Decentralizing India’s National Capital: To tackle Delhi’s pollution & many other problems

Delhi’s centralized role under strain

Seven years back, through my article[1], I argued for the decentralization of India’s National Capital and suggested distributing its administrative functions across tier-2 and tier-3 cities across India, without disruption to government services.

Since then, every passing year has validated the logic of this suggestion, not only reaffirming the original arguments but also adding new dimensions to the case.

This article revisits the idea and explores why it is even more relevant today.

Why decentralize the National Capital?

Delhi’s role as India’s political and administrative nerve center has created a lopsided dependence on a single city, which is becoming increasingly untenable for several reasons:

1. Congestion and Pollution: Delhi is overcrowded and heavily polluted, with air quality regularly breaching hazardous levels. This poses severe health risks to its residents, particularly children and the elderly, leading to long-term implications for public health.
2. Infrastructure Strain: Basic amenities like water and electricity are stretched thin. Traffic congestion and overburdened public transportation systems result in wasted time and reduced productivity.
3. Security Risks: Concentrating the country’s administrative apparatus in one city makes it vulnerable to terrorism, natural disasters, and other calamities.

Distributing these functions would mitigate risks and enhance national resilience.

4. Economic Imbalance: The concentration of Central government offices in Delhi inflates property prices, skews economic activity, and perpetuates regional inequality.

A practical vision for decentralization

The idea is not to displace Delhi as the National Capital entirely but only to distribute its administrative load. The top-level officials of all the ministries and departments may be retained in Delhi for administrative convenience.

Here’s how it could work:

• Logical Allocation of Ministries and Departments: Ministries (and even departments within ministries) could be relocated to different cities/ towns best suited for their focus areas.

For instance:

• Ministry of Shipping to Kochi
• Ministry of Food Processing to Anand, Gujarat
• Ministry of Fisheries to Quilon
• Ministry of Space to Thiruvananthapuram

These are just examples. The government may find a better or different way of distributing ministries and departments.

• Focus on Tier-2 and Tier-3 Cities: Cities like Varanasi, Surat, Dhanbad, and Mangaluru offer the space and capacity to accommodate additional population and infrastructure.

Avoiding already congested metros like Bengaluru ensures balanced regional development.

• Phased Implementation: The government may start with a pilot involving one or two ministries, followed by an evaluation of costs, benefits, and scalability.
• Leveraging Technology: Advances in IT and communication enable virtual conferences and seamless coordination, making physical proximity less critical.

The conduct of G20 meetings last year across different cities and towns very successfully should give the government increased confidence in varying out such a major exercise.

Advantages of decentralization

1. Balanced Urban Growth: Smaller towns would develop rapidly, reducing the urban-rural divide.
   Infrastructure spending in these cities and towns would benefit the local population and promote regional economies.
   In fact, this has the potential to increase the GDP of almost all the states and hence the national GDP.
2. Economic Integration: Decentralization would distribute government salaries and expenditures more evenly across the country, spurring demand and private sector activity in smaller towns.
3. Improved Governance: Decentralized ministries would foster closer interactions with local populations and industries, enabling policymakers to address ground realities more effectively. In fact, since the shift will be to the city/ town with the maximum relevance to the ministry/ department, unnecessary travel of people most impacted to Delhi can be significantly reduced.
4. Reduced Pressure on Delhi: Relieving Delhi’s administrative burden would improve its livability, especially in terms of pollution levels, availability of housing, water, and other amenities, making it a more sustainable capital. If we don’t do this, very soon we’ll be ridiculed by the world for so poorly managing our capital city.
5. Enhanced Federalism: States would feel a greater sense of belonging, ownership, and connection to the Central Government, strengthening India’s federal structure.
6. Cultural Integration: Central Government employees relocating to different states would foster greater cultural understanding and national unity.

Addressing concerns

Critics may argue that decentralization could increase costs or create administrative inefficiencies. In fact, this opportunity can be used to restructure the administrative apparatus of the government (which I’ll address through another article,).

Any other challenges that arise can be mitigated appropriately:

• Conduct rigorous cost-benefit analyses for each relocation.
• Ensure robust IT infrastructure and seamless communication systems.

Initially limit relocation to ministries and departments that do not require day-to-day coordination with other ministries.

Global Comparisons and Precedents

While very few countries appear to have adopted this model, India could pioneer this reform so that it aligns with its size and diversity.

Examples like Brazil’s Brasília or South Africa’s three-capital system (executive in Pretoria, legislative in Cape Town, and judicial in Bloemfontein) highlight that alternative models are possible.

Conclusion: A call for bold action

Decentralizing the National Capital is not merely an administrative adjustment. It’s a transformative step toward equitable development and stronger governance.

It is time to revisit this idea, deliberate on its potential, and begin a phased implementation.

This proposal may face initial resistance, particularly from entrenched interests in Delhi, but with broad-based consensus and effective communication, it can be realized.

Let’s reimagine the role of Delhi, not as the sole hub of India’s governance but as one among many vibrant administrative centers.

Please read the original article[1]. here for a deeper dive into this idea’s genesis and foundational arguments.

Note:
1. Text in Blue points to additional data on the topic.
2. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of PGurus.

References:
[1] PM Should Explore Distributing Our National Capital – Jan 15, 2018, PGurus.com

For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.

The post Decentralizing India’s National Capital: To tackle Delhi’s pollution & many other problems appeared first on PGurus.