The idea of KISS

In a fairy tale, a kiss turned a frog into a prince. Recently, I was fortunate enough to visit KISS (Kalinga Institute of Social Sciences) in Bhubaneswar. Most people have heard of KISS and Achyuta Samanta (the founder of KISS and KIIT — Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology), or should have. While there is a KISS International School with some international students, the core is the regular KISS school and the associated KISS college for higher education. KISS was started in 1993 with 125 tribal students and some financial support from the ministry of tribal affairs. Today, there are 25,000 tribal students, from 62 poor tribal communities (13 primitive tribal groups). Most, though not all, are from Odisha. For these students, who are poor and first-generation learners, education is free, from kindergarten to postgraduation. Since schooling is residential, board, lodging and healthcare are also free. Compared to many schools, private as well as public, the KISS track record is rather good — gender ratio, retention rates, pass percentages, integration of vocational education, sports and extra-curricular activities. More specifically, the school has 19,057 students — 9,044 girls and 10,013 boys. The college has 5,994 students — 3,204 girls and 2,790 boys. 

As news about KISS spread in the deprived and disadvantaged catchment area (Odisha, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh), there has been demand for enrolment in it. I was told there are around 50,000 applicants, even after filtering for poverty. But there is a reason for that cap of 25,000. This is primarily a private-cum-social initiative, with limited money received from governments, Union or state. When rice is provided by the Odisha government, it is at APL (above poverty line) and not BPL (below poverty line) rates. Most land (80 acres, 1.5 million square feet of built-up area) has been privately acquired, from villagers. The only exception seems to be some land given on a lease basis to KIIT (one of its wings), but not to KISS. This land was part of the Chandaka Industrial Estate. That never took off. There were sick industries and plots of unutilised land lying around. Hence, Odisha’s Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation handed over some of this land to educational institutions, KIIT being one. Since there are no doles and handouts from outside, the KISS model works only if there is internal cross-subsidisation. And that happens to be with KIIT, which was set up in 1992 with Rs 5,000 in funding. But that expansion of the acronym — Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology — is in the past. Since 2004, KIIT has been a university, having taken the deemed university route. KIIT University now has 11 different schools, spread over 400 acres and with 20,000 students. Note that all these courses, undergraduate and postgraduate, are “professional”. You won’t go to KIIT University and study the liberal arts. Other than the human resource development ministry, the University Grants Commission and the All India Council for Technical Education, assorted newspapers and magazines rate educational institutions. Let’s not get into that. 

For the same university, ranks can also vary across different schools. KIIT University isn’t at the very top. (It is certainly more difficult to attract good faculty to Bhubaneswar. Any good product from an educational institution is the result of faculty, learning from peers and tight entry criteria.) But it is rapidly moving towards the top, especially in the eastern region, and given its relative youth, its climb up the rankings is remarkable. Without KIIT, KISS cannot exist, and that has to do with the innovative way in which the latter is financed. Five per cent of KIIT’s turnover is mandatorily donated to KISS, like CSR funds. “Profits” from KIIT are ploughed into KISS. Every KIIT employee contributes 3 per cent of gross salary towards KISS. Any vendor or contractor that supplies KIIT has to mandatorily contribute 2 to 3 per cent of profits to KISS. Vocational products produced in KISS as outcomes of vocational training also fetch some money. (Students retain 50 per cent of profits from the sale of such products.) 

Finally, there is the channel of pure charitable donations. These multiple methods are enough to sustain KISS, and it works far better than public subsidies through financing, or even direct public provisioning (think of government schools, colleges and universities). Why not replicate KISS elsewhere? For the record, KISS does plan to set up branches in all 30 of Odisha’s districts, in 10 states and 10 countries (with two branches in Bangladesh). Since 2013, there has been a KISS school in Delhi (Najafgarh), with 1,200 students, as a joint venture between KISS and the National Capital Territory government. A KISS school is about to start in Ranchi. But all these will perforce deviate from the original Bhubaneswar model of using KIIT to cross-subsidise KISS. It isn’t that easy to replicate KIIT everywhere, and that is the intent, either. Therefore, the other KISS initiatives will have to be supported by state (or other) governments, for land, building infrastructure and running expenses. 

