State

Cities with 4 million plus population 35% 15% 50%

Cities with million plus but less than 4 million population 50% 20% 30%

Cities in North Eastern States and J&K 90% 10%

Other Cities 80% 10% 10%

Setting up desalination plants (for any city) 80% 10% 10%

Source : jnnurm.nic.in

• The MoUD used to give project-by-project sanctions.• An amount of Rs. 50,000 crore is earmarked during the seven year period. under: UIG : Rs. 25500 Crore BSUP : Rs. 13650 Crore UIDSSMT : Rs. 6400 Crore IHSDP :Rs. 4450 Crore


• Formula for allocation to states – Total population and no. of statutory urban towns (50:50)

• The total outlay for AMRUT is Rs.50,000 crore for five years from 2015-16 to 2019-20.

• The Central Assistance (CA) for the projects will be in three instalments of 20:40:40 of the approved cost.

• In the AMRUT this has been replaced by approval of the State Annual Action Plan once a year by the MoUD

Funds Distribution Annual Budgetary Allocation

Project fund 80%Incentive for reforms 10%State funds for A&OE 8%MoUD funds for A&OE

2%

½ of project cost to cities having population < 10

lakhs

1/3 of project cost to cities having population > 10

lakhs

Source : amrut.gov.in

AMRUTFUNDING PATTERN & BUDJET ALLOCATION

• Central Govt. assistance:

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKORGANISATION STRUCTURE

JnNURM AMRUTNational Level – Apex

Committee(AC) chaired by Secretary (UD), GOI

State Level – SHPSC chaired by Chief Secretary, UDD

District Level – Review and Monitoring Committee co-chaired by

M.P with D.C.

City Level – ULBs will be responsible for implementation of

Mission

Source :www.amrut.gov.in

Joint Secretary & Mission Director (JNNURM)

Director (NURM)

Secretary (NURM)

Section Officer

Source :www.jnnurm.nic.in

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKTRANSFORMATION: From JnNURM to AMRUT

Issue in JNNRUM Corrective Measure through AMRUT1 Unsatisfactory Implementation of Reforms: Less

than 3/4th of the reforms were implemented in North East States, Haryana and Bihar; while some states could not even manage to roll out the reforms.

AMRUT seeks to incentivize reform by earmarking 10% of the total funds as an incentive to be released on implementation of reform measures.

2 Slow Progress of Projects: Overall, only 42% projects were completed under JNNRUM (even after extension of deadline by 2 years).

Government would be allocating funds for these incomplete projects and extend the deadline for their completion. Also, now the state governments would only submit a State Annual Action Plan based on which they would be allocated funds. The Centre will not appraise individual projects.

3 Narrow Eligibility Condition For Projects: The eligibility conditions for assistance under the JNNURM were narrow and only 63 cities/urban agglomerations qualified for assistance under the scheme.

AMRUT would cover projects in 500 cities and towns each with a population of 1 lakh and above, some cities situated on stems of main rivers, a few capital cities and important cities located in hilly areas, islands and tourist areas.

4 Limited Scope of Modernization: JnNURM focused upon treatment of sewage and garbage, augmentation of water supply, building roads and flyovers.

New additions being introduced include digitization and Wi-Fi zones in cities, aimed at improving urban governance.

Source :www.swanithi.com

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKSECTOR WISE LIST OF PROJECTS SANCTIONED AND

COMPLETED UNDER JNNURM

water s

upply

sewera

ge

Drai

nage

solid

waste

Roads

& Fly ov

ers

MRTS

Other U

rban…

Urban R

enew

al

Develo

pmen

t of h

eritag

e area

s

preser

vatio

n of w

ater b

odies

parki

ng pr

ojects

020406080

100120140160180

Sector wise comparison of projects sanctioned vs completed

No.of projects sanctioned No.of projects completed


URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKSTATE WISE PROJECTS SANCTIONED AND COMPLETED

UNDER JNNURM

Andhr

a Pra

desh

Aruna

chal

Prade

sh

Chand

igarh

Chatti

sgar

hDelh

i

Gujara

t

Harya

na

Karna

taka

Madhy

a Pra

desh

Mahar

astra

Nagala

nd

Orissa

Punjab

Rajasth

an

Sikkim

Tamiln

adu

Uttar P

rade

sh

Uttara

khan

d

West B

enga

l0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

State wise projects Sanctioned & Completed

No.of Projects Sanctioned No.of Projects Completed


URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKJnNURM POSITIVES(UIG)

