logging in or signing up urban governance nayak53 Download Post to : URL : Related Presentations : Share Add to Flag Embed Email Send to Blogs and Networks Add to Channel Uploaded from authorPOINT lite Insert YouTube videos in PowerPont slides with aS Desktop Copy embed code: Embed: Flash iPad Dynamic Copy Does not support media & animations Automatically changes to Flash or non-Flash embed WordPress Embed Customize Embed URL: Copy Thumbnail: Copy The presentation is successfully added In Your Favorites. Views: 685 Category: Entertainment License: All Rights Reserved Like it (0) Dislike it (0) Added: October 07, 2010 This Presentation is Public Favorites: 0 Presentation Description All about urban governance in India in general Comments Posting comment... Premium member Presentation Transcript URBAN GOVERNANCE : URBAN GOVERNANCE Theory and practice 10/7/2010 1 The beginning : The beginning Post independence, the focus was on rural governance and a credible system was being put in place for local governance of rural areas. In 1992 ( 45 years after independence) the 74th amendment to the constitution was passed during the Rajeev Gandhi era. Read with the 73rd amendment this was supposed to change the landscape as far as governance at local level in the country was concerned. Yes, it did a lot for rural governance ,and the panchayati Raj model worked better for them than the ULB structure did for the urban sector .The reasons for this are discussed in this presentation. 10/7/2010 2 Need for the amendment : Need for the amendment At that time it was considered a path breaking amendment because it aimed at the creation of local governments and devolution of powers to them in the respective states. It outlined a broad framework of institutions that would act as the local governments and would ultimately bridge the gap between the government and the governed. The 73rd Amendment Act, which is known as the sister amendment aimed at the creation of stronger, active bodies at the local level in the rural areas. The people would take part in the issues that affected them directly thereby having a say in decision making . As per 2001 census 285.35 Mio people live in the cities and constitute 27.8% of the aggregate population of the country and hence the well being and planned growth of the cities can no longer be ignored. Hence the need for 100% implementation of the CAA. 10/7/2010 3 The XI schedule to the amendment : The XI schedule to the amendment 1. Urban planning including town planning 2. Regulation of land-use and construction of buildings 3. Planning for economic and social development 4. Roads and bridges 5. Water supply for domestic, industrial and commercial purposes 6. Public health, sanitation conservancy and solid waste management 7. Fire services 8. Urban forestry, protection of the environment and promotion of ecological aspects 9. Safeguarding the interests of weaker sections of society, including the handicapped and mentally retarded 10. Slum improvement and up gradation 11. Urban poverty alleviation 12. Provision of urban amenities and facilities such as parks, gardens, playgrounds 13. Promotion of cultural, educational and aesthetic aspects 14. Burials and burial grounds; cremations, cremation grounds and electric crematoriums 15. Cattle pounds; prevention of cruelty to animals 16. Vital statistics including registration of births and deaths 17. Public amenities including street lighting, parking lots, bus stops and public conveniences 18. Regulation of slaughter houses and tanneries. 10/7/2010 4 Definitions of ULB : Definitions of ULB ULBs have been classified as Municipal corporation, Municipalities and Nagar Panchayats. The 74th CAA does not quantify comparative phrases such as “larger” or “smaller” for the classification and categorization. It lists five criteria like population, area, revenue generated, percentage of employment in non-agricultural activities, economic importance for categorization. However, 65th amendment to the constitution was used as a precursor to 74th amendment. Population of10,000- 20,000 for a Nagar Panchayats, 20,000-30,000 for a Municipal Council, 3 lac or above for Municipal Corporation. The CAA applies mutatis mutandis to all the 3 categories. 