Event Report
Sneha Kohli
Urbanisation is reshaping India’s economic, social and environmental landscape. Cities provide employment, education, healthcare, housing and other essential services, while also acting as centres of economic activity and innovation. However, rapid urban growth has brought several interconnected challenges, including inadequate infrastructure, traffic congestion, housing shortages, environmental degradation, water stress, waste management difficulties and growing socioeconomic inequalities. Addressing these challenges requires more than constructing infrastructure or introducing government schemes. It calls for integrated urban planning, effective governance, sustainable financing, evidence-based policymaking and meaningful public participation. Urban policies must also account for the different experiences of people living and working in cities, particularly women, migrants, informal workers and other groups that are often overlooked in conventional planning.
In this context, the Impact and Policy Research Institute (IMPRI), through its Centre for Habitat, Urban and Regional Studies (CHURS), organised Urban Policy and City Planning – Cohort 4.0, an Online National Autumn School Programme and six-week immersive online certificate training course. The programme was conducted from 5 September to 10 October 2026, across six consecutive sessions bringing together experts from academia, government, research institutions and the urban development sector, the programme examined the relationship between urban development, planning, governance and public policy.
The sessions covered urban planning and economic development, people-centric governance, sustainable mobility, urban finance, affordable housing, gender-responsive planning, migration, climate resilience and waste management. The discussions offered participants an opportunity to understand the institutional and practical challenges facing Indian cities and to consider approaches towards making urban spaces more inclusive, sustainable and liveable.
Day 1: Urban Planning and People-Centric Governance
Urban Planning for Economic Development
Prof. Chetan Vaidya, Independent Urban Advisor; former Director of the School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi, and the National Institute of Urban Affairs (NIUA), New Delhi; Independent Director, GIFT City; and Visiting Distinguished Fellow, IMPRI, discussed the role of urban planning in supporting economic development. He began by highlighting the diversity of India’s urban sector.
Indian settlements include small towns, metropolitan centres, industrial and mining towns, port cities, and cultural and religious centres. Since their economic activities, geographical conditions and development requirements differ, he argued that a uniform planning model cannot adequately address the needs of every city. Planning must instead be specific to the state, district and city, while recognising the relationship between economic development and environmental objectives.
A major concern raised during the session was the limited integration of physical planning with socioeconomic development. Conventional planning instruments, including master plans, local area plans and building bye-laws, often focus on land use, construction and the regulation of development. However, economic activity can change faster than planning systems respond. Prof. Vaidya therefore emphasised that planning should not merely control development but also create conditions that support employment generation, manufacturing and local economic activity.
He highlighted the importance of planning at the city-region level, as urban expansion frequently extends beyond municipal boundaries into surrounding areas. Stronger rural–urban linkages and suitable locations for manufacturing are important, particularly when high land costs make large cities less suitable for certain industries. He referred to NITI Aayog’s 20 Growth Hubs initiative in the context of linking economic development with regional planning.
Prof. Vaidya also highlighted the potential of existing data, including building approvals, changes in property use, RERA information and trade licences, to understand local economic trends. He proposed stronger statistical capacity within metropolitan areas so that planning can respond to changing conditions. Recognising informal businesses and street vendors within planning processes, as well as using form-based codes to simplify regulations, were among the approaches discussed. The session emphasised that urban planning can contribute more effectively to economic development when it responds to local realities and treats cities as dynamic economic and social systems.
Implementing People-Centric Urban Governance on the Ground
Mr. Sameer Unhale, Joint Commissioner, Department of Municipal Administration, Government of Maharashtra; Urban Practitioner; and Visiting Senior Fellow, IMPRI, examined how urban governance operates through policies, institutions and relationships between different levels of government. He approached the subject through the interconnected ideas of people, urban development and public policy. The discussion placed urban governance within the broader context of the New Urban Agenda, climate commitments and the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 11, which focuses on inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable cities.
Mr. Unhale explained that public policy cannot be understood only as a government scheme or a single piece of legislation. It includes Acts, rules, taxation, budgetary allocations, regulatory measures and centrally sponsored schemes. Using the Swachh Bharat Mission as an example, he illustrated how policies require coordination between institutions, public communication and citizen engagement. He also discussed the growing role of digital technologies, social media, big data, digital public infrastructure and direct benefit transfers in the policy process.