• According to the MoUD, as on july 2012, there were a total of 554 projects approved under UIG with a total cost of 622.53 billion.

• Out of these 554 projects:

Maharashtra (with 5 mission cities) had the maximum number of 80 projects,

Gujarat (with 5 mission cities) at 72,

West Bengal (with 2 mission cities) at 69,

Andhra Pradesh (with 4 mission cities) at 52 and

Tamil Nadu (with 3 mission cities) at 48.

• When it comes to implementation of reforms, initiation of early action to get projects approved, commitment to speedily implement projects and the inclination to take up parallel urban initiatives, andhra pradesh, gujarat, karnataka, maharashtra, tamilnadu madhya pradesh and west bengal has showngood number of urban best practices.

Source : www.planningcomission.gov.in

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKBSUP PROJECTS UNDER JnNURM

STATE NO.OF HOUSES SANCTIONED

NO.OF HOUSES COMPLETED

Andhra Pradesh 60,534 22,024Tamil Nadu 47,797 9,598Gujarat 42,396 15,596West Bengal 98,530 30,598Karnataka 13,777 7,370Maharashtra 75,404 17,248Delhi 67,784 14,844Uttar Pradesh 63,537 26,303

• A Total of 1,610 projects had been approved under BSUP.• Total project cost of Rs. 417.23 billion as of December 2012, for

construction/upgradation of 1.57 million units in various cities and towns.• Out of this, a total of 0.62 million houses were reported to have been

completed


URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKFEW BEST PRACTICES IN JNNURM

• Andhra Pradesh, off-site real-time monitoring system to provide real-time

information on solid waste management, urban planning, public works and street

lighting to municipal managers and citizens in the Greater Hyderabad Municipal

Corporation and taking up innovative IT solutions for improving urban water supply

management through Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) in

Vijayawada

• In Gujarat, the introduction of Bus Rapid Transit System in Ahmedabad and a

citywide e-governance system to improve service delivery in Surat

• In Karnataka, using GIS for a better property tax regime, thereby also ensuring a

four-fold increase in the tax revenue of the Brihan Bangalore Mahanagar Palika, and



• In Maharashtra, Nagpur’s city-wide 24x7 water supply initiative and

• Pune’s solid waste management project integrating the informal sector, moving

towards 100 per cent scientific processing of waste.

• Tamil Nadu focused on timely implementation and completion of a large number

of their small town projects, thereby reaching the benefits to the urban residents

faster.

• There are specific instances of definite change for the better, like the project taken

up in Sellur area of Madurai to ensure better living conditions for slum dwellers

through preventing stagnation of garbage in Sellur Odai, and providing safe and

quality drinking water to slum dwellers

FEW BEST PRACTICES IN JNNURM CONTD…


URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKFAILURE OF JnNURM

Competence of Planners

• The mission was centrally planned in New Delhi and its objectives were blindly

accepted and adopted across the states

• The required administrative reforms and accountability were ignored.

• The infrastructure planning was limited to just addition of new Core Infrastructure as

suggested by private consultants.

• The planners were neither trained nor competent in understanding the social needs

for which they were planning

• This was one of the major flaws that resulted in failure

Source :www.effectivestates.org


Approach adopted by Planners.

• One of the mission's primary objective was a projection that improving infrastructure would be a solution and would cause urban renewal.

