Against the backdrop of many proactive urban missions launched by the Indian State over the last decade, it may be pertinent to reflect on the current ecosystem surrounding the planning of public space improvement, and public building works in cities undertaken by various state governments.
gainst the backdrop of many proactive urban missions launched by the Indian State over the last decade, it may be pertinent to reflect on the current ecosystem surrounding the planning of public space improvement, and public building works in cities undertaken by various state governments. It would also be pertinent to inquire if the state governments are hiring a larger pool of experts of the best quality from domains of architecture, urban planning, urban design, and related disciplines to produce well-planned and designed public projects.
Conversely, discussing whether architecture and allied professions in India are engaged well with public projects and the public realm is equally relevant. Over the last decade, urban corporations across India have undertaken public space improvement projects, albeit on a modest scale, under various national urban missions, and other state initiatives. However, among other aspects, uncertainties of short-lived life engulf most public projects due to political regime changes and resulting delays or haste in their implementation, which is fraught with ineffective spending of public monies and resources.
The paucity of funds and absence of sound long-term urban financing mechanisms add to the uncertain landscape. While planning public projects, urban corporations face internal challenges in integrating work between disparate government departments connected with city improvements. In turn, much-needed integrated and holistic planning action is affected. Rigid audit compliance and bureaucratic processes, intricate and opaque processes of procuring technical professional services often at the lowest cost, and complex eligibility requirements keep the prospect of engaging more professionals or firms to plan and design public space and building works at bay
In addition, most urban corporations have poor technical capacities, and only some individuals are at the helm of decision making, with little or no room for relevant technical or stakeholder perspectives. Understandably, such a complex ecosystem around the planning of public projects is unlikely to encourage a large pool of the best talent from architecture and allied professions to participate in such projects. Conversely, public projects need professional services and input from more experts. Despite this challenge, even as few architectural and planning practices strive to do public projects, the sustainability of their efforts is suspect due to the absence of a larger conducive ecosystem surrounding the planning of such projects.
However, in the recent past, a silver lining can be seen in the capacity of a few prominent Indian architecture and planning firms to navigate governmental processes and design prominent public projects of civic scale. On the other hand, while a good number of architectural practices are doing commendable innovative work in a select periphery of operations, their capacities either do not align or are inadequate to engage with the complex environment of operations surrounding the planning and implementation of public projects undertaken by urban corporations.
Even as the nature of architectural design practice can range from being a small studio to a large corporate firm, exceptions notwithstanding, most architectural and allied design practices, due to circumstances and context surrounding their operations or by choice, thrive in niche practices mainly for a private clientele. Further, to a large extent, architecture and allied design professions are also qualified by internal conversations and validations with little room for patrons’ opinions or interactions with the public realm. In effect, it is a matter of reflection if these professional domains, to a certain extent, are estranged from addressing a broader spectrum of social needs and realities of Indian cities.
The academia in these professions, too, except a few eminent schools and institutions for planning and architecture, seems to be insulated from the needs of the industry and public realm. It seems to fall short of preparing professionals with adequate skill sets to deal with real ground challenges. The absence of robust and technically well-informed systems in the government for planning public projects, coupled with challenges within design and planning professions, underscores the urgent need for reforms on both sides.
On the government’s side, there is a pressing need to build appropriate systems for planning and designing public projects. Some of the needed reforms include corrections in government urban corporations related to building, unified planning actions, decision making systems informed by technical expertise, juries or boards, technical knowledge and awareness about disciplines associated with the urban. The aim should be to reform governmental processes to create an inclusive environment that fosters greater participation of experts and ease of working around planning and designing public projects. Further, systems must be in place to ensure the continuity of public projects across the changing landscape of elected governments.
On the other hand, design and planning professions and academia need to increase their engagement with public projects and the public realm and prepare professionals with the necessary skill sets. Behind the impressive imagery of well-designed, implemented, and maintained public projects in cities such as Paris, Singapore, Berlin, or Seoul are robust institutions, technically well-informed and integrated systems, and a palpable commitment of the State to excellence in planning and building well. If anything, studying and adapting these systems to the needs, thick realities, and complexities of Indian cities is a pertinent need waiting to be addressed by the government.
Further, given the scale of pending improvement work in cities, the government could consider setting up centres for urban transformation or the ilk equipped with highly skilled professionals to deal with public projects. Such centres could have a flexible framework of operations and become nodes for the planning and implementation of public projects not limited to being advisory entities. Developing a national technical cadre in architecture, urban design, planning, and allied disciplines could also be helpful. Independent India moved through the initial phases of nationalisation and state-initiated social and public building projects and five-year plans with the impetus for regional and rural planning and related projects.
Subsequently, much later, beginning with the IT revolution and the economic liberalisation phase, substantial flows of private capital and constructions transformed some parts of Indian cities into glittering work centres and enclaves. This phase also witnessed restrained engagement of the Indian State with public projects in cities. Against this backdrop, the current phase of urbanisation has seminal value, even as the Indian government is intent on improving cities of all tiers through its urban missions. Therefore, well-planned and designed public projects on a larger scale that meet excellent standards are the need of the hour as potent agents of urban transformation. However, addressing such a pertinent need is hinged on reforming the present ecosystem surrounding the planning and design of public spaces and public building works in Indian cities.
P VENUGOPAL
Source: The Statesman, 10/12/24
