CHAPTER VIII: POLICY PROPOSALS, CONCLUSIONS AND

SUGGESTIONS

8.0. Overview of this Chapter

This chapter discus the policy proposals, conclusion and suggestions, service delivery
model for water supply was constructed to know the service delivery index;
operational efficiency index and performance index of water utility agencies (urban
local bodies) within the Bangalore Metropolitan Region. The service delivery model
has suggested for effective service delivery for harmonious relationship between
integrating the Bangalore Metropolitan Center and Bangalore Metropolitan Region and
gives future research directions.

8.1. Service delivery Model for water supply

8.1.1. Service Delivery Index, Operational Efficiency index and Performance

Index
Delivering Service Indicators (DSI) seeks to provide a set of indices for benchmarking
service delivery performance in water supply in Bangalore Metropolitan Region in
order to track progress over time. It seeks to enhance effective and active monitoring
and evaluation of service delivery and to use as an instrument of public accountability
and good governance in Bangalore. One of the key objectives of the DSI Index is to
help reduce the information gap between citizens, service providers and the state,
which is at the root of poor service delivery performance, rent capture and
misappropriation of resources. Ultimately, the purpose of the DSI Index is to help
policymakers, citizens, service providers, donors and other stakeholders in enhancing
the quality of service provision and ultimately improve development outcomes with
respect to Bangalore Metropolitan Centre and Bangalore Metropolitan Region.

Water supply Utility Data Indicators90

1. Total Water supply coverage (%): Population served x 100/total population in

the present service area (COV1)

90
Data Book of Southeast Asian Water Utilities, 2005 and the 2007 Benchmarking and Data Book of
Water Utilities in India and Bhanoji Rao, A Ranking Scheme for Asian Water Utilities Institute of
Water Policy, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, November
2009

225
 2. Total Water supply coverage in slum areas (%): Population served x 100/total
population slum in the present service area (COV2)
3. Average daily water availability in a week (AVI1)
4. Average daily water availability in hours (AVI2)
5. Per capita consumption (lpcd)= total annual domestic consumption [(m3/d/c) x
100 /365]/ number of people served (CON)

6. Non revenue water (%) = [total annual production (m3) - total billed
consumption (m3)] x 100/[total annual production (m3)] (UNW)
7. Cost recovery (%) (Operating ratio) = annual O&M cost (in Rs.)/ Annual
revenue (in Rs.) (OR)
8. Collection efficiency (%) = total annual collection (in Rs.) / total annual
billings (in Rs.) x 100 (RC-Eff.)

Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India had prepared the handbook of

Service level benchmarking indicators for Urban Local Bodies. The following
indicators have been selected for accessing service delivery status of water supply in
Bangalore.
Table 11: Water Supply Benchmarks

Water Supply Indicators Benchmark

Per capita production of water 142 lpcd
Number of days of water supply per 7 Days
week (Normal season)
Number of hours of water supply in a 24 Hrs
day (Normal season)
Household connection coverage 100%
Service Coverage in Slums 100%
Cost recovery in water supply services 100%
*Unaccounted water % 100%
Collection Efficiency (Water Charges 90%
for Current Year)
*Unaccounted water is zero the scaled value will be 100%
Source: Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India

226
 Table 12: Service Level Benchmarks of Water Supply in Bangalore Metropolitan Region (BMR)
ULBs/Water Boards % of % of Per Capita Number of Numbers of Unacco % cost Collection
Service Services Consumptio days water Hours of water unted recovery efficiency
coverage in coverage n of Water supply per supply in a day for in water (Water
General in slums week (Normal (Normal water supply Charges for
Households Seasons) Seasons) (%) services Current Year)

BBMP AREA - (Bangalore 92.90 43.00 119 4 4 1/2 39 89.25 69.00

Metropolitan Centre) BWSSB91
BMR92- Bangalore Metropolitan
Region (ULBs & KUWSDB)
Ramanagaram City Municipal 59.44 22.00 100 2 1 25.92 89.49 80.00
Council
Channapattana City Municipal 60.74 27.00 70 3 1 30.00 73.31 85.00
Council
Doddaballapur City Municipal 52.00 26.00 57 3 1 8.00 14.97 41.00
Council
Devanahalli Town Municipal 30.81 15.00 62 2 1 22.50 16.25 68.00
Council
Hosakote Town Municipal Council 44.00 17.00 95 2 1 20.00 8.99 40.00
Nelamangala Town Municipal 43.00 99.00 34 2 1 12.00 1.85 5.00
Council
Vijayapura Town Municipal Council 20.00 20.00 84 3 1 18.00 7.02 86.00
Anekal Town Municipal Council 30.00 22.00 31 2 1 17.60 4.47 10.00
Kanakapura Town Municipal 83.70 28.00 80 3 1 21.00 10.85 48.00
Council
Magadi Town Municipal Council 100 25.00 81 5 2 15.62 8.54 59.00

91
2007 Benchmarking and Data Book of Water Utilities in Indi, A partnership between Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India and Asian
Development Bank
92
Manual on Public Disclosure Schedules 2010 and Service Level benchmarking by DMA, GoK, 2010, ULBs web site and Karnataka Urban Service Level
Benchmarking, Water Supply Indicator Report, 2008-09, Karnataka Municipal Level Data Society (KMDS) [Link] , Status of
Infrastructure Report, Karnataka, 2006-07, KUIDFC.