• The objective failed to account for capability/capacity & willingness of ULB authorities to learn, participation of the citizens being limited to just inviting comments, and lack of focused research were the important reasons for its failure.

Funding of Projects.

• Since the Objectives of the mission were vague and not easily understood, the funds were either diverted or misused.

The central funding had to be matched by the states to achieve stability. But lack of monitoring, review and no provision for midterm course correction caused serious damage to the renewal mission.

FAILURE contd…

Source :www.effectivestates.org

PERFORMANCE AUDIT OF IMPLEMENTATION OF JNNURM IN AP

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKPERFORMANCE AUDIT OF IMPLEMENTATION OF JNNURM IN AP

ORGANISATIONAL SETUP

JNNURM functions under the overall guidance of a National Steering Group (NSG)

The NSG is supported by a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) whose task is to appraise proposals, and a Central Sanctioning and Monitoring Committee (CSMC)

At the State Level, the programme is co-ordinated by a State Level Steering Committee (SLSC).

Agency Function(s) Remarks

STATE LEVEL NODALAGENCY (SLNA)

Appraisal of projects, management of grants, management of revolving fund for O&M

APUFIDC

PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT UNIT (PMU)

Providing requisite technical and managerial support

PMU for AP was sanctioned in 2008

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT (PIU)

With a focus on enhancing the pace and quality of implementation of JNNURM.

17 PIUs for 3 mission and non mission cities

Source: JNNURM guidelines

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKAUDIT FRAMEWORK

AUDIT OBJECTIVES Reform agenda was implemented effectively;

Individual projects were planned properly and executed economically and efficiently and achieved their intended objectives;

Financial control was exercised adequately; and

Mechanism for monitoring and evaluation was adequate and effective.

AUDIT CRITERIA Mission Guidelines, instructions, circulars, orders and toolkits issued by the GoI from

time to time;

Tripartite Memorandum of Agreement signed between the GoI, State Government and the ULBs;

Detailed Project Reports (DPRs) of selected projects; and

Andhra Pradesh Financial code and instructions issued by the State Government from time to time.

SOURCE : www.saiindia.gov.in


Audit was carried out between April 2011 and June 2012 and covered

the implementation of projects during the entire mission period of JNNURM

Out of the 251 projects approved for the State under JNNURM, 74 projects with (53 percent) falling under the 4 Mission cities and 38 Non-Mission cities were selected for detailed audit scrutiny.

Status of sampled projects

Component wise details


AUDIT SCOPE

EXECUTION OF PROJECTS

The year-wise break up of projects approved and completed as reported (December 2012) by the State Government

As of March 2012, 251 projects were approved by GoI for implementation under JNNURM in Andhra Pradesh


LIST OF COMPLETED POJECTS UNDER UIG & BSUP IN HYDERABADS.NO

UIG SECTOR (IN LAKHS)

1 Rajiv Gandhi circle

Flyover/roads

3,300.00

2 GreenlandJunction

Flyover/roads

1,727.00

3 chandrayangutta

Flyover/roads

1,101.00

4 pipeline Shadnagar to prashanth nagar

Water Supply

9,493.00

5 Diversion Krishna to sec-bad

Water Supply

8,120.00

6 storage facilities on South of south Musi

Water Supply

3,355.00

7 storage facilities on South of north Musi

Water supply

2,981.00

8 Control and DataAcquisition System

Water Supply

990.00

9 Strengthening of Sewerage system in Old City area

Sewerage 14,505.00

10 Krishna Drinking Water SupplyProject - Phase II

Water supply

60,650.00

SOURCE: www.jnnurm.nic.inData as on 07-08-2014

S.NO

BSUP SECTOR COST(CRORES)

1 Revised BSUP Project for Construction of25761 DUs.

housing 414.62

2 Providing InfrastructureHouses Constructed Under VAMBAYIntrenal Roads & Site Leveling

infrastructure

49.73

3 provision of infrastructure facilities in the slums of MCH divisions I to IV, by GHMC

infrastructure

22.65

4 provision ofinfrastructure facilities in the slums ofMCH divisions V to VIII

infrastructure

29.88

5 provision ofinfrastructure facilities in the slums ofMCH divisions IX to XII

infrastructure

26.34SOURCE: www.jnnurm.nic.inData as on 16-11-2015


CONCLUSION

Implementation of the mandatory and optional reforms by Government was largely satisfactory.