10/7/2010 5 State of implementation in namma Bengaluru : State of implementation in namma Bengaluru Urban planning/Town planning is with BDA and not BBMP. The BDA plan is very old and does not cover the region. Another agency called BMRDA has been created. The two agencies do not have a clue to regional planning and there is no cohesiveness. Regulation of land use is with the state government Water supply and sewerage is with BWSSB Fire services and citizens health and safety is with the State. Electricity supply is with BESCOM Urban forestry, ecology etc is with forest department of state Slum improvement is with a separate board The urban poverty alleviation is left to NGO and CSR The BBMP revenues are mainly from property tax collection and it is dependent on state for money for infrastructure development. BBMP elections get postponed all the time. RESULT: Quality of urban life needs a lot to be done, along with direct accountability to the citizen. Absence of direct accountability by a single agency has created a labyrinth of chaos and corruption. Sometimes you have different agencies working at cross purposes leading to urban chaos and expenditure. New Para- statal agencies are going on being created and positions are being handed out as political favors. BBMP is left with solid waste management, upkeep and maintenance of Roads (which are regularly dug up by BESCOM, BWSSB) , Urban facilities like parks, Libraries, play grounds, Burial and burial grounds, cattle pounds, Beggary, Registration of births and deaths etc. 10/7/2010 6 FUNDS for ULB : FUNDS for ULB The imbalance of revenue and expenditure that are the share of the municipalities make them run short of money and inevitably depend on the transfers of funds by the state governments. As state government is dependent on centre for funds, so is local government dependent on state government’s support. According to one-estimate municipalities get only 0.6% of the National Gross Domestic product (NGDP) in spite of the fact that cities contribute 90% of the government revenue and 60% of the NGDP. What is the non plan expenditure of the states? 10/7/2010 7 MPC : MPC The metropolitan planning committees ( mooted in CAA) that were to be responsible for coordinating the development plans for growing urban areas are at best, non-existent. Although, the provisions have been made by the states, they have not actualized into functioning bodies as developers or planners. Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Punjab, Rajasthan, have provided for the constitution of MPC in their respective acts, but not constituted it, even though it is a constitutional requirement. Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Haryana have not provided for any provisions for the constitution of MPCs in their respective acts. It is only recently when the corporate world in Bangalore went in to a tizzy over connectivity to the BIAL that the MPC was taken out of mothballs and put in charge of the planning and project including setting up the ABIDe ( Agenda for Bengaluru infrastructure and development initiative) and plan for2020.It boasts of realizing the city founding father Kempe Gouda's dreams. Recent developments indicate that it will remain just that- “A dream” with a lot of witch hunting ,resignations etc. Anyhow, how Kempe Gouda could have dreamed decades ago, of a beautiful city built by him being wrecked by the IT industry and lack of planning is anybody’s guess ! 10/7/2010 8 ULB elections : ULB elections The election commissions have been formed but surprisingly, in certain states, they have not taken an active part in the municipal elections. To illustrate, in states like Assam, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat the SECs issues the notification of elections on its own. But in Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, West Bengal, Kerala and Orissa the State Government issues the notification of elections on the recommendations of the SECs. In Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Karnataka, Punjab, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh the task of delimitation of the constituencies lies with the State Governments. The SECs use the electoral rolls prepared for the Assembly Elections and sometimes when they prepare their own, there are two electoral rolls that differ. The processes for preparing the rolls as also its periodical revision is not uniform in the states This gives scope for mass rigging. 10/7/2010 9 Status of conducting elections to ULB : Status of conducting elections to ULB As per latest available data there are 101 municipal corporations, 1430 municipalities and 2009 Nagar panchayats in the country ,totaling 3540 ULBs. There are many states who have not conducted elections to ULBs at regular intervals. In namma Bengaluru the elections are getting postponed for one reason or the other in spite of the court directives. Only 2 elections have taken place since 15 years. Bihar has the dubious distinction of having not conducted any elections to local urban bodies since 1994 . The other constituents of BiMaRU states are not far behind. West Bengal is another state which pays no attention to elections to local bodies at corporation level. What constitution amendment has made mandatory has become a political 3 ring circus to the disadvantage of the urban population. Namma Bengaluru is no exception. 