Section – 2
INTRODUCTION
Preamble
The people of India are acutely aware of the fact that the current status of the country's development, impressive though it is lately, has not touched and included many sections of the society. A debate is currently raging as to which inclusive development model is best suited for the country. Each of the proposed models is claimed to be the best there is. But, no single model, no matter how great its qualities and attributes are, can be expected to prove equally applicable and successful in every Indian region or state, given the proverbial diversity of the country. It is therefore apparent that each region/state must evolve its own development model most appropriate for its unique set of eco-socio-economic conditions, culture, geography, etc. It would however be desirable and helpful to have a conceptual framework that could catalyze the emergence of an appropriate, comprehensive, and inclusive development plan.
Also apparent is the fact that the process of preparing an appropriate regional development plan is an extremely complex endeavor, considering all the environmental, social/cultural, economic and other hurdles that would need to be crossed along the way. It would take 'adaptive leadership' to undertake and complete this challenge.
This study that the author undertook a few years back has two aims: (1) to provide a conceptual framework that could kick-off the preparation of a development plan at the regional level, and (2) to propose an adaptive methodology for the process.
Motivation behind the idea
Today, despite radical changes in the global economic climate, migration from developing nations to more developed nations continues, although somewhat curtailed, and perhaps alleviated by reverse migration. Also, within any nation, motivation for migration from the villages to small towns, and from small towns to large urbanized areas continues to exist because of the promise of prosperity through participation in growing urban economies, despite the appalling quality of life urban areas may offer, at least initially, for the poor.
Fig. 2.1: Typical living quarters in big cities for Chinese migrant workers. (Image courtesy: www.un.org)
Fig. 2.2: Slums of Chennai, Tamil Nadu, set up in the city's waterways, risking occasional floods and fires and adding to the pollution. (Image Courtesy: Google Images)
Porter (2001) of Harvard University argues that with the advent of globalization, while sound macroeconomic policy (good budgets and regulation of interest rates and control of inflation) is necessary, it is good microeconomic policy that creates economic prosperity.
Since migration of skills has been contributing to the economic prosperity of the cities, some governments have been sponsoring such migration or urbanization. As cities grew inexorably, the demands placed upon the region's economy and ecology increased rapidly, creating quality of life issues among city dwellers, compelling governments to focus more on the development of people-related infrastructure in the cities. The purported reason has been that city dwellers contribute most to the GDP and they demand better facilities in return from the governments. This caused inequitable resource allocation for rural development triggering a vicious cycle: rural-urban migration, urban degradation, government response, increased urban economic activity, more "opportunity migration," and so on. This pattern of urban expansion in the developed world is believed to have stabilized, but in the process has created both mega-cities as well as unsustainable suburban sprawl.
Fig. 2.3: Push-Pull Dynamics (Image Courtesy: Google Images)
Mega-cities, no doubt, bear a great testimony to human spirit, enterprise, endeavor and ingenuity. These aspects of human creativity are challenged to greater heights by the need to address the inevitable sustainability issues arising out of the developmental practices that have led to the existence of such mega-cities. Policy makers should have realized that the problems of the mega-cities model could indeed have been avoided in the first place, if only economic activities and opportunities had not been concentrated in the big cities but had created geographically decentralized political economies.
In fact, urbanization as a social and economic phenomenon should not be confined to mega-cities. It would be far more effective and viable if it were planned to take place equitably over the entire region/country, at various geographical locations including smaller towns and cities. Such an approach, in addition to being more socio-economically sustainable, would involve a more tolerable environmental cost.
Besides economic opportunities, there are other important societal and political considerations as well. In the modern technological era, every citizen in developing nations becomes immediately aware of the quality of life offered by developed nations to their citizens. Nilekani (2008) quotes Sir Nicholas Stern, a former World Bank Chief Economist as remarking, "Even in villages, television is changing attitudes quite rapidly. It is making people conscious of what life is outside the walls of their village." Subramanian (2007), a former Cabinet Secretary, Government of India says, "The vastly different Indians [the haves and have-nots among the urban dwellers] cannot coexist peacefully as a democracy for long……In the era when information is easily transmitted to the remotest area and awareness levels have grown, this contrast [between rich and poor] is not sustainable for long…..The winds of change have come and can no more be resisted. Changes of one sort or the other will, willy-nilly, take place…. In the absence of rapid economic development in India's rural areas, renewed questioning of the democratic process would take place, a fact well known to the nation's political decision makers. Therefore, the opportunity for rapid development was not to be missed. The leadership at the state level has not only to recognize this, but to act."