An important part of the session concerned the constitutional and institutional structure of urban governance in India. Urban development is primarily a State subject, which shapes the Union government’s role in influencing the sector through centrally sponsored schemes, advisories and guidelines. Mr. Unhale discussed the 74th Constitutional Amendment and institutions such as State Finance Commissions, State Election Commissions, Metropolitan Planning Committees and District Planning Committees. Although the constitutional framework provides for decentralised urban governance, the actual powers and responsibilities of urban local bodies depend considerably on decisions taken by state governments.
He also stressed that Indian cities cannot be understood through broad generalisations. Urban policies are shaped by geography, economic conditions, social relationships, history and politics. His discussion of the real estate and housing sector illustrated how legislation, master plans, planning authorities, RERA, regulations, finance and institutions interact to influence development. He further highlighted that informality and slums need to be understood in relation to the realities that existing policies may fail to address.
The session also distinguished municipal finance from the wider concept of urban finance, which can involve urban local bodies, regional development authorities, parastatal agencies and the private sector. Taxation, user charges and grants remain important sources of municipal revenue, although many urban local bodies continue to depend on transfers from higher levels of government. The discussion highlighted the importance of examining institutional arrangements and financial systems to understand how people-centric urban governance can be strengthened.
Day 2: Sustainable Mobility and Planning Cities That Care
Reclaiming Streets: Sustainable and Equitable Urban Mobility for All
Mr. Srinivas Alavilli, Fellow, Integrated Transport and Road Safety, World Resources Institute (WRI) India; and Visiting Senior Fellow, IMPRI, discussed how cities can develop mobility systems that are sustainable, accessible and equitable. Drawing on his work translating research into action in urban mobility, he introduced participants to concepts that help explain how people move through cities and how transport systems can be evaluated.
He distinguished mobility from transport and explained the importance of examining actual travel patterns rather than focusing only on the availability of roads or vehicles. One key concept was modal share, which refers to the proportion of trips made through different modes, including walking, cycling, buses, trains and private vehicles. He also explained the relationship between travel demand, generated by activities such as employment and education, and transport supply, which includes roads, buses, metro systems and other facilities.
A central argument was that cities should be designed to move people rather than vehicles. Buses and metro systems can carry considerably more people while using less road space than private cars. Mr. Alavilli used the example of buses transporting passengers between airport terminals and aircraft to illustrate how efficiently shared transport can move large numbers of people. He also discussed induced demand: expanding roads or constructing flyovers may encourage additional private vehicle use, eventually filling the extra capacity and failing to resolve congestion in the long term.
A dedicated bus lane in Bengaluru illustrated how giving buses priority can improve their speed and make public transport more attractive. This was also a question of equity, as bus users should not have to bear the delays caused by congestion from private vehicles.
The session emphasised evidence-based planning through tools such as Shift Transport, an urban transport analytics platform developed by WRI and its partners. By bringing together information on population, roads, vehicles, public transport, modal share, congestion and trip lengths, such platforms can help cities compare mobility systems and make better-informed decisions.
Mr. Alavilli also highlighted the needs of senior citizens, children, caregivers, pregnant women and persons with disabilities. Safe footpaths, walking and cycling infrastructure, and non-motorised transport are essential parts of an accessible mobility system. He explained multimodal integration through physical, digital and institutional coordination, including convenient connections between buses and metro stations, integrated ticketing and cooperation among transport agencies. First- and last-mile connectivity is especially important because major investments in mass transit can remain underused when people cannot conveniently reach stations or their final destinations. The session connected sustainable mobility with climate action and access to employment, education and livelihoods, presenting transport as an integral part of comprehensive urban planning.
Planning Cities That Care: Uniting Design, Ecology, and Social Justice
Ar. Romi Khosla, Distinguished Architect, Researcher and Writer, and Director of Romi Khosla Design Studios, approached urban planning through the broader relationships between politics, society, ecology and the future. Rather than treating planning as a technical exercise concerned primarily with infrastructure and physical design, he encouraged participants to question the assumptions that shape the way cities are imagined and developed.
A major theme of the session was the “age of uncertainty.” Ar. Khosla contrasted the period following Independence, when there was comparatively greater agreement around national development goals, with the present, which he described as marked by political, social and environmental uncertainty. This raises questions about whether planning models inherited from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries remain adequate for contemporary challenges. Planners cannot simply assume that the future will follow established patterns; they must consider how settlements can respond to changing conditions and crises.