10/7/2010 10 ULB and the CAA : ULB and the CAA The crux of the matter is that most of the states have created institutions that have been made mandatory in the 74th CAA. However, the ambiguity in the Act pertaining to the creation of these ULBs has been made use fully to keep “control” for dubious reasons. The act for example does not make it mandatory for the state governments to devolve all the functions to the local bodies, does not define the sources of finance for them. Consequently, these institutions have just remained superficial in most of the states of the union. The Municipalities act needs an overhaul in several states since they have not been reviewed since the days of the British Raj. Take for example the simple matter of licensing of pet dogs in Bangalore. It is yet to be sorted out as to whether it is the health dept of the state or BBMP who has to do it ,since revenue is involved! A plethora of such examples can be given. 10/7/2010 11 The European model : The European model In Europe the city administration also administers the region which includes surrounding rural area. As such, the European ULB plans for the entire region which it administers rather than the city alone. After all, the good infrastructure in hinterland adds to the economic well being of the entire region including the city and better quality of life for all. This also ensures that there is no mass migration from rural to urban areas creating a nightmare situation for the urban managers.(e.g. Indian Mega cities whose solutions can be best termed as “band –aid solutions” since they are reactions to the problems rather than proactive planning initiatives. This is the bane of most Asian cities who face mass exodus of people from the hinterland resulting in nullifying every effort of the town planners at long term planning) 10/7/2010 12 The American Model : The American Model The USA follows the Federal governance system and also it is a credible democracy. India also follows Federal system and it is the worlds largest credible democracy. But the states in the USA allow their cities to have elected representative as their Mayor Commissioner Police Chief Health Officer Town Planner This ensures direct accountability to the Citizens by key officials of ULB. In Indian cities it is predominantly bureaucrats who manage these positions ,and key positions of Police Chief, Health officer, commissioner etc are directly answerable to the state Government who appoints them rather than the people they serve. As a result they are quite alienated from the Governed. 10/7/2010 13 The Chinese model : The Chinese model The major Chinese cities are master pieces of Town planning with well paved and wide streets, roads ,basic infrastructure, and services. However, being a totalitarian state, decisions are implemented whatever be the consequences from a humanitarian angle. The state being supreme, and there being no concept of personal property. This makes it fairly easy to implement changes, unlike India which is a democracy. 10/7/2010 14 JNNURM : JNNURM One of the credible initiatives taken by the GOI was flagging off JNNURM or Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission with budgetary support under the Ministry of Urban Development. It spelt out certain mandatory and voluntary reforms agenda with a time frame. Being a Federal System the centre had to adopt a carrot and stick policy since reforms could not be rammed down the throats of the states. Instead allocation of funds was linked to implementation of the initiatives. ULBs were also required to publish the compliance to the public. If you care to visit BBMP website you will find the disclosures made by BBMP under JNURM. 10/7/2010 15 JNNURM : JNNURM The mission has a 7 year agenda starting from 2005-2006. There are 2 sub missions. Sub-mission I is for urban infrastructure and governance and second one for basic services to urban poor and integrated housing and slum development programme. JNNURM coverage extends to 7 megacities, 28 Million plus population cities and 28 cities with less than a million population. Since 05-06 Rs 10000 crores has been spent under the 2 sub-missions. Most ambitious project in sub mission II is development of Dharavi in Mumbai 10/7/2010 16 State level reforms under JNNURM : State level reforms under JNNURM i. * Repeal of Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act. ii. * Reform of Rent Control Laws balancing the interests of landlords and tenants. iii. Rationalization of Stamp Duty to bring it down to no more than 5% within next seven years. iv. Enactment of Public Disclosure Law to ensure preparation of medium-term fiscal plan of ULBs/Para-statals and release of quarterly performance information to all stakeholders. v. Enactment of Community Participation Law to institutionalize citizen participation and introducing the concept of Area Sabha in urban areas. vi. Assigning or associating elected ULBs with “city planning function”. Over a period of seven years, transferring all special agencies that deliver civic services in urban areas to ULBs and creating accountability platforms for all urban civic service providers in transition. 