EVALUATION OF URBAN RENEWAL PROJECTS UNDER JNNURM FOR SUSTAINABLE URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN INDIA

Abstract

India is a developing nation. However, urban infrastructure facilities are still poor across the country. Government of India has taken initiative and introduced many scheme/program through Five Year Plans (FYP) since first FYP (1951-56). There are policies and action plans for improvement of urban facilities. Until now, little positive impacts of the government scheme are seen in terms of getting benefits to citizens. Urban infrastructure facilities are still poor across the country, the identified 53 towns in India as per Census, 2011 are set to continue on the path of fast urbanization. On the other hand, there is pressure on the urban services in the sectors of water supply, waste water management, storm water and drainage and solid waste management, which is challenge of urbanization in India. Housing for urban poor is another issue, slum population has reached almost 6.54 Crore in India (Census, 2011). These slum populations do not have proper sanitation and other urban services. In this context, Government of India has launched Jawaharlal Nehru Nation Urban Renewal Mission (JnNURM) to improve the quality of life and infrastructure in Indian cities. The JnNURM has been launched by Government of India to address the urban issues in 65 cities across the country. This program was launched on 3rd December, 2005 by prime minister of India with an investment laid out planned of Rs. 50,000 Crore from central government and Rs. 50,000 Crore from state government during short period of 7 years. The central government has encouraged the state government and Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) to implement the reforms aimed at strengthening the governance as well as ensuring that the mechanisms are functions efficiently and effectively for delivery of the urban services under this program. The areas of water supply, waste water management, storm water and drainage, preservation of water body, solid waste management, other urban transport, parking, urban renewal, heritage development areas, Mass Rapid Transport System (MRTS), and road/flyover/RoB are focused under the sub-mission of Urban Infrastructure Governance (UIG) of JnNURM, whereas the other sub-mission (Basic Service to Urban Poor) focuses on housing for urban poor. The aim of the research is to make the poor performing cities learn from the better performing cities for sustainable urban infrastructure development in India under JnNURM. This study evaluates the completed project in the sectors of water supply, waste water management, storm water and drainage, and solid waste management under UIG sub-mission as well as housing for urban poor under BSUP sub-mission of JnNURM mission, to bring about sustainable urban iv infrastructure development in India. The comparative analysis among 65 JnNURM cities is conducted in terms of implementation of reforms and projects under the two sub-missions. Surat, Pimpri Chinchwad and Kolkata cities have been selected for case study to evaluate the completion of UIG and BSUP projects in the selected sectors. Imphal city is a special case study, as it has not performed well in the first phase of JnNURM. The problems and issue in Imphal leading to poor performance are thoroughly analyzed in the context of best practices followed by better performing cities in order to ensure better implementation of next phase of JnNURM in Imphal. Special case study of Singapore city has been carried out as it is one of the best performing cities in the selected sectors of urban services. It has not only achieved best practices in sectors of water supply, waste water management, storm water and drainage and solid waste management, but also Housing for urban poor has been provided in a sustainable manner by Public Utilities Board in Singapore. The comparative analysis of JnNURM cities has carried out considering mandatory reforms at state and city level as well as the optional reforms at city level. The performance of cities is dependent on good governance like that found in, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, and Andhra Pradesh, who have achieved highest performance whereas Nagaland, Goa and Jammu and Kashmir have achieved least number of reforms at state level. Vishakhapatnam, Surat, Vadodara, Indore, Pune (Pimpri Chinchwad) cities have achieved highest number of mandatory reform at city level, whereas Jamshedpur, Ranchi and Panaji city have achieved least number of mandatory reforms. Kolkata, Asansol and Mumbai have achieved highest number of optional reforms at city level while cities of Pondicherry, Imphal and Kohima least number of optional reforms. Mumbai, Kolkata and Delhi have achieved highest number of E-governance component at city, while Nainital, Shimla and Panaji have achieved least number of E-governance components. As far as JnNURM is concerned, mandatory state level reforms are fully achieved by Gujarat, Tamil Nadu while poor implementation is achieved by Goa and Jammu and Kashmir. Best implementing city level mandatory reform are achieved by Vishakhapatnam and Surat cities while poor implementation is achieved by Ranchi and Panaji. In the case of optional reform at city level, best implementation is achieved by Kolkata and Asansol cities while poor implementation is achieved by Imphal and Kohima v In comparative analysis of sectors of UIG projects, water supply, waste water management, storm water and drainage has highest