Release of Survey Results

3:00 to 4:00 PM IST,

28th February 2017
Press Club of India, Delhi
India’s Cities are in bad shape

Floods in Chennai Landfill fire in Mumbai

Air pollution and traffic in Delhi Polluted and burning lakes in Bengaluru
POOR QUALITY OF LIFE MAY BE EXPERIENCED IN THE FORM OF:

• WATER SCARCITY
• POWER CUTS
• SAFETY
• AIR POLLUTION QUALITY OF LIFE

CITY-SYSTEMS ARE LAWS, POLICIES AND CITY - SYSTEMS

PROCESSES IN RESPECT OF :
• SPATIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN STANDARDS
• FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
• SKILLS AND CAPABILITIES OF STAFF
• TECHNOLOGY AND PROCESSES
• QUALITY AND POWERS OF POLITICAL LEADERS
• TRANSPARENCY
• ACCOUNTABILITY FOR PERFORMANCE AND
SERVICE LEVELS
• CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
The City-Systems framework
The City-Systems framework is a new way of thinking
about lingering challenges that plague our cities in three specific
ways.

1 Focuses on root causes rather than symptoms

2 Recognizes the need for a systems approach

3 Facilitates periodic measurement of progress

The Annual Survey of India’s City-Systems (ASICS)
1. Evaluates 21 cities in 18 States across India objectively to assess their ability to provide
citizens a high quality of life – a health diagnostic of our cities

2. Looks at over 80 parameters spanning the four City-System components

1. Laws, policies and rules
2. Government reports
3. Budget documents
4. Govt. websites

3. Designed to help city leaders identify systemic issues in urban governance and chart a
reforms roadmap that fits their city

4. Puts City-Systems data at the heart of reforms

 City ASICS Score Rank Rank 2015

ASICS 2016 Thiruvananthapuram

Pune
4.4
4.2
1
2
1
4
Overall Scores Kolkata 4.1 3 3
Mumbai 4.1 4 2
India’s cities scored between Hyderabad 3.9 5 6
Bhopal 3.7 6 5
2.1 and 4.4 out of a total of 10. Contrast Kanpur 3.6 7 9
this with London and New York, scoring 9.4 and
Chennai 3.6 8 8
9.9 respectively, and it becomes clear that our
cities need to strengthen their foundations – Delhi 3.6 9 7
quality of our laws, policies and institutions Bhubaneswar 3.5 10 18
significantly to deliver a high quality of life to all Patna 3.4 11 11
citizens. Lucknow 3.4 12 10
Ranchi 3.3 13 14
Ahmedabad 3.3 14 16
Raipur 3.3 15 13
Bengaluru 3.3 16 12
Over the last four years and editions Surat 3.2 17 15
of ASICS, our cities have continued to Dehradun 3.1 18 17
score low indicating that progress, on Ludhiana 3 19 19
fixing City-Systems, has been slow. Jaipur 2.7 20 20
Chandigarh 2.1 21 21
London 9.3
 ASICS 2016
Highlights

• Thiruvananthapuram city retained its number one position in 2016

• Pune came in at second, up two ranks over 2015 and Kolkata, third, same as 2015

• The biggest gainer – Bhubaneswar, 10th rank (+8 ranks over 2015)
• This was on the back of a slew of reforms such as instituting Municipal cadres, tiered spatial planning
even at the ward level and a single window clearance process for development projects in conformity
with plans

• The biggest loser – Bengaluru, 16th rank (-4 compared to 2015)

• Score remained the same but increases in scores for other cities pushed it lower

• Other notable mentions –

• Jaipur benefited from Rajasthan passing the Rajasthan Urban Land (Certification of Titles) Bill that
enabled better urban land utilisation while Chennai lost points as it turned back to the system of having
indirect Mayoral elections
INSIGHT 1: Urban Planning & Design is the weakest of the 4 City-
Systems in India’s cities
Poor urban planning can cost a
country 3% of its GDP.

No Indian city looks prepared to

implement Spatial Development
Plans successfully or deter plan
violations (except for Delhi, no
city is required by law to have
ward level plans)
INSIGHT 2: Our cities face a severe ‘systems’ problem. None fare
well across all ’City-Systems’ components

London
UPD – 9.6 UCR – 9.7

TAP – 8.2 ELPR – 10.0

New York
UPD – 9.9 UCR – 9.8

TAP – 9.6 ELPR – 10.0

INSIGHT 3: Larger cities with stronger and sustainable finances have relatively
weak city leadership (Mayors) and levels of devolution. It is the opposite in
smaller cities.
INSIGHT 4: Our cities are not financially self-sustainable - Many cities
do not even generate enough own revenue to cover staff salaries

In 11 out of the 21 ASICS cities,

salary as a proportion of own
revenues has increased from
108% in 2013 to 129% in 2015.
Cities need to generate far
higher levels of own revenues to
meet their growing needs.