He also questioned the tendency to measure India’s progress mainly through economic growth, large metropolitan cities and major infrastructure projects. The urban future of India cannot be understood exclusively through the development of a few large cities, skyscrapers or landmark projects. India has a wide range of smaller settlements, and their future growth and contribution to the national economy also require attention. This perspective broadens urban planning beyond metropolitan expansion and encourages a closer examination of the different forms of settlement across the country.
The ecological dimension of the discussion was particularly important. Ar. Khosla referred to water shortages, global warming, changing weather conditions and the potential displacement of populations due to environmental change. These challenges suggest that urban planning must consider not only how land is developed but also how people and settlements remain resilient in the face of environmental uncertainty.
Ar. Khosla presented the idea of “Natural Cities” as a way of reconsidering the relationship between human habitation and nature. He argued that separating human settlements from natural systems can threaten the long-term sustainability of civilization. Instead of relying solely on the continued expansion of large metropolitan centres, he encouraged consideration of smaller, more self-sufficient settlements with closer connections to nature, agriculture and local resource systems.
The session challenged participants to think about the purpose of urban development itself. It suggested that cities should not be planned only as engines of growth but also as places where people can live in balance with their ecological surroundings. Alongside the practical questions of mobility and infrastructure discussed on the same day, Ar. Khosla’s session widened the discussion to include the social and environmental foundations of future urban settlements.
Day 3: Financing Urban Infrastructure and Affordable Housing
Innovative Urban Financing for Inclusive Infrastructure and Services
Dr. Ravikant Joshi, Advisor, Urban Management Centre, Ahmedabad; former Chief Accounts Officer, Vadodara Municipal Corporation; and Visiting Senior Fellow, IMPRI, discussed the financial challenges faced by urban local bodies and the need to explore different mechanisms for financing infrastructure and services. As cities expand, demands for roads, water supply, sanitation, transport and other public services increase, while municipal resources remain limited. This creates a need to strengthen existing revenue systems and explore additional financing options.
Dr. Joshi explained that conventional municipal resources include property taxes, other taxes, non-tax revenue, user charges, income from municipal assets, government grants and loans. Innovative mechanisms can include public-private partnerships (PPPs), municipal bonds, green bonds, social impact bonds, blue bonds, land value capture, market-based instruments and community participation. However, he emphasised that innovation does not mean abandoning conventional revenue sources.
An important distinction in the session was between funding and financing. Financing refers to the instruments used to mobilise resources for infrastructure, such as borrowing, bonds, PPPs and project finance. Funding refers to the revenue sources that ultimately support these investments and the services they provide, including taxes, user charges, grants and income generated from assets. A project may obtain financing to be developed, but a sustainable source of funding is still required to repay borrowing and maintain services.
Dr. Joshi repeatedly stressed that municipalities must first “put their house in order.” This means improving their own-source revenues, strengthening property-tax assessment and collection, rationalising user charges and making more effective use of municipal assets. Financial credibility matters because lenders and investors assess a municipality’s capacity to manage its finances before extending loans or purchasing its bonds. Innovative mechanisms are therefore more likely to work when supported by sound municipal financial management.
The session also examined practical ways to improve revenue and efficiency, including technology-assisted property-tax assessment, online payments, private-sector participation in revenue collection and strategic use of municipal land and assets. Dr. Joshi highlighted that savings can themselves create financial space, captured in the idea that a rupee saved is a rupee generated. Improving operational efficiency and reducing the cost of service delivery can help municipalities use limited resources more effectively.
Green bonds, social impact bonds, blue bonds and climate finance were discussed as instruments that can connect urban investment with environmental and social objectives. Community participation was also presented as an important approach, with residents contributing through finances, labour, skills or involvement in managing services. The session’s central message was that sustainable urban finance requires a combination of reliable municipal revenue, efficient expenditure, credible institutions and carefully selected innovative instruments. Such an approach can help cities expand infrastructure and services while keeping financial obligations manageable.