Execution of a majority of test checked projects was adversely affected due to non-availability of required land/defective designs.

Lack of co-ordination with the related departments, splitting up of works into innumerable sub-works, change of technology

Monitoring mechanism was not adequate to ensure that projects were executed within time to the envisaged quality standards.

RECOMMENDATIONS

State Government should ensure preparation of Detailed Project Reports with authenticated inputs from survey reports and ensure strict compliance with all the pre-requisites before commencing project execution.

Effective co-ordination with other Departments responsible for granting clearances must be ensured.

Government orders relating to two-stage tendering process (survey and investigation, and execution) should be strictly adhered .

Monitoring mechanism, as stipulated in the guidelines, should be strengthened to ensure that projects are executed on time within the budgeted cost.


EVOLUTION OF URBAN GOVERNANCE

EVOLUTION OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNANCE IN INDIATime Period Developments

2300-1750 BC(Indus ValleyCivilisation)

wide streets, market places, public offices, drainage and sewerage system

Post-Mauryan Appointment of a chief executive officer

320-540 AD(Gupta)

•Towns administered by a council•Provision of having elected administrative officers

1526-1707 AD(Mughal)

Municipal administration vested in kotwal.

Between disintegration of Mughal Empireand advent of the British

•Anarchy and military feudalism in most parts of the country•Local institutions perverted or weakened

1642 Sir Josia Child obtains a Charter from the British Monarch, James II, to set up a corporationat Madras

1720 A royal Charter issued for establishing a mayor’s court in each of the three presidency towns of Madras, Bombay and Calcutta

Time Period Developments

1793 By a Charter Act, the British establish local institutions in Bombay, Calcutta and Madras

1850 Act passed to permit formation of local committees

Up to 1863 Local institutions in urban areas did not make much progress and were confined to about 20Towns.

1870 •Lord Mayo’s resolution released•Municipal Acts passed to enlarge municipal powers , introduced the system of local finance

After 1870 and upto 1880

•Principle of local self-government put into practice only in the cities of Calcutta and Bombay.

1882 Lord Ripon’s resolution released; advocated for establishment of a network of local self government Institutions.

1888 Functioning of local governments for several years had some positive results.


1907 Municipal Acts of several provinces amended , but no real progress achieved•Local self government continued to be one of the functions of the district officer

1914-1919 Government of India Act, 1919 enacted; responsibility for local government transferred.

Up to 1947 Laws governing local bodies enacted during the period 1917 to 1937 fail to prescribe an effective system for day-to-day management of municipal affairs

1950 Constitution places local government & urban local government, within the legislative competence of the States.

Since 1949 Numerous committees and commissions appointed by the Central and State

1985 •Ministry of Urban Development established•National Commission on Urbanisation


1989 Attempt to introduce the Constitution (63rd Amendment) Bill; also known as Nagarpalika(Municipality) Bill; contained provisions for strengthening of urban local governments

1991 Bill [named Constitution (73rd Amendment) Bill] introduced again by the Government

1992 Constitution (74th Amendment) Act finally accepted and enacted

Since 1992 Most State municipal Acts amended• Reforms underway in the structure and functioning of urban local governments

SCENARIO OF URBAN INSTITUTIONS IN HYDERABAD

• THE QUTB SHAHI STAGE (OR) THE FIRST TWIN CITY STAGE (1591-1687).Hyderabad city was planned on a grid pattern consisting of two main roads, running East–West and North–South and intersecting at Charminar, the city centre.

