|
Context
The article explores the deeper socio-psychological and governance failures behind urban crises in Indian cities like Gurugram.
- Recurring flooding and poor civic infrastructure reveal not only technical deficiencies but also a profound neglect of public welfare and inclusive urban planning.
- The issue extends beyond privatisation, highlighting the persistence of caste-based rural mindsets within elite urban environments.
The Visible Crisis: Flooded Dreams of an “International City”
- Gurugram, dubbed the “Millennium City” and home to numerous Fortune 500 companies, faces annual urban flooding, power outages, and infrastructure breakdowns during monsoon seasons.
- This exposes a stark contradiction: despite soaring real estate prices and aspirations of global standards, the city’s basic civic amenities fail to meet residents’ expectations.
Root Cause: Mental Attitudes Over Infrastructure
- Rural mindsets persist in urban spaces like Gurugram, where village-level caste-centric attitudes continue to influence city planning.
- The public good is routinely subordinated to private interests, reflecting a deep absence of publicness—shared spaces, collective responsibility, and community welfare.
- This results in rampant individualism, encroachments, and resource misuse.
Historical Continuity of Privatisation and Exclusion
- The origins of Gurugram’s private urbanism trace back to 1981, when the Delhi Land and Finance (DLF) corporation received the first licence for private development under the Haryana Development & Regulation of Urban Areas Act (1975), starting in the village of Chakkarpur.
- The shift from rural to urban did not alter underlying social dynamics; instead, modern urban forms were imposed over regressive rural social structures, obscuring the exclusionary nature of public life.
Planning Without Public Welfare
- Land consolidation tools such as chakbandi and kilabandi are frequently misused to appropriate land for private interests, often involving illegal grabs of panchayat property.
- Digital technologies like GIS mapping, intended to improve transparency, have been manipulated by officials to serve private gains instead of public welfare.
The Myth of “Smart” Cities
- Technological solutions like CCTV cameras and command centers cannot replace the fundamental civic value of publicness in urban planning.
- Gated communities and luxury enclaves flourish at the expense of vibrant public life outside their boundaries, reflecting urban forms that perpetuate rural exclusivity.
Way Forward: Rebuilding the Idea of the Public
- Genuine urban development requires a fundamental mental shift toward public consciousness and collective responsibility, beyond simply constructing new infrastructure or deploying technology.
- The city’s residents must evolve from rural mindsets of “looking after your own” to embrace urban citizenship, which values shared spaces, inclusivity, and public welfare.
|
Latest News
General Studies