The Indian experience has been no different. India's metros and other large cities have been offering the most of the economic opportunities. Modern communication technologies have been informing the people even in remote areas of the quality of life people in big cities enjoy. Sooner or later, they start feeling the natural human urge to earn and enjoy such lifestyle. Unfortunately, in today's non-urban and rural India, creation of adequate facilities for such lifestyle is economically not viable, and even if such facilities are made available, the local people cannot afford to pay for them. Eventually, most of them start feeling the pressures of the rural-urban divide and at one stage choose to cross the divide into a large city in search of better livelihood and an urban lifestyle. Therefore, large Indian cities have witnessed rural-urban migration and have had to bear the brunt of related urbanization issues.
It is apparent that development of infrastructure in such urban centers is not coping with the scale and rapidity of migration despite the fact that much of the government's resources have so far been committed to further development of these centers. This has left very little resources for the rural and remote areas. The main reasons for this are (a) urban centers purportedly contribute more to the GDP, and (b) current systems tend to under-value the wealth created in rural areas. This, of course, is the reality of our times, but has caused inequitably poor rural development. This fact has not been lost on the non-urban and rural folk. Sadly, therefore, their consequent pent-up frustration has found such extreme expressions as farmer suicides and militancy. Only an inclusive development plan for India can squarely address this grave problem. And, fundamental to inclusive development is the recognition that a human being has the same absolute value to the society irrespective of where one lives or how much one contributes to the economy.
It has thus become imperative for India to plan and meet people's aspirations and avoid potential strife and/or political destabilization.
It is in this context that this presentation proposes a strategic land and infrastructure reform, and suggests an inclusive and sustainable growth model that seeks to mitigate the current vicious cycle caused by unchecked urbanization trends focusing on mega-cities. This reform should be planned at the local level and strategically integrated into a regional development plan.
According to Heifetz, Linsky and Grashow (1998, 2002, 2009), the preparation of a regional development plan cannot be treated as a 'technical problem' (which have been solved previously and existing solution can be applied to a new situation as well) but should be treated as an 'adaptive challenge' (which involves collective efforts by all the stakeholders to evolve a unique solution for each situation). Even India's democratically elected central and state governments cannot undertake this adaptive work by themselves. In fact, only if all the people of a region/state make a concerted effort to solve this adaptive challenge can an optimum and equitable plan emerge. This adaptive effort will need to happen in an environment of understanding and cooperation created by all stakeholders for the collective welfare of the region. This would truly be a gigantic democratic exercise by the people of a great and vibrant democracy in the world. For this to succeed, it is imperative that the stakeholders must not just be focused on the ultimate optimum solution but also be prepared for the inevitable set-backs along the way. This would necessitate educating them on many aspects of the process.
This complex and dynamic exercise involves (a) design of a separate development plan for each region/state to suit the unique conditions prevailing locally, (b) democratically engaging the entire community in setting their own plan objectives that would meet their aspirations with due consideration for their realities, and (c) mobilizing the people to collectively direct the course of plan implementation (and correct its course, when appropriate, by objectively evaluating and reviewing the plan performance) in order to achieve the plan objectives.
Such thoughts provided the motivation for this study.
REFERENCES
Heifetz, R.A. (1998) Leadership without Easy Answers. Cambridge: Harvard Business Press
Heifetz, R.A., Linsky, M., and Grashow, A. (2002) Leadership on the Line. Cambridge: Harvard Business Press
Linsky, M., and Heifetz, R.A. (2009) The Practice of Adaptive Leadership on the Line. Cambridge: Harvard Business Press
Nilekani, N. (2008) Imagining India: Ideas for the New Century. New Delhi: Penguin/Allen Lane.
Porter, M. E. (2001) Regions and the New Economics of Competition. From Global City Regions (A. J. Scott (Ed.)) Oxford: Blackwell (pp. 139-152)
Subramanian, T. S. R. (2007) Building Regional Growth: Elements of Successful State Strategies. In C. W. Wessner & S. J. Shivakumar (Eds.), India's Changing Innovation System: Achievements, Challenges, and Opportunities for Cooperation:Report of a Symposium (pp. 54-58). Washington D. C.: The National Academies Press. Last retrieved on January 17, 2014 from http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11924&page=54
No comments:
Post a Comment