10/7/2010 17 Mandatory Reforms : Mandatory Reforms Adoption of modern, accrual-based double entry system of accounting in Urban Local Bodies/Parastatals Introduction of system of e-governance using IT applications like, GIS and MIS for various services provided by ULBs/Parastatals. Reform of property tax with GIS, so that it becomes major source of revenue for Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) and arrangements for its effective implementation so that collection efficiency reaches at least 85% within next seven years. Levy of reasonable user charges by ULBs/Parastatals with the objective that full cost of operation and maintenance or recurring cost is collected within next seven years. However, cities/towns in North East and other special category States may recover at least 50% of operation & maintenance charges initially. These cities/towns should graduate to full O&M cost recovery in a phased manner. Internal earmarking within local body, budgets for basic services to the urban poor. Provision of basic services to urban poor including security of tenure at affordable prices, improved housing, water supply, sanitation and ensuing delivery of other already existing universal services of the Government for education, health and social security. 10/7/2010 18 Voluntary Reforms : Voluntary Reforms Revision of bye-laws to streamline the approval process for construction of buildings, development of sites etc. Simplification of legal and procedural frameworks for conversion of agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes. Introduction of Property Title Certification System in ULBs. Earmarking at least 20-25% of developed land in all housing projects (both Public and Private Agencies) for EWS/LIG category with a system of cross subsidization. Introduction of computerized process of registration of land and property. Revision of bye-laws to make rain water harvesting mandatory in all buildings and adoption of water conservation measures. Bye-laws for reuse of recycled water. Administrative reforms i.e. reduction in establishment by bringing out voluntary retirement schemes, non-filling up of posts falling vacant due to retirement etc., and achieving specified milestones in this regard. S Structural reforms Encouraging Public Private Partnership NOTE: Any two optional reforms to be implemented together by State & ULBs/Parastatals in each year. 10/7/2010 19 Sub Mission II Urban Poor : Sub Mission II Urban Poor i.Integrated development of slums, i.e., housing and development of infrastructure projects in the slums in the identified cities. ii. Projects involving development/improvement/maintenance of basic services to the urban poor. iii. Slum improvement and rehabilitation projects. iv. Projects on water supply/sewerage/drainage, community toilets/baths, etc. v. Houses at affordable costs for slum dwellers/ urban poor/EWS/LIG categories. vi. Construction and improvements of drains/storm water drains. vii. Environmental improvement of slums and solid waste management. viii. Street lighting. ix. Civic amenities, like community halls, child care centers, etc. x. Operation and maintenance of assets created under this component. xi. Convergence of health, education and social security schemes for the urban poor 10/7/2010 20 Integrated slum and housing development agenda : Integrated slum and housing development agenda i) Provision of shelter including up gradation & construction of new houses. ii) Provision of community toilets. iii) Provision of physical amenities like water supply, storm water drains, community bath, widening and paving of existing lanes, sewers, community latrines, street lights, etc. iv) Community Infrastructure like provision of community centres to be used for pre school education, non-formal education, adult education, recreational activities, etc. v) Community Primary Health Care Centre Buildings can be provided. vi) Social Amenities like pre-school education, non-formal education, adult education, maternity, child health and Primary health care including immunization, etc. vii) Provision of Model Demonstration Projects. viii) Sites and Services/houses at affordable costs for EWS & LIG categories. ix) Slum improvement and rehabilitation projects. x) Land acquisition cost will not be financed except for acquisition of private land for schemes/ projects in the North Eastern States & hilly States, viz., Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Jammu & Kashmir. 