ALL 108% 101% 129%

INSIGHT 5: Weak finances, less investments for the future - Smaller cities,
which will be at the forefront of future urbanisation, invest significantly less
 Urban Planning
& Design
Poor urban planning can cost a country 3% of its GDP.
No Indian city looks prepared to implement Spatial Development Plans successfully or deter
plan violations – scores on these aspects range from 0 to 1.8 compared with 9.1 to 10 for London & New York

• Tiered and participatory spatial planning is virtually absent

• Only one city, Delhi has ward level plans

• Institutional capacity, for effective implementation and evaluation of plans, is lacking

 Urban Planning
& Design
• Most of our planning laws are outdated
• Except for 3 cities, all laws are from the pre liberalisation era, a time since when urban India has grown
several times in size
 Urban Capacities
& Resources
Weak Finances - ASICS cities generate just 37% of the
money that they spend leaving them heavily
dependent on States and stifling their capacity to
invest adequately in infrastructure and services

Only 9 cities - Ahmedabad, Bengaluru, Bhubaneswar,

Delhi, Hyderabad, Kolkata, Mumbai and Pune
generate more than 33% (own revenue) of the amount
they spend.
Empowered &
Legitimate Political
Representation
Of the 80 million residents in the ASICS
cities, 46 million are governed by an
indirectly elected Mayor with a tenure of
2.5 years or fewer, an aspect that
significantly weakens city leadership
Empowered &
Legitimate Political
Representation
Lower citizen interest in City
elections
Municipal election turnouts, when compared
with state elections, are lower by 9% on average
and up to 26% lower (Ranchi). This figure, when
compared to Parliamentary elections is 11% and
at the bottom, is lower by 30% in Surat
Empowered & Legitimate Gender representation in city leadership –
• In cities with 33% reservation for women in the
Political Representation Municipal Council, the average proportion of
female Councillors is 39%.
• Bhubaneswar, Thiruvananthapuram and
Mumbai stand out among cities with 50%
reservation for women.
Transparency, Accountability
& Participation
Open Government
• Enactment of Public Disclosure Law and Community Participation Law, mandated under JNNURM to promote transparency and accountability, is still
an unfinished reform agenda. Nine cities haven’t notified either of the laws till date.
• No city has made available their internal audit report

Grievance Redress
• Thiruvananthapuram is the only city that has an Ombudsman for complaints regarding service delivery
• Only Hyderabad and Pune conduct citizen satisfaction surveys

Participation
• Indian cities have hardly utilised the spirit of volunteering among its citizens. However, things are starting to look better - while only six cities
crowdsourced goodwill in 2015, in the last one year, four more cities - Bhubaneswar, Chennai, Hyderabad and Ludhiana joined the e ort. This could,
possibly, be driven by initiatives such as Swachhata, Smart Cities Mission and AMRUT.
• True to the spirit of deepening urban governance as envisaged in the 74th CAA, Hyderabad is the only city that has constituted Area Sabhas in all
wards. To an extent, so has Pune, being the only city that allows its people a say in city projects through participatory budgeting.
ASICS 2016 – Delhi
City Ranks
1
UPD Scores
3.7 Mumbai
City Ranks
1
UCR Scores
5.2

UPD SCORES Bhubaneswar

Kolkata
Hyderabad
2
3
4
3.1
3
2.9
Pune
Delhi
Surat
2
3
4
4.6
4.5
4.1
Chennai 5 2.9 Ahmedabad 5 3.8
Jaipur 6 2.9 Kolkata 6 3.4
Bengaluru 7 2.7 Chennai 7 3.4
Kanpur 8 2.6 Ranchi 8 3.4
Dehradun 9 2.6 Patna 9 3.3
Mumbai 10 2.5 Hyderabad 10 3.2
Thiruvananthapuram 11 2.4 Bhubaneswar 11 3.2
Bhopal 12 2.4 Thiruvananthapuram 12 2.6
Lucknow 13 2.4 Kanpur 13 2.5
Ahmedabad 14 2.4 Bhopal 14 2.4
Surat 15 2.4 Bengaluru 15 2.4
Patna 16 2.2 Chandigarh 16 2.4
Ludhiana 17 2.2 Lucknow 17 2.2
Pune 18 1.9 Jaipur 18 1.9
Ranchi 19 1.8 Dehradun 19 1.6
Raipur 20 1.8 Ludhiana 20 1.6
Chandigarh 21 0.6 Raipur 21 1.4
London 9.6 London 9.7
New York 9.9 New York 9.8
ASICS 2016 –
Delhi
City Ranks
1
UPD Scores
3.7 Mumbai
City Ranks
1
UCR Scores
5.2