• THE TRANSITIONAL PHASE (1687-1725).This period began with a halt in the active life and growth of the city. The authority was shifted from Hyderabad to Aurangabad, the Southern headquarters of Moghul Empire. Towards the end of 1725 Nizam Mulk Asaf Jah founded the Asaf Jahi Dynasty of Hyderabad and took firm control of the Deccan & the Hyderabad city.

• THE EARLY ASAF JAHI PERIOD (1725-1798).This period is characterized by two distinct phases,

• INHIBITION (1725–1763):-It was one of the great economic stress and strain for Hyderabad because Aurangabad was still the capital.The death of Asaf Jahi I in 1748 and the Anglo – French struggle for supremacy over Deccan (1750-1760) renewed political uncertainty which adversely affected Hyderabad’s growth.

• ACCELERATION (1763–1798):-The Nizam of the Deccan, Nizam Ali Khan (1761-1796) shifted his head quarters to Hyderabad. Hyderabad thus re-emerged as the Chief City of the Deccan after an eclipse of seventy six years.

HISTORY

4 THE SECOND TWIN CITY STAGE (1798-1874).In 1798 two significant political decisions profoundly altered the course of the city’s development.Decision 1:-In the first instance the subsidiary alliance of the Nizam with the East India Company in 1798 created Secunderabad and consequently ushered in second phase of the development of Hyderabad through with settlements.Decision 2:-The Nizam’s permission for the construction of the British Residency on the North bank changed the trend of the Hyderabad’s growth.In 1886, the Chadargat becomes Chadarghat Municipality. The Hyderabad City Police, established in 1847, is the law and order enforcement agency.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyderabad

5 THE RAILWAY PERIOD (1874-1908).

The inception of the Railway in the twin cities led to a considerable growth, much of it oriented to the Railway stations, goods yards, associated ware house areas and industrial regions. From Bombay, the Railway line spanning Hyderabad and Secunderabad in 1874 was extended to Madras via Warangal in 1898.

6 THE MODERN (OR) METROPOLITAN STAGE (1908-1956).

The modern area of the twin settlements and their fusion into a great metropolis. The flood of 28th September, 1908 was subsequently followed by events of economic & political significance which changed the social, cultural, political & economic structure of the twin cities.

In the year 1912 and greater attention was given to the provision of infrastructure facilities have added to the physical growth of the city.

In 1921, Hyderabad Municipality increases to 84 sq km. Electricity, water and sewerage services to general public were first commissioned in 1925, with the establishment of The City Endowment Board.

In 1933, The two Boards amalgamated into a Corporation and given statutory status under the Hyderabad Municipal Act,

7. THE DEVELOPING STAGE (1956-1985).Hyderabad is constructed as Capital of Andhra Pradesh from 1st November, 1956. In 1960, the budget of the Corporation was 1.5 crores; raised to 1000 crores in the next 45 years

8 . THE PRE-IT REVOLUTION STAGE (1986-2000).Hyderabad witnessed growth of public sector enterprises. Numerous organizations set up base and attracted people to come and settle down in Hyderabad.In 1992, 74th act has been enacted this marks the beginning of a historic reform to decentralize power to the people. It provides a constitutional form to the structure and mandate of urban local bodies to enable them to function as effective institutions of self-government.

9 THE TRI-CITY STAGE HYDERABAD-SECUNDERABAD, CYBERABAD (2001 ONWARDS).The development of HITECH City led to the formation of Cyberabad City. The city grew in leaps and bounds during this decade. the civic agencies were faced with complex urban challenges. Highlights of this period are the development of the International Airport, Financial District, Outer Ring Road and the expressways.

