ACCCRN India: Synthesis Report – Volume I
38
has led to reduction in per capita availability as well as access to services over last several decades. The cities
have neither inancial resources nor capacity to expand the infrastructure and lifeline services, nor were
they able to leverage investments due to the limited autonomy.
The following challenges have to be addressed to retroit the cities to make them provide lifeline
infrastructure to all. Bringing together different stakeholders for
paradigm shift in Urban planning towards sustainability and
resilience building including — Integrating land use and service networks
— Matching demand and supply of resources water, land, energy etc. under evolving
urbanisation and climate change environments
Uniied management of resources, infrastructure and services at city level
Inclusive growth and universal access along with cost recovery at city level
Devolving roles to neighbourhoods communities as well as partnership models, wherever viable.
Shift towards more intensive use of public services, especially in transportation to reduce
need for augmentation of infrastructure Leveraging investments for infrastructure building,
under stressed and subsidised cost recovery environments
Integrating eficiency improvement including usage eficiency improvement, loss reduction, reuse etc.
along with augmenting sources of water and energy Decongestion and allocation of Space for common
infrastructure especially the road network and in core city areas under very high land price situation.
3.4 GOVERNANCE ISSUES
The JNNURM provided an opportunity for implementing some of the important urban reforms envisaged in the
74th Constitutional amendment. However, the pace of actual implementation of reforms is quite diverse
across the states. The Urban Local Bodies continue to depend on the central and state funds for not only
meeting the capital costs of infrastructure, but also for maintaining the services due to high subsidies.
The ULBS are still incapable or not empowered to ix tariffs due to a mix of administrative as well as political
challenges.
Performance incentives need to be underlined, especially since the service level benchmarking efforts
have been initiated under JNNURM. With very limited data availability, performance metrics are dificult to
design and implement under prevailing overstressed and decrepit infrastructure and monitoring systems.
Three major options exist for improving the eficiencies in service delivery. They include extensive use of
technologies automation, monitoring, management etc. to increase eficiency of the staff and resources,
private public partnerships for selective management of infrastructure services and increasing staff
strengths to match the growing city population.
Some efforts have been done under JNNURM in organizational restructuring to improve eficiencies, but
without radical revamping of the system and extensive use of technologies in all sectors, no major changes
are possible. The city administration is constrained by inancial and capacity bottlenecks that limit possibilities
for major restructuring efforts.
Duplication and fragmentation of roles between different institutions in control of resources,
management of infrastructure and services currently constrain the urban system management.
These roles are spread unevenly spread across ULBs, para-statal organizations and the state governments
resulting in inability of any agency to manage even simple services autonomously. This especially
felt in meeting the energy and water demands, especially in peripheral areas. Coherent action
among policy makers, regulators and implementers and other stakeholders is another issue limiting the
urban planning and management. Generic policies recommended by the central government are often
cannot be contextualized and local policy making mechanisms are weak due to capacity constraints at
the city levels. This is especially true in case of master planning process as well as building rules, especially
cities located in risk prone and resource scare environments and facing challenges of high growth.
Successful models for direct stakeholder involvement starting from settlement levels are yet to emerge, even
though it is highlighted in 74th CAA and some of the states have enacted rules for community engagement,
but these efforts are in early stage of evolution.
ACCCRN India: Synthesis Report – Volume I
39
CLiMAte
ChAnGe
ChALLenGes
4
ACCCRN India: Synthesis Report – Volume I
40
4.1 HISTORIC DATA OF TEMPERATURE CHANGES