some points for criticism of smart cities project : GS 3 : IAS
10:55 AM
- Two years on, a watered down version of that idealisation is raising more questions than providing answers
- neither are greenfield (or new) cities coming up, nor even are satellite cities
- minuscule parts of existing cities—often, exclusive pockets—have been identifed for development by special purpose vehicles (SPVs).
- For instance, just four sq km out of Bhubaneswar's 135 sq km are to be 'smartified'.
- the SPVs are essentially companies (in which the local body has a shareholding), triggering apprehensions about governance and extraneous authority.
- Smart cities will create exclusive 'cities within cities', which is against the very spirit of the panchayati raj and go against the 73rd and 74th amendments (related to panchayats and urban local bodies)
- the demolition of 4,000 government houses in excellent upkeep, felling of over 40,000 trees, dislocation of 6,000 families and auctioning of 300 acres to builders.
- Elected local representatives are worried about erosion of authority.
- The other aspect is prioritisation.
- all 20 cities on the smart city first list were already better off than the rest.
- at the city level, of which Delhi offers an apt example: the areas around India Gate, Connaught Place, the diplomatic enclave of Chanakyapuri, Lodhi Road and the Ridge, which have wide, tree-lined avenues, large parks, pleasing architecture and bins everywhere are to be smartified with "app- integrated cycle tracks, sensor-based car parking, geo-tagged bins" and so on
- A lot of technology is involved, as if it is the end-all, prompting one critic to say, "The only aim of the project seems to be to allow foreign companies to dump expensive technology on us.
- The beneficiaries will be those who own property there.
- whatever NDMC is being given under the smart city project, it already has plans for—water supply, sewers, roads, parks and WiFi.
- corporatisation of municipal work, it also allows the Centre a degree of control over city governance via the SPVs, the CEOs of which can't be removed without the Centre's permission.
- There's no clarity on the role of elected municipal bodies either.
- urban development is a state subject, so friction between SPVs and municipal bodies can't be ruled out
- The Centre clearly doesn't trust the municipal corporation to use funds properly. Else, why create SPVs?" On top of that, the Kochi corporation is expected to raise Rs 500 crore in equity for the SPV when its annual revenue itself is around that amount
- The biggest fears, however, are that smart cities, part of Modivision—right-of-centre economics and corporate-style governance with an attendant blindness to weaker sections—will be ruthless with the urban poor
- What troubles the poor most, however, is the fear of being lifted out—by means of 'keep them out of sight' policies.
- "unlocking the full value of land", a euphemism perhaps for evicting people.
- Every city has a unique footprint. That is not being taken into consideration
- if the money might not be better spent on changing these things rather than making a few areas 'smart'
0 comments