Source: cgg.gov

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKURBAN GOVERNANCE IN HYDERABAD:

•All states amended the municipalities and corporation Acts in 1994 to give effect to

the 74th Constitution Amendment Act

•There were two municipal laws in the state prior to the 74th Constitution Amendment:

(a)Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965

(b)Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, 1955 (which governs Hyderabad,

Visakhapatnam and Vijayawada Municipal Corporations)

THE AIM OF THE DECENTRALIZATION PROCESS WAS TO:

•Make urban governance closer to people.

•Efficient delivery of urban services and improve quality of life.

TASK OF GOVERNANCE IN HYDERABAD :

Alleviating poverty, infrastructure, sanitation, transport, environment, etc.

Soure:www.cgg.gov.in

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKPRE-MCH:

FORMATION OF HYDERABAD MUNICIPAL BOARD AND CHADERGHAT MUNICIPAL BOARD :

• In the year 1869, Municipal administration was first introduced for the city of Hyderabad. At that time, city was just 55 km2 with a population of 3.5 lakhs.

THE FIRST CORPORATION:

• In 1933, Chaderghat Municipality was merged with Hyderabad Municipality to form Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

• The Hyderabad Corporation and the Secunderabad Corporation, were established in 1950 via the Hyderabad Corporation Act.

• Once again in "1955", both the municipal corporations of Hyderabad and Secunderabad were merged to form Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (MCH).

• In 1956, Hyderabad became capital of Andhra Pradesh after the state was formed.

FORMATION OF GHMC:

• The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation was formed on 16 April 2007 by merging 12 municipalities and 8 gram panchayats with the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad.

SOURCE:Municipal_governance_in_India

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKHYDERABAD AREA MAP

HMDA: 7,228 sq kms.

GHMC: 625 sq kms.

MCH: 173 sq kms.

AREA & DEMOGRAPHY• Hyderabad is the sixth largest city in the urban agglomeration in India. • The Urban Agglomeration consists of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (MCH) (172 sq.km),

surrounding 12 municipalities. • The urban agglomeration population has increased from 4.3 million in 1991 to 5.7 million in 2001.

This as more than 50 % during 1981-91 and 27% during 1991-2001.

AREAS THAT WERE COVERED UNDER MCHCircle I – Moosarambagh, Saidabad, Saroornagar, Barkas, Moghalpura, Chaderghat.Circle Ii – Falaknuma, Zoo Park, Puranapul, Begum Bazaar, Shali Banda Etc.Circle Iii – Amberpet, Kachiguda, Himayathnagar, Bholakpur, Nallakunta Etc.Circle Iv- Golkonda Military Area, Hakimpet, Mehdipatnam, Mallepally, Langer House.Circle V – Jubilee Hills, Banjara Hills, Yousufguda, Sanathnagar, Khairatabad Etc.Circle Vi – Esamia Bazaar, Agapura, Gun Foundry Etc.Circle Vii – Secunderabad Division.

• As per the 2011 census, the urban population of Hyderabad city was more than 77 lakh.

• Total Metropolitan Area Population of Hyderabad in 2015 - 11,458,741 (11.4 million)

• After the formation of GHMC, infrastructure works costing Rs.13470 Crores have been

sanctioned out of which works costing Rs.6531 Crores have been completed.


GHMC SERVICES:a) Public Health, Sanitation, Street Lighting etc.

b) Provision and maintenance of infrastructure – Roads, Storm Water Drainage, Under

Ground Drainage ,Street Lights, Parks & Play Grounds etc

c) Regulatory activities – building constructions, trade licenses etc

d) Resource mobilization.

e)Implementation of urban poverty alleviation programmes.


• Among large cities in India, Hyderabad has been at the forefront of municipal reforms in areas such as

• Municipal finance, • partial privatization of urban services, • Introduction of new public-private partnership arrangements for service delivery, • “Good governance” through measures aimed at improving transparency and

accountability of the government.


