Urbanisation is justifiably the buzzword today and it is here to stay for long, both as a phenomenon and in terms of policy discourse. Urban spaces are sprouting and enlarging at a rapid pace the world over; and Nagaland is no exception. The urban population in Nagaland expanded by 8.86 percent between 2001 and 2011. That the rate is bound to increase is given. This undoubtedly presents a policy challenge, but also an opportunity to leverage the same for socio economic development. Against this backdrop, it is disheartening to note of the fact and the conspicuous absence of public debate over Kohima being adjudged as India’s second most unliveable city. This article is intended towards generating a public discourse on urbanisation, by arguing for the same as a resource.
For long, urbanisation studies in Third World countries forwarded the views of ‘over urbanisation’, ‘hyper-urbanisation,’ or ‘Urban hypertrophy.’ All these, in essence, contended that urbanisation in such economies are outpacing industrialisation, and that the rate of urbanisation in relation to that of National Income is “excessive” when compared to the experience of developed countries. Hence, Third World cities were cramped by too many migrants ‘pushed off’ from agriculture ‘queuing’ for industrial jobs while seeking shelter in slums. Besides, the ‘Urban Bias’ theory suggests ‘biased’ government policies in favour of politically powerful large cities. All these portrayed a somewhat negative view of urbanisation in such countries.
However, this view is now substituted by a new thinking which sees the on-going urbanisation as an opportunity, while emphasising the need to mitigate the accompanying urban issues. It is contended that over urbanisation thesis is a fallacy, primarily for the reason that it ignores the many benefits that accrues from agglomeration (briefed below). And that the precarious state of cities in developing countries, on the contrary, indicates an ‘anti-urban bias’ in policies. Exploiting the rapidly occurring urbanisation as a resource through agglomeration benefits augmenting, congestion-mitigating, resource generating cities will generate huge opportunities for economic growth, poverty reduction, and rural development. Towards this, comprehending the theoretical expectations of the gains from this phenomenon is called for.
Cities present four kinds of basic gains: economies (read as benefits) of density, scale, association, and extension. Density results in a reduction in the cost of interacting, learning, organising, producing, transporting, and consuming. It is more cost-efficient, for instance, to provide myriad social welfare services to a dense settlement than to scattered smaller settlements. Scale economies, emanating from the sheer volume of economic opportunities, spread overhead costs and risks over large number of agents. Small vendors collectively installing a standard cold storage profitably, otherwise financially unfeasible individually, is a case in point. Association economies are reflected in collaborations in devising joint strategies, undertaking innovations, and inventing solutions. Extension economies are associated with cost efficiencies of cities from extending their organised strategies to other cities and rural areas.
Cities are subjected to the above agglomeration economies, which make them storehouses of skill and capital, hubs of knowledge and innovation, sources of informal and formal employment, hopes of millions of rural-urban migrants, markets of goods, and generators of public financial resources for socio-economic development including rural development. Nagaland Vision 2030 document affirms that “in the present century the urban areas are emerging as the ‘engines of economic growth’ as agglomeration and densification of economic activities stimulates accelerated economic growth and better opportunities. They are not only strategic centres of economic activity and living, but they are also critical for achieving inclusive growth as they provide ample social and economic opportunities”. All these can be gleaned from history, and statistically validated.
Humankind has made a remarkable stride in material wellbeing. In this economic headway, urban spaces have been and continue to be a key driver and facilitator. In ancient times, port towns and cities, by means of sea haulage, were prosperous centres of cultural and commercial exchange, providing rich revenues to royal exchequers. Today, the economic reality is such that cities are the prime generators of the wealth of nations. Urban-based economic activities account for up to 55 percent of GDP in low-income countries, 73 percent in middle-income countries, and 85 percent in high-income countries (Mohanty, 2014). According to Mckinsey Global Institute analysis (2010), cities accounted for 58 percent of India’s GDP in 2008, and is projected to account nearly 70 percent by 2030.
While the economic significance of cities is unparalleled, on the other hand, most cities of today are not without issues. And in order not to negate the benefits of urban agglomerations, the urban challenges and issues have to be taken care of. The New Urban Agenda (2017), intended to guide the policy approach of the UN member states towards sustainable urbanisation for the next 20 years, represents a global consensus that “our future is urban”. And to make our future (read as cities) sustainable, gender equity, youth empowerment, participatory planning, “right to the city” or inclusive public space, “leave no one behind” or reducing urban inequality, etc. are some of the emphasised goals.
