Context: 

This article is based on the news “Need to launch next phase of Smart Cities Mission: Parliamentary Committee” which was published in the Hindu. The Standing Committee on Housing and Urban Affairs recently presented a report in the Lok Sabha on “Smart Cities Mission: An Evaluation”.  

Smart Cities Mission (SCM): Current Progress

• Progress Evaluation of Smart Cities Mission:  As of December 2023
  • Total Projects and Investments: 7,970 projects worth ₹1,70,400 crore.
  • Completed Projects: 6,419 projects worth ₹1,25,105 crore.
  • Projects at Work Order Stage: 1,551 projects worth ₹45,295 crore.
• City-wise Progress Report: As of December 2023:
  • Completion Status Of Smart Cities Mission
    • Madurai: Completed 100% of projects.
    • 56 Cities: Completed more than 80% of work.
    • Cities Lagging Behind: Progress was 50% or below in 14 cities.
  • Lagging Cities: Primarily from the northeast, Union Territories, and hilly areas. For example, Gangtok, Atal Nagar, Shillong, Silvassa, Itanagar, Puducherry, Saharanpur, and Port Blair’s completion percentages ranged from 16% to 39%.
• Next Phase of Smart Cities Mission (SCM): Report emphasised the necessity to launch the next phase of Smart Cities Mission, focusing on tier-2 cities within 100 km of state capitals.

About Smart Cities Mission

• Launch: Launched in June 2015 to promote cities that offer core infrastructure, clean and sustainable environments, and a decent quality of life through smart solutions.
• City Selection: 100 cities were selected through a competitive process between January 2016 and June 2018.
• Time Frame: Cities are given a five-year period from the selection date to complete proposed projects.
• Financial Support Allocation: The union government allocated ₹48,000 crore over five years to the 100 smart cities. State governments and Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) matched the amount provided by the Union government.
  • Exceptions: 13 Himalayan and northeastern states received 90% funding from the Union government, with the remaining 10% from state and ULBs.
  • Convergence Funds: Additional resources raised through convergence, from ULBs’ own funds, grants under the Finance Commission, innovative finance mechanisms such as Municipal Bonds, other government programs and borrowings. 

Achievements of Smart Cities Mission

• Digital Transformation: Implementation of smart technologies for efficient governance and service delivery. For instance, Integrated Command and Control Centres (ICCCs) with smart features for monitoring and managing cities have been operationalised in all the 100 Smart Cities.

• Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): More than 70% of projects align with United Nations’ SDGs related to cities, clean water, clean energy, and economic growth. SCM projects have played a significant role in advancing 15 out of the 17 SDGs.
  • SDG11: Nearly 44% of projects contribute to making cities inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable.
  • Other: 13.3% projects contribute to SDG 6 (Clean water and sanitation), 8.6% to SDG 7 (Affordable and clean energy), and 6.4% to SDG 8 (Decent work and economic growth).
• Infrastructure Development: Development of core infrastructure such as roads, water supply, sewage, and solid waste management systems.
• • Improvement of urban mobility by constructing metro lines, bus rapid transit systems (BRTS), and pedestrian-friendly pathways.

Challenges Associated With Smart Cities Mission

• Mission Deadline Extension: The Smart Cities Mission supposed to conclude by June 2023 but it was extended till June 2024 to finish pending projects.
• Funding Challenges: Lakshadweep, Daman and Diu, Puducherry, and Port Blair received less than 50% of pledged central funds. In the case of State/ULB contribution, only 28 cities received 100% of their share from states/ULBs with funds released below 60% in 14 cities by states/ULBs.
• Failure in Fundraising Mechanisms:
  • Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs): Only 6% of Smart Cities Mission projects are funded through PPPs instead of the recommended 21%. About 50 cities couldn’t generate any funding through PPPs.
  • Loans: Proposed 5% funding through loans not met, except in six cities viz. Bhopal, Hubbali-Dharwad, Kochi, Visakhapatnam, Chandigarh, and Srinagar. Out of the proposed ₹9,844 crore, cities managed ₹5,298 crore (54%) through loans.
• Execution Challenges: The report highlighted that there was a lack of a robust mechanism to ensure coordination and smooth and harmonized monitoring.
  • For example, the committee noted that the frequent transfer of Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) and the lack of clear guidelines and directions for dedicated CEOs with fixed tenure by the ministry is one of the reasons for projects facing delays.
• Ineffective Advisory Forum Meetings: The committee noted that the state-level advisory forum meetings which include MP, MLA, Mayor, District Collector, and CEOs of the smart cities are not held regularly.
  • On average, 1-8 meetings have taken place in the first five years of the scheme. Further, in Amravati and Imphal, no meeting took place. 
• Absence of Master Plans: Master plans are essential for determining land and infrastructure requirements for urban use. According to a report by NITI Ayog titled “Reforms in Urban Planning Capability in India”, master plans are absent in 65 per cent of the 7,933 recognised urban entities.

Way Forward to Smart Cities Mission

• Need for Phase 2: Report stresses the necessity of initiating the next phase of SCM focusing on tier-2 cities within 100 km of state capitals. 
  • The experience and expertise gained by Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) in urban development initiatives must be leveraged for the purpose.
• Expand Role of ICCCs: The committee recommended that the role of ICCCs in cities should be expanded by enabling them to provide a variety of services in the fields of health, internal security, waste management, traffic management, disaster management, e-governance etc.

• Ensuring Long-lasting Impact: Report urged the Ministry to address issues like failure to raise funds through PPP, inter-city project implementation disparities, and governance structure deficiencies.
  •  The committee asked the government to analyse why the drive failed to raise funds and introduce remedial measures noting that government funding alone cannot meet the cost of increased infrastructure in cities.
• Separate Plan for Smaller Cities Mission: Since, even the increase in central funding to 90% from the original 50% did not yield any result, the committee observed that a separate plan be made to ensure that smaller cities like those in the northeast can reap the benefit of the scheme. 
• Need for IT Strategy and Privacy Safeguards: Various applications of ICCCs like CCTV surveillance systems, early warning and disaster response systems and other functions will generate and use large volumes of data from these varied digital sources. 
  • The Committee recommends that a robust system should be put in place to protect digital platforms from cyberattacks and to ensure that sensitive public and private data is adequately protected and safeguarded.
  • It also highlighted a need for a comprehensive framework and operation and maintenance strategies to ensure increased lifetime utility, value of infrastructure/assets and their timely upgradation.
• Governance Structure Enhancement: The committee recommended the appointment of dedicated CEOs with minimum fixed tenures for clear accountability. The inclusion of city administration, local self-government, urban development experts, and stakeholders for transparency and decision-making will further strengthen governance structure.
• International Collaboration: Smart Cities Mission’s emphasis on sustainable development offers lessons for the Global South. India is positioned to support and guide development projects in other countries, such as the Gelephu Smart City Project in Bhutan.

News Source: The Hindu