227
8.2. Service Deliver Index = (COV1, COV2, AVI1, AVI2, and CON)
Service Delivery COV1, COV2, AVI1, AVI2 and CON are selected. The selection is
self-explanatory since percentage of coverage in general household, coverage in slum
areas, duration of supply in a week and hours and level of consumption are important
measures of service delivery. Coverage has the natural range of 0 to 100. AVI1 is
scaled on the basis of 7 days and AVI2 is scaled on the basis of 24 hours per day
supply as 100, and hours less than 24 were prorated. Thus if 12 hours and 31/2 days in a
week on the average happened to be the duration, then the score will be 50, and so on.
For CON, we use a norm of 142 LPCD, and per capita the indicator at 100 even if the
average consumption is above the norm. The overall service delivery index is an
average of the five indicators. All the five are considered as equally important for the
Service Delivery Index (SDI).

8.3. Operational Efficiency Index = UNW, OR, and RC-Eff.

Operational Efficiency Here three indicators considered are UNW, OR and RC-Eff.
Unaccounted water, operating ratio and revenue collection in current year are all
natural choices for constructing an operational efficiency index (OEI). Scaling for
conversion of each component to the range of 0 to 100 is accomplished as follows. For
UNW, the worst is taken as 50%, and that would amount to UNW index value of zero.
If and only the actual UNW is zero, the scaled value will be 100. This is taken as the
norm for obtaining an index value of 100, with higher values yielding lesser index,
with no cap leading to an index of zero. For OR, the minimum is for revenues to cover
O&M costs. Hence a value of 1 for OR signifies the worst outcome and takes the value
of zero on the 0-100 scale. There is no way we can find a minimum with any
justification, and it is unacceptable to aim for a zero value for OR.

8.4. Overall Indicator

On the premise that service delivery and operational efficiency are of equal
importance, a priority, one could take an average of the two to get the overall
performance index for each utility, notwithstanding the fact that one might go for
differential weighting if one prefers service delivery at any cost and if one had other
supporting arguments93. While one have settled for simple average of SDI and OEI to
obtain the Performance Index (PI), PI for Bangalore Metropolitan Centre and
Bangalore Metropolitan Regions Water supply utilities.

93
Indeed, the 2007 Benchmarking and Data Book of Water Utilities in India did suggest an evaluation
scheme summarized. It can be seen that various weights are proposed for the individual indicators,
which are necessarily arbitrary.

228
 Table 13: Water Utilities Indicator, Service Delivery Index and Operational Efficiency Index

ULBs/Water Boards COV1 COV2 CON AVI1 AVI2 Service Delivery Index UNW OR RC-Eff. Operational Efficiency Index

BBMP AREA - (Bangalore 92.90 43.00 83.80 57.14 18.75 59.12 89.25 69.00
1.56 53.27
Metropolitan Centre) BWSSB
BMR- Bangalore Metropolitan
Region (ULBs & KUWSDB)
Ramanagaram City Municipal Council 59.44 22.00 70.42 28.57 4.17 36.92 2.86 89.49 80.00 57.45

Channapattana City Municipal Council 60.74 27.00 49.30 42.86 4.17 36.81 2.33 73.31 85.00 53.55

Doddaballapur City Municipal Council 52.00 26.00 40.14 42.86 4.17 33.03 11.50 14.97 41.00 22.49

Devanahalli Town Municipal Council 30.81 15.00 43.66 28.57 4.17 24.44 3.44 16.25 68.00 29.23

Hosakote Town Municipal Council 44.00 17.00 66.90 28.57 4.17 32.13 4.00 8.99 40.00 17.66

Nelamangala Town Municipal Council 43.00 99.00 23.94 28.57 4.17 39.74 7.33 1.85 5.00 4.73

Vijayapura Town Municipal Council 20.00 20.00 59.15 42.86 4.17 29.24 4.56 7.02 86.00 32.53

229
Anekal Town Municipal Council 30.00 22.00 21.83 28.57 4.17 21.31 4.68 4.47 10.00 6.38

Kanakapura Town Municipal Council 83.70 28.00 56.34 42.86 4.17 43.01 3.76 10.85 48.00 20.87

Magadi Town Municipal Council 100.00 25.00 57.04 71.43 8.33 52.36 5.40 8.54 59.00 24.31

Note: COV1 = Coverage in General Households (%), COV2 = Coverage in Slums (%), AVI1 = Average daily water Availability in a
week, AVI2 = Average daily water Availability in hours, CON = Consumption (litre per capita/day), UNW = Unaccounted for Water (%),
OR = Operating Ratio and RC-Eff. = Collection efficiency of revenues in current year (%).

230
8.5. Correlation Matrix Analysis
Karl Pearsons coefficient of correlation is also known as the product moment
correlation coefficient. The value of ‘r’ lies between + 0r – 1. Positive values of ‘r’
indicate positive correlation between the two variables. (i.e. changes in both variables
take place in the statement direction), whereas negative values of ‘r’ indicate negative
correlation i.e., changes in the two variables taking place in the opposite directions. A
zero value of ‘r’ indicates that there is no association between the two variables. When
r= (+) 1, it indicates perfect positive correlation and when it is (-) 1, it indicates perfect
negative correlation, meaning thereby that variations in independent variable (X)
explain 100% of the variables in the dependent variable (Y). One can also say that for
a unit change in independent variable, if there happens to be a constant change in the
dependent variable in the same direction, then correlation will be termed as perfect
positive. But if such change occurs in the opposite direction, the correlation will be
termed as perfect negative. The value of ‘r’ nearer to +1 or -1 indicates high degree of
correlation between the two variables. The Negative sign shows that Inverse
relationship between indicators and Positive sign shows that direct relationship
between indicators.