number of approved DPRs and investment while these are lowest in sectors of urban renewal, heritage development area and preservation of water body. Comparison of UIG project implementation at state level reveals that, West Bengal, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu have maximum number of projects while Punjab, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh have less number of projects. Comparison of UIG project implementation at city level in 65 cities reveals that, Kolkata, Bangalore, and Chennai have been more number of projects while Ludhiana, Jamshedpur and Raipur have implemented less number of projects. Comparison of BSUP projects implementation at state level reveals that, Maharashtra, West Bengal and Andhra Pradesh have approved highest number of dwelling units while Tripura, Sikkim and Goa have approved lowest number of dwelling units. Comparison of slum population as per Census, 2011 reveals that, UT of Chandigarh has highest percentage while lowest is in Tripura and Odisha. Cities of Kolkata, Hyderabad and Delhi have approved (high numbers) 131009 dwelling unit, 78746 dwelling units and 74312 dwelling units with an investment of Rs. 3382.52 Crore, Rs. 1884.95 Crore and Rs. 3257.72 Crore respectively. And City of Gangtok, Panaji, and Haridwar have approved (low numbers) 254 dwelling units, 115 dwelling units and 96 dwelling units with an investment of Rs. 33.58 Crore, 10.22 Crore and 3.62 Crore respectively. On the basis of better performing in term of having maximum number of project implementation as well as reforms, Surat, Kolkata and Pimpri Chinchwad (Pune) cities have been selected for detailed study. Evaluation has been carried out in sectors of “water supply”, “waste water management”, “storm water and drainage” and “solid waste management” under Urban Infrastructure and Governance (UIG) and “housing for urban poor” under Basic service to Urban poor (BSUP) in the completed project. Household surveys and Focus Group Discussions (FGD) with the beneficiaries has revealed the different outcome of the projects from various sectors. Surat has done well in the water supply sector in the newly developing areas of Vesu and Pal, while Pimpri Chinchwad has done well in the ward No. 19. In case of Kolkata city, water supply projects and waste water management projects have done well at Salt Lake. Under BSUP project, Pimpri Chinchwad has done well in housing for urban poor through redevelopment in Nigadi, while Kolkata has done well and was appreciated by beneficiaries at vi Chandanagar where In-situ project was implemented, whereas in Surat BSUP projects have been implemented through relocation at Kosad (North zone), but beneficiaries have not appreciated the projects due to lack of sufficient urban services. Cities are benefited from JnNURM at different levels due to different levels of performance under both sub-missions (UIG & BSUP). In this context, the aim of the research is to evaluate whether the targeted populations in the cities of Surat, Kolkata and Pimpri Chinchwad are getting benefits from the completed projects in the areas of water supply, waste water management, storm water and drainage, solid waste management, and housing for urban poor. Appraisal of level of implementation of JnNURM reforms was another evaluation to find out the city performance as part of this research work. Various tools and techniques such as Focus Group Discussion (FGD), Photographs, Field Observation, Key Interviews with Implementing Agencies, and Households survey was used to carry out the research appraisal. The statistical analyses of secondary data from various sources at national level looks into the JnNURM physical progress, financial progress, and reforms status whereas at city level the analysis looks into city profiles describing advantage and disadvantage of projects, and planning prospect apart from the projects status. The quantitative and qualitative analysis of data from household survey considered various parameters such as (for water supply) - source of water, water quality, duration of water supply, satisfaction level, and so on, (for waste water management sector) - sewerage connection, satisfaction level, practice of waste water recycle at home and so on (for storm water and drainage sector) - drainage system, storm water disposal mechanism, flooding problems, frequency of flooding, clogging of drains, and satisfaction level of municipalities, and for solid waste management sector parameters were door to door collection, types of disposal, segregation of solid waste, frequency of collection, environment and aesthetic and so on. The pictures of pre and post project situations of the above parameters were compared to finding out the impacts of projects. The major households survey findings in Surat city were (1) Pipe line water supply coverage had been extended to previous uncovered areas within city limits in west zone and south west zone while duration of daily water supply has increased in the post project stage as compared to pre projects stage, (2) Water quality had slightly improved at post projects stages in comparison to the pre projects situation in the west zone and south west zone whereas in east zone water quality remains the same, (3) Satisfaction level of water supply in vii Surat Municipal Corporation for water supply is slightly satisfaction at post projects stage in compared to pre projects situation, (4) Sewer line had been covered in the localities of west zone and south west zone where no sewer line at pre projects