The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this p... more The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
Across the 10 cities in 3 states, a total of 29 different agencies were assessed and 381 indicato... more Across the 10 cities in 3 states, a total of 29 different agencies were assessed and 381 indicators were evaluated. In this chapter, consolidated results from the assessments against different parameters are presented. Overall analyses of the indicators reveal that agencies tend to score better in the aspect of ‘accountability’, while ‘public participation’ fares the poorest when it comes to urban mobility-related governance. For accountability, cities in Karnataka and Bengal score high in mostly all functions. Participation as an element of good governance fares the worst across all cities and states analysed. Transparency ratings are largely in the medium range across all the states. Karnataka and Delhi score the highest on the capacity-related indicators, with all other states having mostly low to medium scores.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
We begin with an overview of the current state of urban transport. Top-down attempts to reform th... more We begin with an overview of the current state of urban transport. Top-down attempts to reform the sector are critiqued. Various reforms underway and the nature of these reforms are discussed. We provide a summary of the Transport Governance Initiative and the structured way this allows us to assess the governance of the sector and find areas for improvement. We then present a summary of the regulatory framework and the gaps in it. The attempted reforms and the absence of a focus on governance reforms are mentioned. In the next section we present an overview of what the assessments revealed in terms of each of the governance aspects. Finally, we provide some ideas for the way forward in terms of legislative reforms, capacity enhancement and the need for attitudinal shifts. We also suggest how these reforms may be achieved.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
This chapter presents findings of the application of the TGI toolkit on a set of five urban mobil... more This chapter presents findings of the application of the TGI toolkit on a set of five urban mobility-related policies—the Delhi Transit Oriented Development (TOD) policy, Chennai’s non-motorized transport policy, parking policy of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike and Maha Mysuru Mahanagara Corporation and the road safety policy of Tamil Nadu—assessed from the lens of the TGI toolkit for the policymaking function. As prescribed by the TGI toolkit, these indicators assess the processes and approaches adopted in formulating the policy and not the merits/demerits of the policies themselves. Overall, we found that all the selected states/cities, except Delhi, rated medium to low on most indicators. The TOD policy in Delhi received a high score on almost all aspects of quality. We find that the capacity-related indicators scored the highest and transparency and public participation indicators scored the lowest across all cities.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
We assess eight Executing Authorities, i.e. agencies that undertake urban transport projects or p... more We assess eight Executing Authorities, i.e. agencies that undertake urban transport projects or provide transport services in this chapter. The agencies evaluated are the Public Works Department (PWD) of Delhi, the Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC), the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC), the Development Authorities of Kolkata, Siliguri Jalpaiguri and Asansol Durgapur in West Bengal, the Road Department of the Corporation of Chennai and the Projects Wing of the Tamil Nadu Highways Department. Executing authorities are evaluated based on 20 indicators. Half of the indicators evaluated scored a ‘low’ value, while only a tenth got a ‘high’ rating. All but one of the Public Participation indicators got a ‘low’ score. The PWD Delhi and the two Transport Corporations in Karnataka performed better in this category. At the other end of the spectrum, the Corporation of Chennai fared very poorly, with 18 of the 20 indicators assessed as a ‘low’.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
This chapter presents the state of the work on urban and metropolitan governance, generally first... more This chapter presents the state of the work on urban and metropolitan governance, generally first and then in the context of the Transparency, Accountability, Public Participation, Capacity (TAP-C) framework. Summarizing studies on metropolitan governance, these debate the transition from ‘government’ to ‘governance’, but we find the latter is a better term to promote equity and inclusion. We find that only those systems that have a corporate mindset in being accountable to the users of various services are successful. Regarding public participation, we find that middle-class and neighbourhood associations are more likely to be included in such consultations. Based on a comprehensive review of the literature, we find that to save a few studies, the research on urban governance especially in the context of democratic countries such as India is still nascent. This chapter ends by describing how this book is novel in developing a TAP-C framework.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