Table 14: Correlation Matrix - Inter-correlations among eight indicators

INDICATORS COV1 COV2 CON AVI1 AVI2 UNW OR RC-Eff.

COV1 1 0.1 0.5 0.8 0.6 -0.2 0.4 0.2
COV2 0.1 1 -0.3 -0.1 0.1 0.3 -0.1 -0.5
CON 0.5 -0.3 1 0.4 0.6 -0.5 0.6 0.7
AVI1 0.8 -0.1 0.4 1 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.3
AVI2 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.6 1 -0.3 0.5 0.2
UNW -0.2 0.3 -0.5 0.0 -0.3 1 -0.5 -0.5
OR 0.4 -0.1 0.6 0.1 0.5 -0.5 1 0.6
RC-Eff. 0.2 -0.5 0.7 0.3 0.2 -0.5 0.6 1

Karl pearsons coefficient of correlation in the case of water utilities in Bangalore

are reported in table 14:
• CON and UNW (correlation coefficient -0.5): This is a strange relationship,
and implies the association between increasing consumption and declining

231
 extent of unaccounted for water. One cannot imagine why this is so. Perhaps
the larger utilities serving larger populations tend to have more efficient
apparatus to curb unaccounted water.

• OR and UNW (-0.5) this implies that association between increasing operating
ratio (% of cost recovery) and decline in extent of unaccounted water.

• COV1 and CON (0.5) = correlation coefficient is perfectively positive; it

indicates that cover of general household has correlated with consumption
pattern.

• COV1 and AVI1 (0.8) = Coverage of general households and average water
supply in a week have perfect positive correlation is greater than the 0.5, it
means if coverage increases and average water supply in a week it should
increase, it has good correlation.

• COV1 and AVI2 (0.6) = Coverage of general household and average number
of hours water supply in a day are positively correlated.

• CON and AVI2 (0.6) = Consumption per capita and average water supply in a
week have positive correlation, it shows that per capita consumption increase
resulting in average increase in water supply.

• CON and OR (0.6) = Consumption per capita and operating ratio have positive
correlation; it indicates that cost recovery with respect to per capita
consumption is poor.

• CON and RC-Eff. (0.7) = Consumption and Revenue collection efficiency are
positively correlated

• OR and RC-Eff. (0.6) Operating cost and Revenue collection efficiency of

current year have very strong correlation means collection efficiency is good.

8.6. Performance Index for Bangalore water supply Utilities.

The averaging of Service Delivery Index (SDI) and Operational Efficiency Index (OE)
is carried out and top 5 and bottom 5 on the ranking by Performance Index (PI) are
noted in Table 5. BWSSB stands good in position while comparing to other Water
Boards (local bodies). The poor Performance Index of Urban Local Bodies are Anekal

232
Town Municipal Council, followed by Nelamangala Town Municipal Council etc.
Based on the results we conclude that service delivery is only above fifty percent in
Bangalore Metropolitan Center whereas in Bangalore Metropolitan region it is very
poor. This correlated with opinion survey results from different respondents that
BWSSB more than fifty percent of the respondents that the existing institutional
arrangement is good for effective service delivery whereas other urban local bodies
and KUWS&DB within the BMR the performance is poor and very poor for managing
day to day operations in providing water to citizen (figure 22 & table 15).

233
 Table 15: Ranking of ULBs in BMR

ULBs/Water Boards Service Operational Perform ULBs/Water Service Operational Performance

Delivery Efficiency ance Boards Delivery Efficiency Index
Index Index Index Index Index

BWSSB Anekal Town

59.12 53.27 56.2 Municipal 21.31 6.38 13.8
Council
Ramanagaram City Municipal Nelamangala
Council 36.92 57.45 47.2 Town Municipal 39.74 4.73 22.2
Council
Channapattana City Hosakote Town
Municipal Council 36.81 53.55 45.2 Municipal 32.13 17.66 24.9
Council
Magadi Town Municipal Devanahalli
Council 52.36 24.31 38.3 Town Municipal 24.44 29.23 26.8
Council
Kanakapura Town Municipal Doddaballapur
Council 43.01 20.87 31.9 City Municipal 33.03 22.49 27.8
Council
Vijayapura
Town Municipal 29.24 32.53 30.9
Council

234
 Figure 22: Ranking of ULBs within BMR

Magadi Town Municipal Council 52.36 24.31 38.3

Kanakapura Town Municipal Council 43.01 20.87 31.9
Anekal Town Municipal Council 21.31 6.38 13.8
Vijayapura Town Municipal Council 29.24 32.53 30.9
Nelamangala Town Municipal Council 39.74 4.73 22.2
Hosakote Town Municipal Council 32.13 17.66 24.9
Devanahalli Town Municipal Council 24.44 29.23 26.8
Doddaballapur City Municipal Council 33.03 22.49 27.8
Channapattana City Municipal Council 36.81 53.55 45.2
Ramanagaram City Municipal Council 36.92 57.45 47.2
BWSSB 59.12 53.27 56.2

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Service Delivery Index Operational Efficiency Index Performance Index

8.7. Spatial Land use planning in shaping city structures

Urban planning, in particular the land use policy, plays an important role in shaping
city’s structure, and subsequently, the demand for transit or private vehicles. Various
literatures indicate that increasing urban density reduces significantly per capita
vehicle travel (Newman et al., 1997; Kenworthy and Laube, 1999; Kenworthy, 2003;
Mindali et al., 2004) and results in lower fuel consumption and transport-related
greenhouse gas emissions.
Unsuitable use of land is normally caused by inconsistent land use planning and
implementation. Moreover, the absence of a land use plan – not uncommon in cities of
developing countries – can make a bad situation even worse. The pace of urbanization
often exceeds a city authority’s capability to establish an effective and responsive land
use plan, and where such a plan is in effect, insufficient implementation may create
spatial incompatibilities and associated undesirable impacts, such as energy-intensive
urban forms (Permana, Perera and Kumar, 2008)94. In residential areas, multi-family
dwellings tend to have a lower energy use per unit area than single-family dwellings.