RS. 5 MEAL SCHEME:• A pilot project offering hot and hygienic meals for the

poor at Rs. 5 .• It provided food to as many as 12.50 lakh people in the

last one year• GHMC has introduced this scheme with the help of Hare

Krishna Foundation HYGIENIC ‘GREEN TOILET‘CONCEPT:• April 30, 2011, the first ‘green toilet' in the city was

opened• It equipped with solar power system, energy-efficient

LED lights and waterless • It is constructed in built-operate-transfer model• The GHMC had also announced that it would build 50 bio-

toilets for women on priority.

www.newindianexpress.com/ghmc-public-toilets www.thehansindia.com


THE E-SEVA INITIATIVE: Designed to simplify and accelerate public services, and most

importantly to improve the relationship between government and the

public by reducing corruption,

It is a single-window set-up that allows “customers” to pay their

utility bills at one stop .

PROPERTY TAX REFORM A self-assessment scheme for property tax, was

successful in increasing revenues.

To be successful, it was important that tax-payers

perceive rapidly visible improvements in service

quantity, quality and delivery system

SOURCE:www.meeseva.gov

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKCITIZENS’ CHARTER:• The public is a partner in resource mobilization, and that citizens who meet

their responsibilities have the right to demand a certain level of service in return.

• These rights have been spelled out by the MCH in the form of a Citizens’ Charter. i.e; Simple, Moral, Accountable, Responsive and Transparent

SOURCE:http://www.tniusnews.org

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKOFF SITE REAL TIME MONITORING SYSTEM (OSRT)

•OSRT is a unique easy-to-use mobile phone mechanism to generate real-time off-site images of

municipal activities valued by citizens.

•OSRT utilizes image compression, photo comparison and perimeter binding

technologies.

BIRTH / DEATH CERTIFICATES:•The service helps the citizen to apply for death and birth

certificate from the e-Seva center or through online.

CITIZEN SERVICE CENTRES:•The objective of the Citizen Service Centres is to provide complete disintermediation in

providing services and make officers became responsive and responsible.

GREEN CHANNEL:•This initiative has been launched for the hassle free and speedy issuance of building

permits to the citizens.

SOURCE:http://www.tniusnews.org


NON-STATE ACTORS IN URBAN GOVERNANCE:• The World Bank - Municipal Services for the Urban Poor, Water and Sanitation Programme ,with

UNDP.,

• The UK development agency DFID - Report Card on Civic Services in Hyderabad, Centre for Good

Governance,

• UN-Habitat and Cities Alliance - City Development Strategy .Had an impact on urban governance

by introducing new norms in service delivery.-civil society organizations are also involved.

Ex: Lok Satta and PUCAAR

• Lok Satta (People’s Power) is an organisation whose goals include promoting good government and

fighting corruption and the criminalisation of politics.

• People’s Union for Civic Action and Rights (PUCAAR) emphasis is on communal harmony and the

empowerment of the marginalized and poor

• SOURCE:www.cess.ac.in

ROADS• The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation’s (GHMC) is failing in maintaining standards in

laying the roads in the capital city.

• Use of sub standard material on BT roads causes damage of roads instantly on busy roads, a report says

• Delay in repairs on stretches carrying heavy vehicular traffic causes frequent road accidents

• Roads and Buildings Department and submitted a report to the government revealed that The Black Tap (BT) roads laid by the contractors on the busy areas have not more than 6 months life due to usage of substandard material.

• The road network connecting Hi-tech City to Panjagutta and Hi-tech city to Borabanda eroded within a month after the works completed in the last two years due to the use of low quality substances.

• The R&B was maintaining 190 km, including intercepting State highways, and the remaining 80km road was owned National Highway Authority.

CONTINUED ……

ISSUES

CONTINUED ……

RAIN WATER PITS

A whopping Rs 100 crore collected by the Greater Hyderabad Municipal

Corporation (GHMC) from house owners and building contractors over the past

three years for digging rainwater harvesting pits have allegedly been diverted or

lying unaccounted.

The GHMC, under the Water, Land and Trees Act (WALTA) had been collecting

Rs 8 for every square yard for recharge pits. "It is evident that no proper records

were maintained about the funds.