We assess nine planning indicators in this chapter—planning mandate, capacity of the planning age... more We assess nine planning indicators in this chapter—planning mandate, capacity of the planning agency, effectiveness of the planning process, transparency in the working of the planning agency, public participation in planning, legislative review–capacity, and public participation, and engagement of consultant/advisory groups by the planning agency. The selected cities are rated quite highly on the planning mandate in statutory requirements, planning capacity and their effectiveness. Most cities are rated quite low on enabling public participation and transparency in the working of the planning agency. Most cities did not require a mandated legislative review. Even where the legislative review is required, they are rated quite low on transparency or public participation in such a process. Nonetheless most cities are rated quite highly on the engagement of consultant/advisory groups and the way in which they are objectively treated.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
This chapter looks at the budgeting process in eight different agencies that are involved in tran... more This chapter looks at the budgeting process in eight different agencies that are involved in transport infrastructure development or provision of transport services. The former consists of the Public Works Department (PWD) of Delhi, the Corporation of Chennai and the Tamil Nadu Highways Department. The latter are Transport Corporations providing bus services. We evaluated the Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC) and the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC). In the State of West Bengal, we scrutinized the Calcutta, North Bengal and South Bengal State Road Transport Corporations. The budget process is assessed using seven indicators. Overall, 41 of the 56 indicators evaluated only managed a ‘low’ score. PWD Delhi fared better than other agencies. While the Accountability and Capacity indicators had some ‘low’, ‘medium’ and even a few ‘high’ scores, we find that all Public Participation indicators and all but two of the Transparency indicators scored a ‘low...
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
In this chapter, we examine the mandate and functioning of the standard-setting bodies in each of... more In this chapter, we examine the mandate and functioning of the standard-setting bodies in each of our selected states and cities, based on four indicators—the standards mandate itself, their actual functioning, the role of stakeholder consultations and the enforcement of standards relating to urban mobility. In Delhi, the street design guidelines mandated by the Unified Traffic and Transportation Infrastructure (Planning & Engineering) are chosen as the standard. In Bengaluru, the Directorate of Urban Land Transport is selected as the standard-setting agency. The other selected cities do not have a city-based standard regarding the urban transport sector; hence the assessment teams are not in a position to evaluate or rate them. Hence, in this chapter, we analyse the rating only for Delhi and Bengaluru which score reasonably well on various elements of quality.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
In this chapter we present the results of the evaluation of 11 indicators related to the function... more In this chapter we present the results of the evaluation of 11 indicators related to the functioning of regulatory authorities. In Karnataka, the Transport Corporations providing bus services in the cities of Bangalore and Mysore were assessed while in the State of West Bengal the Regional Transport Authorities (RTAs) were scrutinized. The State Transport Authority (STA) was evaluated in Tamil Nadu. We find that most agencies fare poorly, with about half of the indicators getting evaluated as ‘low’ and half getting a ‘medium’ rating with only a handful of indicators getting a ‘high’ score. Within the TAP-C categories, we find that only the Capacity indicators scored a ‘high’ value, while at the other end, all Transparency indicators scored a ‘low’ value.
This chapter focuses on urban transport governance. We summarize the existing studies on urban tr... more This chapter focuses on urban transport governance. We summarize the existing studies on urban transport, and position our work uniquely in the context of the existing research. The chapter elaborates on why urban transport as a sector is important to focus upon. Summarizing the studies on general transport governance, we find that it is an important sector that cannot be ignored, especially because of its network effects, but has to be made sustainable. Regarding institutional arrangements for urban transport, we find mere merging of transport and land-use departments without their holistic consideration does not work. But we find collaborative/cooperative governance works. While we find the presence of both public and private operators in public transport systems creates competition, there has to be an appropriate institutional framework for public–private partnerships (PPPs) to work, given the limited resources for the government in emerging economies, to make them inclusive and ...
2007 International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development, 2007
... Working with such goals and the large number of projects with strong unmet and unrecognized .... more ... Working with such goals and the large number of projects with strong unmet and unrecognized ... the particular project, based on the judgment of the initiators 4) Visibility: the expectation was that ... that would be the most visible to the public would generate enough public support to ...