94
Permana A.S., Perera R, Kumar S (2008). “Understanding Energy Consumption Pattern of
Households in Different Urban Development Forms: A Comparative Study in Bandung City,
Indonesia”. Energy Policy, Vol. 36, No. 11, pp. 4287 –4297. Permana, A. S. (2005). Impacts of Existing
Land Use Patterns on Urban Physical Mobility and Air Quality in Bandung City, Indonesia. Master
Thesis, Asian Institute.

235
In the former, if elevators are required, the energy savings may be offset somewhat,
but this does not cancel the considerable energy savings resulting from less travel
associated with living in a compact city and environment.
Integration of transport planning into land use planning is central to developing
environmentally sustainable transport systems. In most cases, this integration is absent;
as a result, public transit systems, when not completely lacking, are often not
compatible with land use. This, along with other factors mentioned previously, leads to
the extensive use of private cars and creates car-dependent citizens. When these two
key paradigms are integrated and provided that public transport is of high quality,
citizens can expect to enjoy the benefits of a seamless transit system starting from their
homes, as well as efficient intermodal transfers. Castell (1998)95 further argued
Megacities are in the forefront of governance challenges, with implications for human
civilization:
Megacities are not just cities of large size but they are distinctive spatial forms. They
have a strong internal coherence. The functions and activities performed in their
territory are spatially interconnected. They are not just opposition of different areas,
even if we can differentiate analytically spatial sub units. They are one single area in a
very fundamental sense: they constitute a complex unit of production, a single labour
market and a specific system power, beyond their extreme cultural and social
differentiation. Their territory, even if it is of gigantic size, is used daily by millions of
people within the boundaries and extended regions of the Megacity. As for the country
it increasingly becomes the hinterland for the functions and powers that emerge from
Megacities and Megacities are the nerve centers of our interconnected global system. If
the Megacities become dysfunctional and non-livable settlements, it would signal the
beginning of a disaster of human civilization.

8.8. Urban Costs and Benefits as a Function of City Size

Using macro – economic theory Alonso (1971)96 suggested as shown in figure 23
‘urban benefits increases with city size in a less than proportional way. Urban cost
increase with city size in a more than proportional way. There comes a point at L

95
Castells, M. (1998). Why Megacities Focus? - Megacities in the New World Disorder, the Megacities
Project 1998, Publication MCP-018.
96
Alonso, W. (1971). The Economies of Urban Size’. Regional Science Association Papers 26:
68-83

236
where urban costs are greater than urban benefits, this point defines an optimal city
size S1. According to Alonso (1971, pp.68-83) ‘beyond that point, cities are too big’.
Proud’homme (1996, p100) has countered that Alonso’s argument completely omits a
key factor- management. He further noted that ‘urban benefits and costs are not merely
a function of city size. They are also a function of city management. It is true that
certain, probably many cities in the world are too big relative to their managerial
capabilities. But some of these oversized cities are in fact quite small. He also stated
that we all know of cities with one million or above inhabitant that area too large.
Similarly we know of small cities are under control and are not too large.

Figure 23: Urban Costs and Benefits as a Function of City Size

Costs

XL
Benefits

Unit costs L
and
benefits

S2

Source: Prud’homme 1996, p100

S1
City size

Therefore, Prud’homme (1996, p100)97 claimed (figure 23) that the use of efficient
policies can move the benefit curve up and/ or the cost curve down. With appropriate
management, point L can be moved to the right to XL, and consequently the optimal
size of a city can be increased from S1 to S2. Because management can constantly
shift the benefit and cost curve and therefore the optimal city size, there really is no

97
Prud'homme, R. and C.W. Lee. (1999). Size, Sprawl, Speed, and Efficiency of Cities.
Urban Studies 36, no. 11: pp. 1849-1858.

237
optimal city size and the concept itself is not very useful. What counts is not the size of
a city but its management. Moving the benefits curve upward and the cost curve
download could be defined as the main task of urban management.

In Bangalore case, planning and governance are imperative for ensuring effective
service delivery and management of resources. As noted earlier, this set of indicators
includes both quantitative and qualitative variables. Land-use zoning policies impact
transportation policies that aim to reduce GHG emissions by determining the degree of
segregation among land uses and therefore the energy required to travel between
home, work, shopping and other activities. The City of Toyoma, Japan, is pursuing
transportation-oriented growth by concentrating city functions such as residential,
commercial, business, and cultural facilities along a newly established light rail line,
built over an underused long distance rail line (Mori in OECD, 2009g)98.