10/7/2010 21 Urban Governance Index : Urban Governance Index United Nations commissioned a task force to identify the indicators on good governance for select cities and do field testing and submit its report in august 2004. The idea was to put in place a good governance index to measure the quality of governance. This was done by 2 UN bodies namely, global campaign on urban governance and global urban observatory.24 cities were selected for compilation of data and field testing. In Asia Colombo was selected. Developing countries mostly from Asia and Africa constituted the majority of the cities. The select main indicator and sub indicators give an idea as to where the urban managers have to focus for a better quality of life for the urban population. 10/7/2010 22 Main indicators : Main indicators Effectiveness Equity Participation Accountability Security 10/7/2010 23 EFFECTIVENESS : EFFECTIVENESS Local government revenue per capita Ratio of actual recurrent and capital budget Local Government transfers Ratio of mandates to actual tax collection Predictability of transfers Published performance standards Customer satisfaction survey Vision statement 10/7/2010 24 EQUITY : EQUITY Citizens charter Proportion of women councilors Proportion of women in key positions Pro-poor pricing policy Street Vending 10/7/2010 25 Participation : Participation Elected council Election of Mayor Voter turnout People’s forum Civic Associations (per 10,000) 10/7/2010 26 Accountability : Accountability Formal publication of contracts, tenders, budget and accounts Control by higher levels of government Codes of conduct Facility to receive complaints Anti-corruption commission Disclosure of personal income and assets Regular independent audit 10/7/2010 27 Security : Security Crime Prevention Violence against Women Policies HIV/AIDS Policy 10/7/2010 28 Standardized service level Benchmarks : Standardized service level Benchmarks Why SSLB? The systems for measuring performance of ULBs and taking further action on them need to be institutionalized. It is therefore important that the basic minimum standard set of performance parameters are commonly understood and used by all stakeholders. Depending on the specific need additional performance parameters can be defined and used over a time period. 10/7/2010 29 Limitations in PM : Limitations in PM However, most initiatives in performance management so far have been observed to have some key limitations, viz. a) Different sets of performance indicators have been defined under different initiatives b) Even for the same performance indicator, the definition may vary or the assessment method may vary, thus inhibiting inter-city or intra-city comparisons c) Most measurement exercises have been externally driven (by agencies external to the agency responsible for delivery against those performance parameters), and therefore the key issue of ownership of performance reports d) Most performance measurement initiatives have been one-off exercises and not been institutionalized, limiting the benefits of monitoring trends in performance over time e) The process of performance measurement has not been taken further into performance measurement. 10/7/2010 30 Why benchmarking of SSLB? : Why benchmarking of SSLB? Measuring service levels of civic agencies implies measuring outcomes, and thereby indirectly also reflects on institutional capacity, financial performance and other parameters. Service level parameters can be measured either from a utility manager’s / planner’s perspective or from a citizen’s or consumer’s perspective. Further, to facilitate comparison between cities / service delivery jurisdictions, and changes in performance over time, it is important that the performance levels are benchmarked and monitored against those benchmarks. 10/7/2010 31 SSLB : SSLB The MoUD set up a core group on SSLB. This group initially came up with SSLB for 4 basic services in urban management. They are: a) Water Supply b) Sewerage c) Solid Waste Management d) Storm Water Drainage 10/7/2010 32 SSLB : SSLB Water Supply: As water supply is a basic need, emphasis has been laid on performance related to reach and access to quality service; and prevalence and effectiveness of the systems to manage the water supply networks. As financial sustainability is critical for continued effectiveness in service delivery, performance is measured on this aspect too. Indicators selected are: 2.1.1 Coverage of water supply connections 2.1.2 Per capita supply of water 2.1.3 Extent of metering of water connections 2.1.4 Extent of Non-Revenue Water 2.1.5 Continuity of water supply 2.1.6 Efficiency in redressal of customer complaints 2.1.7 Quality of water supplied 2.1.8 Cost recovery in water supply services 2.1.9 Efficiency in collection of water supply related charges 10/7/2010 33 SSLB : SSLB Waste water management (Sewerage and Sanitation): For waste water management, performance related to reach and access of the service, effectiveness of the network and environmental sustainability have