Affordable Housing for All: Bridging the Gap Between Policy and Access
Dr. Akshaya K. Sen, General Manager (Economics), Housing and Urban Development Corporation Limited (HUDCO), examined the evolution of affordable housing policy in India and the persistent gap between government initiatives and actual access to adequate housing. He situated the discussion within India’s ongoing urbanisation, explaining that growth in the urban population is expected to increase demand not only for housing units but also for supporting infrastructure and habitable living conditions. The objective, therefore, should not be limited to constructing houses; it should also include improving the quality of life of urban residents.
Dr. Sen traced government interventions from the post-Independence period, including early initiatives for industrial workers, economically weaker sections and slum improvement. He discussed the National Housing Policy of 1994, the policy emphasis on habitat in 1998, and the National Urban Housing and Habitat Policy of 2007. Later interventions included the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM), Rajiv Awas Yojana, Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY), Affordable Rental Housing Complexes and PMAY 2.0. This policy evolution illustrated the continued effort to address housing shortages through a combination of public programmes and other delivery mechanisms.
Despite these interventions, access to affordable housing remains constrained by challenges relating to land, finance, governance and developers. Dr. Sen highlighted the difficulty of obtaining suitable land, unclear land titles, insecure tenure, inadequate land records, limitations in digital mapping and the location of housing in relation to livelihoods. Financial constraints are especially significant for lower-income households and workers in the informal sector, who may struggle to access affordable, long-term housing finance. Multiple approvals, cumbersome procedures, delays and weak coordination between agencies can further restrict housing delivery.
Dr. Sen further outlined financial and regulatory measures, including interest subsidies, tax incentives, credit-risk guarantees, priority-sector lending, foreign investment, Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs), infrastructure investment trusts, green financing and PPPs. Reforms such as RERA, single-window approvals, model building bye-laws and the Model Tenancy Act were discussed in relation to improving transparency and reducing barriers. He also referred to PMAY components such as in-situ slum redevelopment, which seek to improve existing housing conditions rather than relying only on new construction. The session highlighted that affordable housing requires coordinated action on land, finance, regulation and implementation, with attention to the needs of households that are often excluded from formal housing markets.
Day 4: Gender-Responsive Cities and the Rights of Migrants
Reimagining Urban Spaces: Gender-Responsive Policies for Safer, Inclusive Cities
Prof. Vibhuti Patel, Visiting Distinguished Professor, IMPRI, examined urban planning through a gender lens, highlighting the relationship between the design of cities and people’s access to safety, mobility, employment and public resources. She argued that urban spaces are not experienced equally by everyone. Women’s ability to travel, study, work and participate in public life is influenced by the availability of safe transport, adequate infrastructure and public facilities, as well as the unequal distribution of unpaid domestic and care work.
A major focus of the session was the relationship between urbanisation and safety. Prof. Patel discussed gender-based violence, trafficking, harassment and insecurity experienced by women and children in public spaces. Unsafe streets and transport systems can restrict women’s mobility and limit their access to education, employment and other opportunities. She therefore highlighted the need for well-lit streets, safe public transport, functioning helplines, responsive police systems and accessible support services. One Stop Crisis Centres were discussed as an important form of coordinated assistance, bringing together police, medical care, shelter, legal support and other services so that survivors do not have to navigate multiple institutions independently.
The design and maintenance of public spaces formed another important part of the discussion. Footpaths, lighting, public toilets and accessible community spaces are essential to making cities usable by a wider range of people. Prof. Patel referred to safety audits as a way of identifying locations vulnerable to harassment and crime. She also emphasised that street vendors and hawkers should be recognised as part of active public spaces rather than treated merely as obstructions. Regular activity and the presence of people can contribute to a greater sense of safety. The “Right to Pee” campaign was discussed in connection with the need for clean, safe and properly maintained public toilets for women.
The session also considered groups that are frequently overlooked in urban planning, including transgender and gender non-conforming persons, homeless people and elderly women. Safe spaces, night shelters, halfway homes and facilities tailored to different needs were identified as important elements of inclusive planning.
Prof. Patel further highlighted gender-responsive and gender-transformative budgeting. She stressed that assessing inclusion requires more than looking at the amount allocated to women or vulnerable groups; it is also necessary to examine whether the funds reach the intended beneficiaries and produce meaningful outcomes. Gender-disaggregated data, social audits, accountability, financial decentralisation and citizen participation were presented as important mechanisms for improving implementation. The session demonstrated that gender-responsive planning must be integrated into budgeting, infrastructure, public services and governance rather than treated as a separate policy concern.