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this p... more The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
Across the 10 cities in 3 states, a total of 29 different agencies were assessed and 381 indicato... more Across the 10 cities in 3 states, a total of 29 different agencies were assessed and 381 indicators were evaluated. In this chapter, consolidated results from the assessments against different parameters are presented. Overall analyses of the indicators reveal that agencies tend to score better in the aspect of ‘accountability’, while ‘public participation’ fares the poorest when it comes to urban mobility-related governance. For accountability, cities in Karnataka and Bengal score high in mostly all functions. Participation as an element of good governance fares the worst across all cities and states analysed. Transparency ratings are largely in the medium range across all the states. Karnataka and Delhi score the highest on the capacity-related indicators, with all other states having mostly low to medium scores.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
We begin with an overview of the current state of urban transport. Top-down attempts to reform th... more We begin with an overview of the current state of urban transport. Top-down attempts to reform the sector are critiqued. Various reforms underway and the nature of these reforms are discussed. We provide a summary of the Transport Governance Initiative and the structured way this allows us to assess the governance of the sector and find areas for improvement. We then present a summary of the regulatory framework and the gaps in it. The attempted reforms and the absence of a focus on governance reforms are mentioned. In the next section we present an overview of what the assessments revealed in terms of each of the governance aspects. Finally, we provide some ideas for the way forward in terms of legislative reforms, capacity enhancement and the need for attitudinal shifts. We also suggest how these reforms may be achieved.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
This chapter presents findings of the application of the TGI toolkit on a set of five urban mobil... more This chapter presents findings of the application of the TGI toolkit on a set of five urban mobility-related policies—the Delhi Transit Oriented Development (TOD) policy, Chennai’s non-motorized transport policy, parking policy of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike and Maha Mysuru Mahanagara Corporation and the road safety policy of Tamil Nadu—assessed from the lens of the TGI toolkit for the policymaking function. As prescribed by the TGI toolkit, these indicators assess the processes and approaches adopted in formulating the policy and not the merits/demerits of the policies themselves. Overall, we found that all the selected states/cities, except Delhi, rated medium to low on most indicators. The TOD policy in Delhi received a high score on almost all aspects of quality. We find that the capacity-related indicators scored the highest and transparency and public participation indicators scored the lowest across all cities.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
We assess eight Executing Authorities, i.e. agencies that undertake urban transport projects or p... more We assess eight Executing Authorities, i.e. agencies that undertake urban transport projects or provide transport services in this chapter. The agencies evaluated are the Public Works Department (PWD) of Delhi, the Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC), the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC), the Development Authorities of Kolkata, Siliguri Jalpaiguri and Asansol Durgapur in West Bengal, the Road Department of the Corporation of Chennai and the Projects Wing of the Tamil Nadu Highways Department. Executing authorities are evaluated based on 20 indicators. Half of the indicators evaluated scored a ‘low’ value, while only a tenth got a ‘high’ rating. All but one of the Public Participation indicators got a ‘low’ score. The PWD Delhi and the two Transport Corporations in Karnataka performed better in this category. At the other end of the spectrum, the Corporation of Chennai fared very poorly, with 18 of the 20 indicators assessed as a ‘low’.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
This chapter presents the state of the work on urban and metropolitan governance, generally first... more This chapter presents the state of the work on urban and metropolitan governance, generally first and then in the context of the Transparency, Accountability, Public Participation, Capacity (TAP-C) framework. Summarizing studies on metropolitan governance, these debate the transition from ‘government’ to ‘governance’, but we find the latter is a better term to promote equity and inclusion. We find that only those systems that have a corporate mindset in being accountable to the users of various services are successful. Regarding public participation, we find that middle-class and neighbourhood associations are more likely to be included in such consultations. Based on a comprehensive review of the literature, we find that to save a few studies, the research on urban governance especially in the context of democratic countries such as India is still nascent. This chapter ends by describing how this book is novel in developing a TAP-C framework.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