situation and, (5) The waste water management projects have observed positive impacts in the benefited localities by having proper sewer connection, (6) Water logging is still observed in some of benefited localities in central zone during raining season, (7) Door to door collection for municipal solid waste is being done through private agencies and satisfaction level is high at post projects stages in comparison to pre projects situation, (8) overall littering is less practice even in the market areas (vegetable market, and fish market) as beneficiaries are well aware of municipal solid waste management practice however in few colonies in east and south east littering of solid waste along roads and streets is observed, (9) Beneficiaries of BSUP projects (group housing) at Kosad in north zone have not been improved urban services. Shortages of water, unclean surroundings, poor esthetic, less job prospect are common issues in Surat city and (10) Community participation in project implementation was total absence. The beneficiary had no involvement in planning, implementation stages as far as JnNURM projects was concern. The survey finding in Pimpri Chinchwad city were (1) Duration of water Supply duration has increased and the quality as well as quantity of water supply has increased in benefited localities in post projects stages in comparison to the pre projects situation, (2) The beneficiaries have appreciated the works done under JnNURM projects as far as water supply projects are concerned, (3) Waste water management projects have brought tremendous changes in terms of collection through sewer line and coverage to the targeted population. There has been a positive impact on water body in urban areas as discharge into river and drains has stop, (4) Storm water drainage lines are seen overflowing during rainy season in projects localities at post projects stage, (5) Solid waste collection is being done by Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation and collection is slightly improved in post projects stage in comparison to post projects, (6) More number of dustbins have been installed around the city and at every corner in residential colonies and beneficiaries are using them, (7) In regard to BSUP projects in Pimpri Chinchwad city, the beneficiaries have appreciated and bring the changes the quality of life at post projects stages in comparison to pre projects, (8) Involvement of community participation is nil as far as JnNURM projects was concern. The survey finding in Kolkata city were (1) Water supply duration is almost remained the same in both pre and post projects situation. The beneficiaries had responded that there was no change in terms of water quality and quantity and so on, (2) There is no improvement in terms of waste water viii collection in post projects stage as compared to pre projects situation, (3) As far as storm water and drainage project was concerns, there is no positive impact on urban environment or citizen, (4) The solid waste collection is done through private agencies and door to door collection is not being practice at post projects. Interventions of JnNURM Projects for solid waste management litter have had no impact in Kolkata city, (5) BSUP projects have improved the quality of urban poor under In-Situ projects in various ULBs within Kolkata Metropolitan Region. The beneficiaries have appreciated the In-Situ projects in Kolkata city. The beneficiaries have benefited at different levels depending on the nature of projects. The creation of infrastructure facilities like laying pipe line for water supply and sewer line have directly impact on the beneficiaries whereas the renewal of the existing infrastructure facilities such as renovation of pumping station and replacement of old machine has less impact on the beneficiaries. In comparison of the three cities (Surat, Pimpri Chinchwad and Kolkata), Pimpri Chinchwad city has better performance for BSUP projects in terms of planning aspect and service facilities whereas Kolkata city is better performance for In-Situ projects. Relocated of slum dwellers in Surat city is facing a lot of problems in terms of urban services and job prospects. The lessons learnt from the study are that, urban infrastructure development planning process suffered on account of the following; (1) lack of integrated planning at city level and regional level, (2) absence of community participation in planning, (3) exclusion of peri-urban areas, (4) process heavy and lack of coordination, (5) failure to adopt service benchmark, (6) lack of capacity, (7) lack of different approaches towards reforms and (8) delay in the implementation of 74th Constitutional Amendment Act (CAA). In this context, strategies required to carry out projects effectively, in time to ensure the sustainable urban infrastructure in India have been drawn with the help of useful inference from the best practice of better performing cities such as Surat, Pimpri Chinchwad (Pune) and Kolkata. Based on the study, the following strategy have been developed – (1) Reform strategy to be adopted for Urban Renewal Project, (2) Short term Plan Strategy for JnNURM Mandatory Reform, (3) Medium term Plan Strategy for JnNURM reform, (4) Peel Experience and Reflect Learning (PEARL) Model for JnNURM, (5) Storm Water System Plan Strategy, and (6) Strategy for BSUP Projects. Along the same line of these strategies, the policy has suggested the “Capacity Building at city level” which is highly required for sustaining the urban infrastructure development in India.