Migration, Urban Informality, and Rights of the Mobile Poor
Prof. Irudaya S. Rajan, Chair, International Institute of Migration and Development; and Visiting Professor, IMPRI, examined migration as a central component of urbanisation and discussed the challenges faced by migrants who contribute to city economies but often remain insufficiently represented in planning. He placed migration alongside fertility and mortality as one of the three components of population change. As fertility patterns and life expectancy change, migration becomes increasingly important in understanding urban population growth and the changing composition of cities.
Prof. Rajan noted that cities such as Delhi, Mumbai and Chennai have grown through the movement of people from other districts, states and regions. Many migrants, particularly those employed in informal work, move without their families because of inadequate housing, limited services and the costs of urban living. This means that urban growth cannot be understood only through infrastructure or population statistics; it must also account for the living and working conditions of people who sustain urban economies.
A key concern was that migration is often inadequately incorporated into urban plans. Discussions of urban development and smart cities may focus on technology and infrastructure while giving limited attention to migrant workers. Their political representation may also be weak when voting registration remains linked to their place of origin rather than the city where they work. The experiences of migrant workers during the COVID-19 lockdown demonstrated the serious consequences of this exclusion, particularly when restrictions on mobility disrupted employment and livelihoods.
Prof. Rajan connected rural distress with migration and urban informality. Limited employment opportunities, low wages and economic insecurity can push people to leave rural areas. However, many migrants enter informal employment in cities, where they may face temporary work, long working hours, insecure conditions and a lack of formal contracts. The session also discussed repeated movement between cities, differences in wages and the exploitation of workers despite their contribution to urban economies.
Housing, healthcare, insurance and social protection were further areas of concern. Poor housing conditions, difficult working hours and language or cultural barriers can prevent migrants from accessing public health services. The absence of insurance and the risks associated with cash-based wage payments can increase their vulnerability. Prof. Rajan connected these issues with the principle of “leaving no one behind,” emphasising that migrants must be considered within urban policy and planning.
He also questioned why educational, healthcare and employment opportunities remain concentrated in major cities. Strengthening rural services and livelihoods could reduce some of the pressures driving migration, while recognising that migration takes different forms and is not always a one-way movement. The session highlighted that inclusive urban planning requires attention to migrants’ rights, employment, housing, social protection and political representation, alongside a broader approach to balanced regional development.
Day 5: Water Management and Sustainable Urban Waste Management
Building Urban Resilience to Climate Change: A People-First Approach
Dr. Rumi Aijaz, Senior Fellow and Head, Urban Policy Research Initiative, Observer Research Foundation (ORF), New Delhi, addressed the challenges of water management in the context of climate change. Delivered through a recorded presentation, the session began by emphasising the central role of water in everyday life and the functioning of urban systems. Climate change is altering temperature and rainfall patterns, creating challenges that may appear contradictory: rising temperatures can increase water demand and scarcity, while changing rainfall patterns can produce intense rainfall and flooding.
Dr. Aijaz explained that urban flooding is not caused by heavy rainfall alone. The way cities are planned and developed affects their capacity to absorb and manage water. As natural areas are reduced and built-up surfaces expand, rainwater is less able to enter the ground and more likely to become surface runoff. This increases pressure on drainage systems, particularly during periods of intense rainfall. He therefore emphasised the importance of improving drainage infrastructure and ensuring its regular monitoring and maintenance, rather than responding only after flooding has occurred.
The session introduced the idea of natural and artificial “sponges” as a way to retain water and reduce runoff. Natural sponges include wetlands and other areas capable of absorbing and holding rainwater. Artificial measures include permeable surfaces and other systems that allow water to seep into the ground rather than immediately flowing into drains. These approaches can help reduce pressure on drainage networks while improving the capacity of cities to manage rainfall.
Dr. Aijaz also discussed the concept of “water squares,” drawing on approaches used in the Netherlands. Such spaces can serve ordinary public purposes during normal conditions and temporarily store excess water during heavy rainfall. The example illustrated how urban spaces can be designed to perform multiple functions while contributing to climate resilience.