Spatial policy- A focus on spatial compactness or density to increase urban growth’s

responsiveness to climate change and sustainability may be limiting if it does not take
into account the impact of the activities within the city (Neuman, 2005)99. Metropolitan
regions must be able to respond to rapid growth and demand for undeveloped land.
How to define density in order to set priorities for compact development?
1. Which spatial development patterns best contribute to GHG emissions
reductions, climate change adaptation, and efficient resource use?
2. How can spatial planning reduce the energy required to travel between home,
jobs, and activities?
3. What impact does compact development have on economic growth?
4. How can challenges to urban quality of life, housing affordability, and urban
attractiveness be overcome?
Extent of outgrowth and level of services interact100: With a sound planning the city
should be able to limit the outgrowth and ensure desirable level of services. However,
good planning can accommodate phased growth, which would in turn facilitate good

98
OECD (2009g). Green Cities: New Approaches to Confronting Climate Change, OECD Workshop
Proceedings, 11 June 2009, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain.
99
Neuman, Michael (2005). “The Compact City Fallacy. Journal of Planning Education and Research
Vol. 25. No. 1. Sage Publications. pp. 11-26.
100
T. V. Ramachandra and H. S. Sudhira (2011). Influence of Planning and Governance on the Level
of Urban Services. 2011 IUP the IUP Journal of Governance and Public Policy. Vol. 6 no. 1 (March
2011)

238
level of governance. Does the level of services either by provision of amenities or
infrastructure (like outer ring road) with limited planning capabilities fuel more
sprawl? With provision of outer ring road and poor planning and governance, the city
would spread beyond the periphery of these ring roads.

Few indicators are used for testing the spatial planning; the BDA is responsible for
preparation of master plan and its implementation as per KTCP act and BDA Act.
Comparing with the various indicators from 1991 to 2005 the growth rate shows that
it’s unimaginable. The vehicle density per [Link] increased to 826 in 1991 to 3208 in
2005 (increase of 288.38%), such a usage increase in vehicular growth have impact on
roads and traffic management. Whereas Population density has increased by 58.93% in
1991 to 2005, it shows that vehicular growth is much higher than the population
density. In case of built –up area it has increased to 111.36% between 1991 to 2005
whereas existing land use in the same period has increased to 99.05%, it has correlated
between built-up area and existing land use. In case of residential uses existing land
area has increased by 44.78%. One of the interesting points is that energy demand
(petrol and diesel) has increased to 218.17% during the same period; it has correlation
of vehicular growth and energy demand (table 16 & figure 24).
Table 16: Indicators for spatial planning in BBMP area
Indicators 1991 2005 % of increases
Vehicle density (Number of vehicle/ [Link]) 826 3208 288.38
Bangalore population density (persons per 5876 9339 58.93
[Link])
Built up area ([Link]) 142.54 301.27 111.36
Existing land use, 1990 & 2003 (BDA) (area in 28400 56530 99.05
hectares)
Existing land use - Residential uses 1990 & 9878 14300 44.78
2003 (BDA) (area in hectares)
Energy demand (Petrol and diesel in tones) 179400 409300 218.17
Source: Census Bureau, NCEAR data, 2006, 1990-BDA (1995); and 2003-BDA
(2005)

239
 Figure 24: Percentage of changes from 1991 to 2005

350

300
288.38 y = 28.34x2 - 210.0x + 441.9
250 R² = 0.700
218.17
200
% of
150 increases

100 111.36
99.05
Poly. (% of
50 58.93 increases )
44.78
0

The governing of city requires ideal growth and compact development. In Bangalore
case urban sprawl played a major role for shaping the city structure. The study
conducted by the London School of Economics for city integration with governance
comparing with Mumbai and Bangalore has poor governance due to more sprawls
(map 11).

240
Map 11: Population density of Bangalore and Mumbai –Urban Sprawl (Source: Urban Age)

MUMBAI BANGALORE

241
8.9. Conclusions
Integration of service delivery model and spatial planning indicator analysis shows that
urban form directly impact on governance, the managing or governing metropolitan
cities like Bangalore, Mumbai, Kolkata etc, it requires strategic spatial plan focusing
on effective and efficient delivery of service to the citizens. As Peterson (2007)101
points out, The Urban Development Authority’s (UDAs) in Indian cities hold
substantial amounts of land as part of urban development projects. In new areas, these
UDAs acquire land under public purpose regulation (which has come under a lot of
public scrutiny recently because of special economic zones), develop them with
infrastructure networks, and then sell to developers and end-users. Once the capital
costs of the projects are recovered, the UDAs typically hand over the developed
parcels to the municipal government for their operation and maintenance. This
notwithstanding with the several institutional overlaps that exist with respect to land
use in India’s cities. Integration of land use with transport planning should be made
mandatory for all ULBs as well as planning bodies such as the DPCs and MPCs (Local
Governance – Summary of Recommendations)102.

The Service delivery scale factor is also very important to know a disability factor
that measures the additional costs of providing a service where it needs to be delivered
but where the delivery is of less than economic size because the population served is
small and remote from other points of service delivery. Clearly, no one system of
metropolitan governance is likely to work equally well for all urban local bodies. The
governance system adopted should vary with the size of the urban local body and the
nature of the institutions in the area where the local body is located. Recently, the
Expert Committee on the Governance in Bangalore Metropolitan Region
recommended that the Commissioner of Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike
(BBMP) -- the Greater Bangalore Municipal Corporation -- should be selected by a
high-powered search committee constituted by the State in consultation with the
Mayor and, more importantly, that the Commissioner’s role should be redefined in the

101
Peterson, George E (2007). “Land Leasing and Land Sale as an Infrastructure Financing Option,”
in Financing Cities, (eds)., George E. Peterson and Patricia Clarke Annez, Washington, DC: Sage
Publications and the World Bank.
102
Speech of Shri M Veerappa Moily, Chairman, Second Administrative Reforms Commission at
the Governance National Colloquium on Urban Governance held at IIM, Bangalore 20th September,
2006

242
legislation to make him/her clearly responsible and accountable to the Mayor and the
corporation.