UCR SCORES
Bhubaneswar
Kolkata
Hyderabad
2
3
4
3.1
3
2.9
Pune
Delhi
Surat
2
3
4
4.6
4.5
4.1
Chennai 5 2.9 Ahmedabad 5 3.8
Jaipur 6 2.9 Kolkata 6 3.4
Bengaluru 7 2.7 Chennai 7 3.4
Kanpur 8 2.6 Ranchi 8 3.4
Dehradun 9 2.6 Patna 9 3.3
Mumbai 10 2.5 Hyderabad 10 3.2
Thiruvananthapuram 11 2.4 Bhubaneswar 11 3.2
Bhopal 12 2.4 Thiruvananthapuram 12 2.6
Lucknow 13 2.4 Kanpur 13 2.5
Ahmedabad 14 2.4 Bhopal 14 2.4
Surat 15 2.4 Bengaluru 15 2.4
Patna 16 2.2 Chandigarh 16 2.4
Ludhiana 17 2.2 Lucknow 17 2.2
Pune 18 1.9 Jaipur 18 1.9
Ranchi 19 1.8 Dehradun 19 1.6
Raipur 20 1.8 Ludhiana 20 1.6
Chandigarh 21 0.6 Raipur 21 1.4
London 9.6 London 9.7
New York 9.9 New York 9.8
ASICS 2016 – City
Thiruvananthapuram
Ranks
1
ELPR Scores
6.4
City
Thiruvananthapuram
Ranks
1
TAP Sores
6.2

ELPR SCORES Kolkata

Raipur
Ranchi
2
3
4
6
5.9
5.5
Hyderabad
Bengaluru
Pune
2
3
4
6.2
5.4
5.1
Pune 5 5.1 Bhopal 5 5
Dehradun 6 5 Kanpur 6 5
Chennai 7 4.8 Lucknow 7 4.4
Bhopal 8 4.7 Raipur 8 4.2
Mumbai 9 4.6 Kolkata 9 4.1
Patna 10 4.6 Ludhiana 10 4.1
Kanpur 11 4.4 Bhubaneswar 11 4
Lucknow 12 4.4 Mumbai 12 3.9
Ludhiana 13 4.1 Patna 13 3.4
Ahmedabad 14 4 Chennai 14 3.3
Surat 15 3.8 Ahmedabad 15 3.1
Delhi 16 3.7 Dehradun 16 3
Jaipur 17 3.7 Surat 17 2.7
Bhubaneswar 18 3.6 Ranchi 18 2.6
Hyderabad 19 3.3 Chandigarh 19 2.5
Chandigarh 20 3 Delhi 20 2.4
Bengaluru 21 2.6 Jaipur 21 2.2
London 10 London 8.2
New York 10 New York 9.6
ASICS 2016 –
City
Thiruvananthapuram
Ranks
1
ELPR Scores
6.4
City
Thiruvananthapuram
Ranks
1
TAP Sores
6.2

TAP SCORES
Kolkata
Raipur
Ranchi
2
3
4
6
5.9
5.5
Hyderabad
Bengaluru
Pune
2
3
4
6.2
5.4
5.1
Pune 5 5.1 Bhopal 5 5
Dehradun 6 5 Kanpur 6 5
Chennai 7 4.8 Lucknow 7 4.4
Bhopal 8 4.7 Raipur 8 4.2
Mumbai 9 4.6 Kolkata 9 4.1
Patna 10 4.6 Ludhiana 10 4.1
Kanpur 11 4.4 Bhubaneswar 11 4
Lucknow 12 4.4 Mumbai 12 3.9
Ludhiana 13 4.1 Patna 13 3.4
Ahmedabad 14 4 Chennai 14 3.3
Surat 15 3.8 Ahmedabad 15 3.1
Delhi 16 3.7 Dehradun 16 3
Jaipur 17 3.7 Surat 17 2.7
Bhubaneswar 18 3.6 Ranchi 18 2.6
Hyderabad 19 3.3 Chandigarh 19 2.5
Chandigarh 20 3 Delhi 20 2.4
Bengaluru 21 2.6 Jaipur 21 2.2
London 10 London 8.2
New York 10 New York 9.6
Reforms
Roadmap - UPD
Reforms
Roadmap - UCR
Reforms
Roadmap - ELPR
Reforms
Roadmap - TAP
Thank You

For more information, contact:

Anil Nair| anil.nair@janaagraha.org | 09871916608

Vivek Anandan Nair| vivek.nair@janaagraha.org | 09740469944