Urban planning regulations were another important part of the discussion. Dr. Aijaz highlighted the need for better implementation and monitoring of building bye-laws so that construction does not further reduce natural drainage and water absorption capacity. Improved weather forecasting and early warning systems were also emphasised, as they allow authorities and communities to prepare for extreme rainfall, heat waves and other weather-related events.
The session connected water management with community resilience. Large infrastructure projects and government intervention remain important, but they need to be complemented by public awareness, local preparedness and community participation. Effective urban water management therefore requires coordinated action on infrastructure, land use, regulation, forecasting and community-level responses. The overall emphasis was on moving towards preventive and people-first approaches that recognise the links between climate change, urban development and the everyday safety of residents.
Fostering Inclusive and Sustainable Urban Waste Management for Resilient Cities
Prof. Shyamala Mani, Senior Advisor, WASH and Waste Management, Centre for Environment and Health, Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI); former Professor, National Institute of Urban Affairs (NIUA), New Delhi; and Visiting Professor, IMPRI, examined urban waste management through the interconnected perspectives of sustainability, public health and community participation. She introduced the concept of planetary boundaries to explain that human societies must operate within environmental limits. In this context, cities need to reconsider the way they generate, collect, process and dispose of waste.
Prof. Mani contrasted the conventional linear approach of “collect, transport and dump” with the circular economy. Under the linear model, waste is treated primarily as material that must be removed from urban areas and disposed of elsewhere. A circular approach, by contrast, seeks to reduce waste generation, reuse materials and recover resources wherever possible. This requires changes in municipal systems as well as in the practices of households, institutions, businesses and other waste generators.
A major challenge discussed was the mixing of different categories of waste. When recyclable, biodegradable and hazardous materials are combined, recycling and resource recovery become more difficult. Mixed waste can also create environmental and public health risks during collection, transport and disposal. Prof. Mani highlighted problems associated with landfills, including toxic gases and leachate, and drew attention to waste categories that require specialised handling, particularly domestic hazardous waste, plastic waste and electronic waste. Their improper disposal can affect sanitation workers, nearby communities and the wider environment.
The session emphasised the importance of source segregation, including the requirements associated with the Solid Waste Management Rules. Separating waste where it is generated makes it easier to process different categories appropriately and supports recycling and resource recovery.
Community participation was a recurring theme. Sustainable waste management depends on coordination between municipal authorities, residents, resident welfare associations, institutions and sanitation workers. Citizens have a role in separating waste and reducing generation, while institutions and bulk generators must take responsibility for their practices. Prof. Mani illustrated these points through a case study of a zero-waste colony in Delhi, demonstrating how local participation and suitable segregation practices can support better waste management.
Together, these measures can reduce environmental harm and help cities manage resources more responsibly. The discussion reinforced the broader programme theme that resilient cities must address environmental challenges through both institutional systems and changes in everyday practices.
Day 6: Democratic Urban Futures and Financial Empowerment
Reimagining Urban Futures: Towards Democratic, Just, and Equitable Cities
Prof. Amita Bhide, Professor and Dean, School of Habitat Studies, Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai; and Visiting Professor, IMPRI, discussed how Indian cities can move towards more democratic, just and equitable urban futures. She began by distinguishing between imagining a future as the complete opposite of the present, creating an entirely new future from the ground up, and developing a pathway that responds to existing conditions and challenges. She emphasised the third approach, arguing that the future of cities must be understood through their current economic, social, political and environmental realities.
Prof. Bhide noted that cities are connected through global, regional and local networks, but their experiences differ according to their economic activities, social relationships and geographical contexts. Indian cities are undergoing economic transitions, including the expansion of services and the continued importance of informality in employment and production. Unlike the experience of urbanisation in several Western countries, urbanisation in India continues alongside persistent poverty, economic insecurity and rising inequality.
She identified three major challenges: economic insecurity and inequality, uneven access to basic services, and the centralisation of urban governance. Urban local governments often lack adequate resources and administrative capacity, while citizens have limited opportunities to influence decisions. She also highlighted concerns about women’s safety, inadequate public spaces for children and older persons, and the vulnerability of migrants and minorities. These challenges demonstrate that urban development cannot be assessed only through the scale of infrastructure investment or the physical transformation of cities.
