There
are probably as many definitions of underdevelopment as there are developing
countries. So let me offer another definition that may be appropriate
for the early 21st century: a developing country is one with few places
for urban residents to walk safely.
The lack of safety need not be a reflection of crime, but simply a matter
of inadequate facilities for pedestrians. The almost complete lack of
safe and continuous pavements and footpaths that is so typical of the
many urban sprawls across the developing world is almost as notable
as the extensive provision of these in, say, cities and towns of western
Europe. Indeed, those cities of the developing world where pedestrians
are given some attention and civic space are generally in the more developed
parts: Singapore, Malaysia, Argentina, for example.
Developing countries currently have rapid rates of rural-urban migration,
and it is estimated that already more than half of the population of
the developing world consists of urban residents. Yet the provision
of basic infrastructure has lagged far behind the movement of people.
The shortage of basic amenities especially in urban slums is well known.
Problems such as those of inadequate safe water supply, sanitation,
power provision, environmental pollution and congestion have been widely
studied. The shortage of space, with cramped and crowded living and
working conditions, no playgrounds for children and few parks for residents,
have been noted.
Increasingly, there is also recognition of the ecological footprints
of urbanisation. Generally, towns and cities in developing countries
have lower per capita energy consumption than those in the developed
world. Even so, developing country urban sprawls cast adverse environmental
shadows on the surrounding region, not only through the generation of
solid waste and air pollution, but also by contaminating water sources,
using up or degrading what used to be prime agricultural land, destroying
natural vegetation. These eventually affect environmental conditions
in the urban spaces themselves, and impact on urban quality of life,
especially for the less privileged residents who cannot protect themselves
from the negative impacts.
These issues are now commonplace in discussions on the urban condition.
But one very crucial aspect of city life in developing countries seems
to be missed out in most such discussions - the importance of having
safe, continuous and usable walking spaces.
This is certainly evident in India, even though rates of urbanisation
in India are lower than in most of the developing world. In general,
urban development in India is clearly engaged in the process of destroying
the footpaths and pavements that did exist. It seems to be that most
municipalities rarely accommodate for footpaths in urban planning exercises,
or if they do, they subsequently turn a blind eye to breaches of plans
that destroy walking spaces.
As a result, even cities that even a decade ago used to be seen as pleasant
havens with leafy walk ways are now congested nightmares, with paved
roads for vehicles taking precedence and reducing or even removing the
spaces available for pedestrians. The problem is not confined to the
rapidly expanding metros, but spreads across almost all urban conglomerations.
As a result, pedestrians walk the streets at their peril, typically
having to share the road with unregulated traffic involving all sorts
of vehicles and without access to any separate protected space.
To take only one example, consider Hyderabad, a city that has grown
very rapidly in the last decade not only in population but even more
in geographical spread. Two aspects of Hyderabad's growth make it even
more instructive as an example with wider significance.
First, urban development in Hyderabad has raised property prices so
sharply that land has become a major source of both accumulation and
speculation. This in turn has given rise to numerous scams around land-grabbing
and insider deals, of which that related to Satyam/Maytas is only the
latest. Second, both the current state government and the previous one
have emphasised the ''beautification'' of the city and the creation
of ''world class'' urban infrastructure.
So what are the ''world class'' facilities that the city of Hyderabad
now delivers it residents? Mostly, the new urban development consists
of some major new urban road arteries, widening of existing roads, the
spanking new Shamshabad airport (which is almost desolate in its distance
and imitative grandeur), along with the usual paraphernalia of contemporary
metropolitana: shopping malls and high rise apartments.
Much of this has predictably excluded the majority of residents, and
the lack of emphasis on basics such as adequate sanitation or clean
and affordable housing for the poor is only too evident in the continuing
chaos and growing congestion of much of Hyderabad and Secunderabad.
But the road expansion in particular has had another effect: the almost
complete destruction of pavements and walking spaces in large parts
of the twin cities.
Wherever roads have been widened, the assumption seems to have been
that no one will ever need to walk along them, but will simply use mechanised
transport to traverse them even for short distances. There is no other
way to understand why in many places there has been no apparent attempt
to create any sort of separate pavement, and pedestrians are forced
to negotiate their passage in direct competition (and often confrontation)
with speeding cars, buses, two- and three-wheelers. Since vehicular
traffic in India is almost universally aggressive in its attitude to
pedestrians, this does not make for easy or safe journeys on foot. And
the problem is compounded by the various animals that are usually to
be found on our streets, for whom movement must be equally if not more
difficult.
On those streets where some minor concession to pedestrians remains
in the form of a few limited sidewalks, these are little more than complicated
and often malicious obstacle courses. The narrow pavements are usually
uneven, poorly paved and apparently never cleaned. They tend to be punctuated
with trees, electric poles, stumps of open live wires, heaps of rubbish
and sludge, broken glass and other discarded items - forcing those who
try to use them to periodically jump off them and on to the crowded
roads.
All this makes it difficult enough for healthy adults to perambulate
on such roads. Imagine the problems of old people, small children, pregnant
women, people with some physical disability, those carrying heavy and
bulky burdens. The simple act of perambulation becomes not just arduous
but something fraught with risk, a near-impossible task.
Since urban planning in India also apparently ignores the obvious need
for public conveniences for ordinary people, and Hyderabad appears to
be no exception to this rule, public toilets are few and far between.
They are certainly hard to find on most major roads or even in most
markets and other crowded urban spaces. This creates huge problems for
women who are forced to be in such public spaces for long periods, but
the male of the species in our country is typically not constrained
by such lack of facilities. Therefore the pavements tend to have another,
less dangerous but often more unpleasant, feature: the pervasive stench
of urine.
Combine all this with other sources of unease for hapless pedestrians:
noise pollution because of the constant honking of car horns and the
rumble of engines; atmospheric pollution because of all the emissions
from the vast diversity of vehicles of every size and age; the difficulty
of crossing streets even when there are traffic lights, because of so
many transgressions by vehicles. It is clear that street life is nasty
and brutish, not just for the poorest of the poor who are forced to
live on the streets, but even for those who have to walk on them for
a short while.
I have picked on Hyderabad as an example, but clearly the problem is
not unique to this city. From Mumbai to Kolkata, from Pune to Chennai,
from Bangalore to Amritsar, we are destroying urban spaces and making
them dirty, difficult and dangerous for most people to use.
What is extraordinary is that much of this is done precisely in the
name of making our cities ''world class''! Perhaps, if we stopped thinking
of the world, and started thinking of the needs of most of our own urban
residents, we might actually begin to make our cities liveable.