None of those requirements is significant compared to the huge sums of money governments spend on education, with limited gains. Nevertheless, the original Bhubaneswar idea appeals much more. Someone had the foresight to say: I don’t want to go to the government with a begging bowl. Let me see what I can do, individually and collectively. Let me be the change agent, instead of perpetually asking governments to do something. I don’t expect governments to establish temples to Lakshmi and Saraswati. That’s why KISS is precious. 

Strategies for Boosting Biotech Industry, Stem Cell Research, Genome Engineering, Computational Biology and Drug Discovery were Outlined at a Strategy meet on Biotechnology

Strategies for Boosting Biotech Industry, Stem Cell Research, Genome Engineering, Computational Biology and Drug Discovery were Outlined at a Strategy meet on Biotechnology

The Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science & Technology, Government of India is completing 30 years and will be celebrating its 30^th Foundation Day in February 2016. It was felt appropriate at this point to assess and analyze in consultation with all Stake-holders the 4P’s- Progress, Promises, Problems and Plans for Future. In this connection a Strategy Meet was organized by Department of Biotechnology (DBT) on 31^stAugust, 2015 at NCR Biotech Science Cluster, Faridabad. The Minister Science & Technology and Earth Sciences, Dr. Harsh Vardhan presided over the meeting. The meeting was attended by the Directors and Senior Faculty of DBT aided Autonomous Institute’s, Senior Experts across the Country and Senior Members of the Civil Society. Secretary and all Officers of DBT were present.

In his Opening Address, Secretary, DBT gave an overview and detailed assessment of the impact over the years and highlighted how DBT has contributed significantly through its efforts towards:

Supporting Key Missions

Spear heading cutting edge research

Building Institutional and Human Resource Capacity

Forging Industry Academic partnership

Leveraging international strength through collaborations and

Guiding policy thinking and analysis

The Minister Science & Technology and Earth Sciences, Dr. Harsh Vardhan in his Inaugural Address highlighted the importance of Biotechnology Sector to contribute to the society. He said that it would be important to develop a new sense of urgency and work towards preparing an Action Plan and address key strategies for the future to deliver perceptible and measurable impact to the benefit of society.

The Minister also stated that the Biotechnology Sector which has an important role and cuts across all other sectors, takes forward its strategy in partnership with other S&T Ministry / Departments and State Governments.

He appreciated the good work that DBT is doing in taking forward Biotechnology Research in the country and stressed the necessity to fix 3 to 4 focus areas with achievable targets in the next 2 to 3 years.  The Hon’ble Minister added that malnutrition could be one of the key focus areas elaborating that whereas there has been much research on nutrition, the research needed to be translated to yield benefits for people.

In response to questions from management and social sector experts on perceptible and measurable strategies of DBT over the next couple of years, Secretary DBT underlined the following:

Biotech will see at least a 20 % increase in new companies, 20% more biotech incubators, 20% more social-sector partnerships, and 20% more Med-tech devices each year over the next three years

Results from stem-cell research will see impact on Sickle-cell anemia and Thalassemia treatments in three years

Work on maternal health, pre-term birth and stunted growth will result in significant improvement in nutrition and anemia treatment - programs for women within 2-3 years

India will establish a substantial presence in genome engineering and computational biology in coming three (3) years.

Mapping of the biodiversity of our islands and the coral reefs will be completed next year from which drug discovery centres will have access to novel compounds in two years

Major international collaborations will be established this year and the next following high-level exchanges with Japan (Stem-cells), France (Marine Biology) Canada (Stem cells), Netherlands (Vaccines), UK (Agri-plant), Netherlands (vaccines), US (Energy, Vaccines)

The Hon’ble Minister Science & Technology highlighted that while the overall strategy of the DBT was clear, each institution and each unit of DBT should have measurable targets over the next couple of years.

The DBT aided Autonomous Institutions have contributed significantly to the specific domain areas of expertise and concerted efforts has been made to take basic research through translation to product development.