A central argument was that urban democracy must extend beyond elections. Citizens need meaningful opportunities to participate in planning, budgeting and decisions concerning public investment. Local governments require greater autonomy and independent resources to respond to local needs.
The session examined how conventional planning can exclude people who do not own property, women whose mobility and economic roles are overlooked, waste workers who remain vulnerable, and persons with disabilities. Rather than addressing these groups only through separate schemes, she argued for their inclusion in broader urban development processes. Strengthening local economies and creating inclusive public spaces were also important priorities.
Prof. Bhide’s discussion placed liveability and people’s everyday needs at the centre of urban development. The session highlighted that democratic, just and equitable cities require participatory governance, accountable institutions and development strategies that recognise the needs and contributions of different urban populations.
Imperatives for Financial Empowerment of Indian Cities: Constraints and Pathways
Dr. Soumyadip Chattopadhyay, Associate Professor, Visva-Bharati, Santiniketan; and Visiting Senior Fellow, IMPRI, examined the financial constraints faced by Indian cities and the need to strengthen the revenue-raising capacity of urban local bodies. Cities require substantial public investment to address infrastructure gaps, improve service delivery and respond to rapid urbanisation. However, the investment required remains significantly higher than actual expenditure, creating difficulties for municipalities attempting to meet growing public needs.
Dr. Chattopadhyay highlighted the limited municipal revenue base and the continued dependence of urban local bodies on transfers from state and central governments. This dependence can restrict financial autonomy and make it more difficult for cities to respond independently to local requirements. Smaller cities may face particular difficulties because they often have fewer resources and weaker revenue-generation capacities.
He identified two major structural issues: a mismatch between the responsibilities assigned to urban local bodies and the revenues available to them, and the underutilisation of existing tax and non-tax revenue sources. Property taxation was a particular focus. Improving coverage, valuation and collection efficiency can strengthen municipal finances by ensuring that the existing tax base is assessed and collected more effectively. The discussion emphasised the importance of strengthening conventional revenue systems before relying heavily on innovative financing mechanisms.
Dr. Chattopadhyay also explained that financial instruments should be matched to the nature of the service being provided. User charges may be appropriate when beneficiaries and the benefits of a service can be identified. Local taxes may be more suitable for services such as street lighting, which benefit the wider community. Intergovernmental transfers are important for services with broader spillover benefits, while borrowing can be used for capital investments and infrastructure. These choices must reflect the needs and capacities of individual cities rather than follow a single model.
The session also considered public-private partnerships, municipal bonds and other innovative financing mechanisms. Dr. Chattopadhyay stressed that these cannot substitute for financially capable local governments. Referring to the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act, he highlighted the need to strengthen both the financial and functional empowerment of urban local bodies. Municipalities need sufficient authority to make decisions as well as the resources to implement them.
He further emphasised revenue planning, identifying feasible reforms, creating dedicated mechanisms for revenue mobilisation and encouraging citizens to monitor municipal functions and expenditure. Financially capable municipalities are better positioned to plan for long-term infrastructure needs, deliver services and respond to the changing requirements of their residents.
Conclusion
The six-day Urban Policy and City Planning Cohort 4.0 examined India’s urban challenges through a broad range of themes. Across the sessions, the speakers demonstrated that these issues are closely connected. Planning decisions affect livelihoods and mobility; financial capacity influences service delivery; housing access is shaped by land and governance; and environmental resilience depends on both infrastructure and community participation.
A recurring theme was the gap between policy intentions and implementation. The discussions highlighted the need for context-specific planning, stronger urban local bodies, sustainable revenue systems, better use of data and coordination among government agencies. They also emphasised that cities cannot be considered inclusive if women, migrants, informal workers, persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups remain excluded from planning and public services.
The programme encouraged a broader understanding of urban development, moving beyond infrastructure-led growth towards cities that are accessible, liveable, environmentally sustainable and responsive to residents’ needs. Its discussions reinforced that building better cities requires not only sound policies and financial resources but also accountable institutions, meaningful public participation and an understanding of the diverse realities of urban life.
Acknowledgement
This report was written by Sneha Kohli- Political Science Student, Jesus and Mary College, University of Delhi, Researcher, Impact and Policy Research Institute (IMPRI), New Delhi.
Read more at IMPRI:
World Diabetes Day (14 November): Early Action on Diabetes and India’s Detection-to-Care Gap