Models are not lacking from elsewhere. If large cities are sought to be put under one
administrative jurisdiction, there are the city provinces of China such as Shanghai or
Beijing, or the Bangkok metropolitan area. If a two-tier arrangement is desired with
one level of government for the metropolitan region and another for cities or boroughs
within, we have the London metropolitan area, Seoul, Greater Toronto, Istanbul or
several places in Europe, as examples. The US has also lived with a combination of
multiple city jurisdictions and several special functional districts. None of these
entities are authoritarian and each has a participative and accountability mechanism
involving the stakeholders. Multiplicity is not a problem in itself if functions and
responsibilities are reasonably well demarcated and the arrangements for co-ordination
endure over a period of time.

The 74th CAA requires the state governments to amend their municipal laws in order to
empower ULBs “with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them
to function as institutions of self governance”. With increased urbanization, the need
for integrated planning is becoming ever more important. Articles 243ZD and 243ZE
specifies the creation of a Committee for District Planning in each district, and a
Committee for Metropolitan Planning in every metropolitan area or region. The
possible of conflict of jurisdiction arises in some states have misconceptions about the
possible conflict of jurisdiction between MPCs and DPCs. Since metropolitan areas are
predominantly urban, the rural or the Panchayat component in the MPCs would be
rather small. Where urban areas are co-terminus with revenue districts, such as
Bangalore, Chennai or Calcutta, the problem does not arise at all. And in such cases a
DPC is not necessary. Where a part of a revenue district is included in a metropolitan
area, State Governments can suitably redefine the boundaries of a DPC or MPC
appropriately. Alternatively, a functional delineation is also possible. The Tamil Nadu
Government defined the MPC for the Chennai metropolitan area to also be a DPC for
those portions of the revenue districts which are included in the metropolitan area.
Under the Constitution of India, it is up to the State Governments to determine the
jurisdiction of the DPC and the MPC to avoid conflicts, if any.

243
In Bangalore Metropolitan Region (BMR), the planning functions and service delivery
will be confined to the following:
4. 295 local bodies as the lowest or third tier of governance;
5. DPC’s for the three revenue districts of Bangalore Urban, Bangalore Rural and
Ramanagaram103
6. MPC for the BMA (currently the BMR).

The committee recommends that the MPC should cover the entire BMR and should
have sectoral sub-committees on water and sanitation, environment, transport, rural-
urban social sector issues in addition to constituting an Executive Board which will
meet more frequently to review progress on all fronts and give its report on proposals
to be examined and endorsed by the MPC; The Committee also recommends on the
size and composition of the MPC as illustrated in the Flow chart 13. As suggested by
the KRR committee, of the total 31 seats for ULB representatives, the number of seats
for each ULB including BBMP will be as per their population share. However,
according to this formula, more than 90% of 31 seats (29 nos) goes to BBMP and
remaining 2 seats are distributed among remaining 10 ULBs. This skewed constitution
may restrict MPC from serving its larger purpose. Thus, a more realistic and
comprehensive formula for the seat sharing between ULBs would have to be worked
out, at least one representative from each ULBs.

103
The KRR report recommends the reorganisation of the Bangalore urban district which currently
comprises of the BBMP, the Anekal TMC and some adjoining rural areas be reorganised by
removing the rural components. The urban district will then reflect its urban character by limiting it
to the BBMP and Anekal TMC while merging the rural local bodies in Bangalore Rural or
Ramanagaram district in an appropriate manner. In such an eventuality the no. of DPC’s will reduce
to 2

244
 Flow Chart 13: Composition of MPC s - KRR report

MPC (63)

Elected
Elected(42)
(42) Nominated
Nominated(21)
(21)

From ULB From RLB From Elected Others (11)

(31) (11) Rep.- MLA,
MP, MLC (10)
1. CM of Karnataka– Chairman

•6-
6-from KLA
From KLA 2. Mayor of BBMP– Vice Chairman
Corporators ULB Chairperson (by Speaker)
of GP, TP and Representatives from
of BBMP Councillors
ZP •2-from KLC 3. Manufacturing Industry
(by Chairman) 4. Service industry incl. IT
3 Electoral Segments
•2-From
2-from LS
LS(by
(by 5. Trade and Commerce
Speaker) 6. Real Estate
7. Environmental Expert
8. Education / health expert
9. Urban Planning expert
10. Legal Expert
GP- Gram Panchayat, TP- Taluk Panchayat, ZP-Zila Panchayat 11. BMRDAComm
Comm––Member
Member Sec.

The Metropolitan Planning Committee mainly focuses on socio- economic plans and
integrates with spatial planning. The MPC gives more focus on political
representation, here the scope of bureaucrat’s representation also important. With the
arm of MPC, Government should constitute Unified Metropolitan Planning Authority
(UMPA) to oversee, preparation, implementation of Spatial Plans within the BMR.
This should be technical wing of MPC established with Town Planners, Infrastructure
Planners with specialists.

245
8.10. Suggestions

• Metropolitan Governance major challenge is integrating transport and land-use.