TAX PAYERS

• Home owners who paid their tax early are disappointed with the GHMC for its failure to live up to its promise. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation had announced that five per cent discount would be offered on property tax for owners who paid their tax by April-end.

• With just four days to go for the first month of the current financial year to end, the tempting sop is yet to be implemented. Over 90,000 tax payers have till now paid `22 crore, but nobody has got the rebate.

• “The tall promises of five per cent discount on tax paid before April-end,2013.

UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE SYSTEM The under ground drainage system in the city is about 60 kms. There are about 30 NALAS in the city which are not maintaining properly and some under KABJAH

which are blocking the passage. Due this the rain water is stagnating on the roads. Through JnNURM about 266 crores has been sanctioned which are been wasted. Due the KABJAHS, the 30feet NALAS are getting decreased to just 7 feet. According to the govt about 10,000 crores has been sanctioned for improvisation.

URBAN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKISSUES IN WATER SUPPLY:

HMWSSB is monitoring of water supply in the entire GHMC area including 10 peripheral municipalities and

sewerage operations in the core city

• 30 colonies in the surrounding circles of the (GHMC) have been waiting for piped water supply for the

past two years despite residential welfare associations paying their 30% contribution.

• Thirteen colonies in the GHMC's LB Nagar circle had paid their share for providing water pipeline

network in 2010.

INSUFFICIENT SUPPLY OF WATER:

• As against the demand of 490 Million Gallons of water per day (MGD), the HMWS&SB claims to

supply about 340 MGD but in reality not even 320-330 MGD is being supplied.

• The board is chalking out contingency plans to use additional pumping motors for drawing water from

dead storage levels of Osmansagar and Himayatsagar.


CONCLUSION :

Clearly, the “good governance” policies did not always achieve their goals, but it can

be argued that they contributed to creating awareness among the public and within

the administration and have influenced the discourse surrounding both public service

delivery and development in the state.

Grass root level approach like bottom up required in any decision making process at

local level and need political support .

Making each service online is a big initiative from government but it is important

that how far it reaches a common man . ?

SOLUTIONS:

• Measuring effectiveness:

• Public opinion polling results on satisfaction with government performance.

• Polling results and customer satisfaction ratings of individual urban services.

• Rate of vandalism in public places and theft of public property.

• Rate of community participation in planning and implementation of programs.

Public Engagement in Decision-Making :

• Engage residents as elected or appointed members of governing boards of appropriate

municipal organizations, such as libraries, schools, police oversight boards or power

authorities.

• Conduct systematic public consultations before adopting plans and budgets, and adopt results

of consultations within limits of available resources

Public Information and Access:

• Provide public and media access to most city council sessions.

• Provide minutes of council sessions on notice boards at city hall, in public

libraries and other public locations.

• Publish proposed plans for land use, municipal budgets, etc. in advance for

public comment.

Questions?

The 74th Constitutional Amendment requires that 18 functions be

transferred to urban local bodies, as per Schedule XII. Yet, it can be

seen that many functions are still be held by state governments, para-

statal bodies, etc. What are your thoughts on the extent of full

decentralisation of functions? What challenges are facing state

governments from implementing the 74th CAA? How can these be

overcome?

Questions?• What are your thoughts on the reliance of municipalities on grant funding for

their activities? What should be the political obligations for grant support to municipalities

• What role can communities and localised user groups play in being part of such new arrangements? How can these be integrated into the municipality’s larger decision-making processes?

• What are the capacity issues being faced by elected representatives at the municipal level? How can these be addressed?

• How can we provide an integrated platform for community engagement on various public issues facing our municipalities, in a manner that is linked into the municipality’s overall political structure, rather than treat communities differently for each service?

Date post:	14-Jan-2017
Category:	Leadership & Management
Upload:	kedarnath-kedhu
View:	306 times
Download:	1 times

planning for urban governanace

Leadership & Management