been emphasized, apart from financial sustainability of operations. Indicators selected are: 2.2.1 Coverage of toilets 2.2.2 Coverage of waste water network services 2.2.3 Collection efficiency of waste water network 2.2.4 Adequacy of waste water treatment capacity 2.2.5 Quality of waste water treatment 2.2.6 Extent of reuse and recycling of waste water 2.2.7 Extent of cost recovery in waste water management 2.2.8 Efficiency in redressal of customer complaints 2.2.9 Efficiency in collection of sewerage related charges 10/7/2010 34 SSLB : SSLB Solid Waste Management: Performance related to reach and access, effectiveness of network operations and environmental sustainability have been considered, apart from financial sustainability of operations. Indicators selected are: 2.3.1 Household level coverage of Solid Waste Management services 2.3.2 Efficiency of collection of municipal solid waste 2.3.3 Extent of segregation of municipal solid waste 2.3.4 Extent of municipal solid waste recovered 2.3.5 Extent of scientific disposal of municipal solid waste 2.3.6 Extent of cost recovery in Solid Waste Management services 2.3.7 Efficiency in redressal of customer complaints 2.3.8 Efficiency in collection of SWM related user related charges 10/7/2010 35 SSLB : SSLB Storm Water Drainage: Extent of the network and effectiveness of the network are emphasized to assess storm water drainage systems performance. As this service does not yield any direct revenues, financial sustainability is not considered. Indicators selected are: 2.4.1 Coverage of Storm water drainage network 2.4.2 Incidence of water logging / flooding 10/7/2010 36 Slide 37: These parameters have been defined primarily from a utility managers’ / planners’ perspective. In other words, the parameters highlight the performance as would be monitored by the leadership / management of Urban Local Bodies or other civic agencies. These performance measurements will need to be carried out by the service delivery agencies themselves, reported to higher levels of management and also disseminated widely. Clear definitions and methodologies are expected to eliminate bias in measurement and reporting. Performance from a citizens’ or consumers’ point of view is better measured by capturing their perception, rather than data from the delivery agency. Measuring citizen’s perception can be in addition to reporting by the agency themselves, and can offer interesting insights when compared with one another.( This can be an area of research !) Performance parameters should be applied in a manner across all cities and be regularly used by all stakeholders. Practical considerations will drive frequency of measurement and reporting; and the jurisdiction of measurement and reporting, both critical aspects in performance measurement. Performance will need to be measured at a frequency higher than or at least equal to the frequency at which it will need to be reported. Frequency should be at such interval at which the variables driving the performance parameter will undergo visible change, and thereby reflect change in performance over different time periods. 10/7/2010 37 UGI : UGI Once the SSLB are in place we can develop a credible UGI to measure the efficacy of urban services provided by the ULB from a citizen point of view. For a ordinary urban citizen to relate to a UGI it may be a worthwhile proposition to develop a Ward level index of service delivery efficiency first . The proposed law on citizen participation would be more meaningful with such a ward level( Ward is the smallest unit in urban governance) benchmark index in place. 10/7/2010 38 CONCLUSION : CONCLUSION It is worthwhile to discuss different theories on urban Governance for a meaningful insight in to this fascinating subject, and it’s relevance to the Indian Urban Managers. I shall endeavor to work on this in my spare hours and for making it my personal research project with the help and support of IMA. Thank You Folks ! THE END My Grateful Thanks to: Research paper on 74th Amendment - Dr. Areeba Hameed Ministry of Urban Development press releases JNNURM technical committee reports United Nations Habitat program and field test reports Administrative Staff College of India papers on SSLB Managing Cities in Developing Countries- Miene Pieter Van Diik Urban Governance and sustainability – Jan Vranken 10/7/2010 39 My Grateful Thanks to: Research paper on 74th Amendment - Dr. Areeba Hameed Ministry of Urban Development press releases JNNURM technical committee reports United Nations Habitat program and field test reports Administrative Staff College of India papers on SSLB Managing Cities in Developing Countries- Miene Pieter Van Diik Urban Governance and sustainability – Jan Vranken You do not have the permission to view this presentation. In order to view it, please contact the author of the presentation.