The primary survey (Opinion survey) results, to establish as the fact for Unified
Metropolitan Planning Authority for plan preparation, implementation and to
provide effective and efficient service delivery to the citizens. At present,
Bangalore had constituted the Bangalore Metropolitan Land and Transport
Authority (BMLTA) to plan, monitor and implement of urban transport within
the BMR104. The KRR report suggests that BMRDA Act to be renamed as
“Bangalore Metropolitan Area Planning Act” (BMAP) and BMRDA as
renamed as Bangalore Metropolitan Planning Board (BMPB) will be the
Secretariat of the Bangalore Metropolitan Area Planning Council (BMC). In
this case BMPB is a Unified Metropolitan Planning Authority within the BMR
and comes under the umbrella of MPC.
• The decentralised planning is good for enhanced service delivery and spatial
planning within the Bangalore Metropolitan Region. The research findings
suggest that instead of one strong Corporation and ten very smaller
municipalities, the diversity of operations and governing the city or town vary.
Instead of One large Corporation, BBMP itself could be split into three
Corporations taking into consideration of developmental characteristics and
Ramanagaram and Channapattana City Municipal Council could be made one
Corporation, the growth rate of these towns are much more than the BBMP.
The BMR area has Four ULBs (including Ramanagaram and Channapattana)
and eight municipal councils. The KRR report has already made
recommendation on Bangalore District only comprising of Urban Character,
remove Anekal from Urban District (Flow chart 15).

• At present, except BBMP area all other Urban Local Bodies within BMR have
not good institutional capacity to handle trunk projects for example
Devanahalli Municipal Council jurisdiction to govern International Airport,
Bidadi Township and large scale information technology companies are
situated in the Municipal Council area. Opinion survey results shows that BMR
ULBs existing institutional arrangement for providing effective service

104
BMLTA was created vide Government Order No. UDD 134 BMR 2006 (2) Bangalore 09.03.2007

246
 delivery to citizens is poor to very poor. In this situation, transferring spatial
planning (Master Plan) to urban local bodies is lurid.

• The spatial growth differentials of Metropolitan (Mega) cities in India

substantiate that, in case of Bangalore - growing core and declining periphery
whereas in Delhi - declining core; growing periphery and rest of the four cities
such as Greater Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai and Hyderabad shows that
declining core and declining periphery105. In Bangalore case, the past trends
reflect the the core (BMA) growing at a rate faster than the rest of BMR106.
While this is not surprising, the proportion of population distribution between
the Core and the region stands at a 73:27 ratio (whereas the proportionate
geopgraphical area is in the order of 16:84 respectively) in 2001 as against the
48: 52 in 1991. In this situation, under the umbrella of BBMP it is difficult to
provide effective service delivery to the citzens, the issues are very complxe
and rigid, we require time to react and decentralise the BBMP into Three
Corporation.

• In case of spatial planning, interim master plan prepared by the local planning
authority in the context of zoning regulations it is very vague and does not have
base for providing FAR, Density etc. The land use policy has been prepared by
the Local Planning Authority is unable to achieve strategic spatial
development. The LPA within the BMR should integrate with Urban Local
Bodies and Unified Metropolitan Planning Authority should oversee all
strategic spatial plans and its implementation. A case example of Anekal comes
under APZ-5 purview of BMRDA, in the year 2006 declared as Anekal LPA
covering on area of 407.20 [Link] given independent LPA to plan preparation
and implementation. The area comprises of maximum portion of green belt and
typical industrial estates. The Interim Master Plan Zonal regulation with
respect to FAR permissible is almost same as BDA Land Use Zonal
Regulations (RMP 2015). In such situation, Anekal LPA is requiring good
institutional capacity to handle such type of large scale development.

105
Census of India, Paper -2, Rural- Urban Distribution, Census of India, 2001 and Handbook of
Urbanization in India (Spatial growth During 1991-2001).
106
Draft Structural Plan of Bangalore, BMRDA, Bangalore

247
 • Metropolitan Planning Committee is difficult to oversee all the spatial planning
aspects, in due course, concerned urban local bodies i.e. corporation has to
strength their institutional capacity to handle land use planning or integrate
development authorities/planning authorities within the arm of Municipal
Corporations/Municipalities etc. [Link] committee has
recommended MPC should focus on sector specific aspects. Kolkata Model is
finding difficulties to integrate and manage all the aspects. The recent news
article shows that past two year never conducted a single meeting107.
• Water supply should be provided to one agency within the Bangalore
Metropolitan Region may be BWSSB. The KRR report had renamed BWSSB
to Bangalore Metropolitan Water and Sewerage Board (BMWSB) has to work
under Unified Metropolitan Planning Authority or could be merged to Urban
Local Bodies arm. In Ahemadabad and Kolkata city (Urban Local Bodies)
themselves provide water supply to citizens.

• City-shaping is not just the preserve of the professional and political classes.
Successful plans are those that engage with the diverse stakeholders within a
city, from private developers, to community groups, to non-governmental
organisations. One needs to include local stakeholders in a formalised form in
this process. One must not regulate everything from the top. Important case
examples for public private partnership is spatial planning implementation, The
Confederation of British Industry in Wales (CBI Wales) has itself established a
Planning Policy Panel for Wales to address spatial development issues. The
spatial planning was largely public-sector driven, but more recently the
promotion of economic development and regeneration has focused on private/
public sector partnerships. The private sector, represented in Wales by the CBI,
has become as key a regional stakeholder as the public sector. The private
sector has had to be actively engaged in spatial planning for the Cardiff
metropolitan.
• ‘Community Participation Law’ (CPL) - News article on ‘Community
Participation Bill passed without community participation or discussion in the

107
Article in the ‘The Statesman’ ‘Constitution flouted: No KMPC meet in two years’ Published on
January 22, 2011 by admin.

