Smart Cities Mission, is an urban renewal and retrofitting program by the Government of India with the

mission to develop 100 cities across the country making them citizen friendly and sustainable. It was
launched by prime Minister Narendra Modi in IDJune, 2016, and the first batch of 20 cities were christened
as Lighthouse cities, role models for the others.

Around the world, we find multiple definitions for smart cities. The generally accepted concept is about digital
interfaces in traditional infrastructure, streamlining city operations, using data purposefully to drive decision
making and ultimately deliver a better quality of life.
Some countries like Singapore have integrated this concept exceptionally well; they’re now able to detect when
someone is smoking in prohibited areas or littering from high rise buildings.

In the Indian case however, Smart Cities seem to mean something different. I quote here from the official policy
document: “The conceptualisation varies from city to city, depending on the level of development, willingness
to change, reform, resources and aspirations of the residents. This can be a long term goal and cities can work
towards developing such comprehensive infrastructure incrementally, adding on layers of ‘smartness’.

We decided to compare two cities. Bangalore, a tier-1 city and Ranchi, a tier-2 city. We’ll look at how the
stakeholders, business, government, society have been involved and been impacted by this mission.

I would like to ask our eminent correspondent from Ranchi, Ms. Ruchika Bhartiya, a few questions about her
research on the Smart City Mission in Ranchi. Ranchi was introduced in Round-1. To reiterate, since the
government has allowed flexibility in the definition of smart cities, to deep dive let us first get a perspective on
this definition.

1. What does Smart City mean in Ranchi?

2. What projects have been awarded under this mission?

- What projects have been awarded in Bangalore under this Smart City Mission?

Vishwajith: We have some idea about smart cities. What has been the broad policy like? Vishwajith, could
you shed a little light on how the modalities of implementation are supposed to be?

Ruchika, Tanmay: what is your take on the FUNDS, Implementation of projects.

At this point I would like to ask Amisha, a prominent social activist, on the element of inclusion in smart
cities.

Ruchika and Tanmay, how is stakeholder participation defined under the smart city mission. Who are the
important players on the table; is it meant to be participative or top down?

We have seen some gaps now, let us see how to address these gaps:

- Vishwa: What gaps do you see?

- Amisha: Any thoughts on scope for improvement?
- Ruchika and Tanmay: what extra can be done to reach the ideal smart city mission?

RECOMMENDATIONS
1. More transparency needs to be generated from the g angle. Digital platform, easy documentation,
public access to data. Ranchi is a good example, let other cities follow. Also helps in avoiding delays.
2. Central nodal team.
3. Business: business should take proactive roles, not wait for the pull from the government. Identify
such areas where sustainable business models in the technology sector can be developed.
4. society: early and frequent engagement of citizen consultation, not only in project formulation but
also during implementation. Efficient grievance redressal mechanism is necessary.
5. The provision for 40% equity stake in the spv is not clear.
6. Forward looking rather than backward looking. pan-city implementation of smart solutions is crowded
out by the focus on retrofitting, redevelopment, and green field development.
7. Greater participation of the fourth estate and fifth estate
 8. Democratize the process of selecting lighthouse areas for area based development, and the specific
projects therein. The participative engagement has to be right from the planning phase, and not only
later in execution monitoring.
9. Select a few focus areas for each city – with early citizen engagement – instead of a broad focus on a
plethora of “possible” action areas.
10. Clear milestones, concrete plans and quantitative policy goals that can be tracked and monitored.
Vague policy objectives cannot be tracked?

OKAY. NOW WHAT CONCLUSION CAN WE DRAW FROM ALL THIS DISCUSSION?

If we compare Bangalore and Ranchi, we find that while there is almost NO activity in bangalore when it
comes to sanitation under the smart cities mission, three projects have been launched in ranchi under the
smart city mission. In fact, more significant work is being done by the Ranchi Municipal Corporation in the
sanitation area, which is reflected in the public perception. Let us go back to our key questions:
1. In Ranchi, smart city seems to mean infrastructural development. IN Bangalore, the smart city is
more aligned with the global definition of smart.
2. In Ranchi, projects awarded have been in the areas of