We assess nine planning indicators in this chapter—planning mandate, capacity of the planning age... more We assess nine planning indicators in this chapter—planning mandate, capacity of the planning agency, effectiveness of the planning process, transparency in the working of the planning agency, public participation in planning, legislative review–capacity, and public participation, and engagement of consultant/advisory groups by the planning agency. The selected cities are rated quite highly on the planning mandate in statutory requirements, planning capacity and their effectiveness. Most cities are rated quite low on enabling public participation and transparency in the working of the planning agency. Most cities did not require a mandated legislative review. Even where the legislative review is required, they are rated quite low on transparency or public participation in such a process. Nonetheless most cities are rated quite highly on the engagement of consultant/advisory groups and the way in which they are objectively treated.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
This chapter looks at the budgeting process in eight different agencies that are involved in tran... more This chapter looks at the budgeting process in eight different agencies that are involved in transport infrastructure development or provision of transport services. The former consists of the Public Works Department (PWD) of Delhi, the Corporation of Chennai and the Tamil Nadu Highways Department. The latter are Transport Corporations providing bus services. We evaluated the Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC) and the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC). In the State of West Bengal, we scrutinized the Calcutta, North Bengal and South Bengal State Road Transport Corporations. The budget process is assessed using seven indicators. Overall, 41 of the 56 indicators evaluated only managed a ‘low’ score. PWD Delhi fared better than other agencies. While the Accountability and Capacity indicators had some ‘low’, ‘medium’ and even a few ‘high’ scores, we find that all Public Participation indicators and all but two of the Transparency indicators scored a ‘low...
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
In this chapter, we examine the mandate and functioning of the standard-setting bodies in each of... more In this chapter, we examine the mandate and functioning of the standard-setting bodies in each of our selected states and cities, based on four indicators—the standards mandate itself, their actual functioning, the role of stakeholder consultations and the enforcement of standards relating to urban mobility. In Delhi, the street design guidelines mandated by the Unified Traffic and Transportation Infrastructure (Planning & Engineering) are chosen as the standard. In Bengaluru, the Directorate of Urban Land Transport is selected as the standard-setting agency. The other selected cities do not have a city-based standard regarding the urban transport sector; hence the assessment teams are not in a position to evaluate or rate them. Hence, in this chapter, we analyse the rating only for Delhi and Bengaluru which score reasonably well on various elements of quality.
Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport, 2019
In this chapter we present the results of the evaluation of 11 indicators related to the function... more In this chapter we present the results of the evaluation of 11 indicators related to the functioning of regulatory authorities. In Karnataka, the Transport Corporations providing bus services in the cities of Bangalore and Mysore were assessed while in the State of West Bengal the Regional Transport Authorities (RTAs) were scrutinized. The State Transport Authority (STA) was evaluated in Tamil Nadu. We find that most agencies fare poorly, with about half of the indicators getting evaluated as ‘low’ and half getting a ‘medium’ rating with only a handful of indicators getting a ‘high’ score. Within the TAP-C categories, we find that only the Capacity indicators scored a ‘high’ value, while at the other end, all Transparency indicators scored a ‘low’ value.
This chapter focuses on urban transport governance. We summarize the existing studies on urban tr... more This chapter focuses on urban transport governance. We summarize the existing studies on urban transport, and position our work uniquely in the context of the existing research. The chapter elaborates on why urban transport as a sector is important to focus upon. Summarizing the studies on general transport governance, we find that it is an important sector that cannot be ignored, especially because of its network effects, but has to be made sustainable. Regarding institutional arrangements for urban transport, we find mere merging of transport and land-use departments without their holistic consideration does not work. But we find collaborative/cooperative governance works. While we find the presence of both public and private operators in public transport systems creates competition, there has to be an appropriate institutional framework for public–private partnerships (PPPs) to work, given the limited resources for the government in emerging economies, to make them inclusive and ...
2007 International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development, 2007
... Working with such goals and the large number of projects with strong unmet and unrecognized .... more ... Working with such goals and the large number of projects with strong unmet and unrecognized ... the particular project, based on the judgment of the initiators 4) Visibility: the expectation was that ... that would be the most visible to the public would generate enough public support to ...
Uploads
Papers by Ranjit Gadgil