248
 house’. The Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976108 to provide for the
constitution of Area Sabha and Ward Committees in the State of Karnataka to
institutionalise community participation in municipal functions and to provide
for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto, has created the platform
for citizen participation in planning implementation and execution.
• Bangalore Metropolitan Region Governance (BMRG) Bill, 2010, will
supersede all the Acts, Laws and Policies within the BMR. Bangalore
Metropolitan Standing Committees has to be constituted to oversee the Urban
and Rural Local Bodies functions and reporting to the Bangalore Metropolitan
Planning Board. In this situation, Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act had
made provision for constituting the standing committees and there is no need to
further duplicating the Standing Committees.

8.11. Recommended Structure of Unified Metropolitan Planning Authority

(UMPA)
At Govt. Level: MPC – BMPB (UMPA)
• BMPB: Bangalore Metropolitan Planning Board- To act as a secretariat to
provide all the planning and technical support for the projects of regional
significance as well as urban.
• At Local Bodies: Creation of Spatial Planning Departments –Bangalore
Development Authority to work within the Corporation as an arm of Technical
Planning wing and all Local Planning Authority work within the Municipal
Councils as an arm of spatial planning wing. The local authorities will continue
to plan and execute the projects within their jurisdiction of Corporations and
Municipal Councils.
• MPC to decide on planning, prioritisation, funding, implementation and
coordination of projects of regional significance and recommend to UMPA
Board (BMPB)(Flow Chart 14).

108
The Karnataka Municipal Corporations (Amendment) Bill, 2011 (L.A- Bill No. I of 201l) (As passed
by the Legislative Assembly)

249
Suggested functions of UMPA (BMPB)
• Finalise Master Plans /Regional plans prepared by Urban and Rural Local
Bodies entire Metropolitan Region.
• Finalise Five year Rolling plan for sectors specific within the purview of
Master Plan/Regional plans and fix up the priorities
• Fix up Annual Targets linking to Performance based budgeting
• Periodic reviews
• Decide on Implementing Agency and make them accountable for the out-puts
• Creation of Dedicated Fund (BMR -Unified Metropolitan Planning Authority
Fund) for implementation of proposed sector specific projects and Master
Plans/Regional Plans within the BMR.

Some of the abbreviations shown in the flow charts 14 are:

BMPB: Bangalore Metropolitan Planning Board
BMWSSB: Bangalore Metropolitan Water Supply Sewerage Board
BMTC: Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation
BMTP: Bangalore Metropolitan Traffic Police
BMRCL: Bangalore Metropolitan Metro Rail Corporation Limited

All these can happen when the funding can be decided by Metropolitan Planning
Committee (MPC).

Dr. Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister of India addressed the National Conference
of the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission, in New Delhi in
December, 2011. He also pointed out ‘It is now well recognised that governance is the
weakest link among the key drivers of urban transformation. Unless our institutions
are reformed and governed well, they will neither attract the huge investments
required to build and maintain city infrastructure nor deliver efficient services in a
sustainable manner’.

250
 Flow Chart 14: Unified Metropolitan Planning Authority –Bangalore Metropolitan Region (BMR)

Metropolitan Planning Committee

State Appointed Unified Metropolitan Planning Authority – Expanded representation of Mayors/Presidents from
Representatives rename BMRDA as BMPB Municipalities, Councils

Executive Committee Additional Members – Chief Secretary, Secretary

UDD, DMA, Transport, Home, MD- KUIDFC, DTP etc.

Metropolitan Commissioner –BMPB Technical Role BMPB -

Coordination & Consultation

BMR Development and BMR Water Resources BMR Economic BMR Education, Health Corporate
Planning (Spatial and Development & Growth and Finance Transport & Environmental Management Group
Planning) energy

City Agencies- Water Supply, Dept. of BMLTA, BMTC, Dept. of Advisory, Industries
Planning Sewerage and Industries and BMTP, BMMRCL, Health, Representatives, NGOs
Authorities and Water Resources Commerce, Railways & Education and Members, Subject
Corporations, BMWSSB, Water Agriculture, Airport Authority Municipalities, Experts etc
State Parastatals – Resources Tourism of India, PWD Councils,
KHB, KSCB, KIADB, Department & etc. KSPCB
Dept. of Revenue BESCOM

Service Delivery/Corporations/ Departments/Agencies/contractors etc

251
 Flow Chart 15: Recommended Bangalore Urban Local Bodies within the BMR

Metropolitan Planning Committee

Bangalore Metropolitan Planning Board

Corporation – 1 Corporation – 2 Corporation -3 Corporation -4 CMCs - 1 TMCs – 7

(South Zone (West Zone + (East Zone + (Ramanagaram City Devanahalli Town Municipal
+Rajarajeswari Dasarahalli Zone Mahadevapura Corporation Doddaballapur Council
Nagara Zone + +Bytarayanapura Zone) (Ramanagaram CMC City Municipal Hosakote Town Municipal
Council
Bommnahalli Zone) Zone) & Channpatana Council Neelamangala Town
CMC) Municipal Council
Vijayapura Town Municipal
Council
Anekal Town Municipal
Council
Kanakapura Town Municipal
Council
Magadi Town Municipal
Council

252