From the analysis it was noted that a number of technologies, products and patents have been generated and DBT has worked towards promoting Industry Innovation Research.

Biotechnology Industry Research Assistance Council (BIRAC), which is a Public Sector of DBT focusses on promoting the innovation ecosystem and today a large number Startups and young Innovators have benefited from the support provided. A number of products and technologies have been delivered.

In the presentations made by the Directors of DBT Autonomous Institutions and other experts a broad overview of various thematic areas was presented highlighting specifically where we stand vis-à-vis the global scenario, the challenges faced and future action plan.

At the end of the meeting after detailed deliberations, a clear road map for the future was prepared. The targeted mission is to “Accelerate the pace of growth of Biotechnology Sector to achieve a target of $110 billion by 2025”.

It was agreed to focus on:

Building a skilled workforce and leadership.

Encouraging basic and discovery research and connecting this to our society.

Nurturing innovation, translation and entrepreneurship to transform our society.

Ensuring a transparent and globally best regulatory environment.

Building and fostering partnerships both at National and International level.

It was also agreed that for effective implementation of these strategic decisions it is important that we create a matrix of the measurements of process as well as outcome.

Key Missions are also being formulated to address major National Challenges on Healthcare, Energy, Food Security and Human Resource.

Coping with regional disparitie

Eleven states in India have 'special category' status. This extra-Constitutional status, introduced for the first time in 1969, was granted by the National Development Council, composed of the prime minister, Union ministers, chief ministers and members of the erstwhile Planning Commission. These 11 have hilly and difficult terrain, lowpopulation density, a sizeable share of the population as tribals, strategic location along the borders, economic and infrastructural backwardness, and a non-viable nature of state finances.

Bihar does not satisfy all the criteria. Yet, Chief MinisterNitish Kumar has been demanding the status for a while. The story is similar to "reservation", introduced constitutionally, initially for 10 years, and only forScheduled Tribes (ST) and Scheduled Castes (SC). The demand for the extension of special category status to other states is similar to the demands for the extension of reservation to groups other than SC and ST.

Special category states enjoy a number of benefits such as excise and income tax concessions, an earmarked 30 per cent of the normal central Plan assistance and 90 per cent of such assistance as grants (compared to only 30 per cent for other states). Given that 11 per cent of normal central plan assistance was allocated to Bihar during the Eleventh Plan according to the Gadgil-Mukherjee formula, it is difficult to see how Bihar can be declared to be special category without augmenting the earmarked 30 per cent of normal central Plan assistance.

At a public rally in Arrah on August 18, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced a Rs 1.25-lakh-crore special package for Bihar for building infrastructure. Bihar badly needs such infrastructure as roads, railways, airport, refinery and power plants. Bihar Vidhan Sabha elections are due before year-end, and the opposition ascribes electoral motives behind the announcement. Leaving the politics aside, it brings the question of regional disparities in India into sharp relief.

In terms of regional disparities, India in a way is a mini-Asia, but with less accentuated differences. In Asia, in 2012, according to the Asian Development Bank (ADB), smaller countries such as Singapore, Hong Kong, Brunei Darussalam, South Korea and Taiwan had per capita gross national income between $21,620 and $54,040. These high-flyers had per capita income more than 20-50 times that of the Asian countries at the bottom of the ladder. At the bottom were Afghanistan, Nepal, Cambodia, Tajikistan and Bangladesh with per capita income between $690 and $1,010. Furthermore, economic performance of conflict-affected countries, such as Afghanistan, was poor. Though Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Manipur, for example, are not Afghanistan, the law and order problems in these states nevertheless appear to be taking its toll on economic performance.

In India, among all the states or Union territories, smaller ones like Goa, Delhi, Sikkim, Chandigarh and Puducherry are at the top, with per capita net state domestic product (NSDP) at factor cost at current prices between Rs 1,43,677 and Rs 2,24,138 in 2013-14, more than 1.9 times the all-India per capita net domestic product (NDP) of Rs 75,420. In the same year, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Manipur, Assam and Jharkhand, at the bottom of the ladder, had per capita NSDP between Rs 31,199 and Rs 46,131, less than 61 per cent of the all-India NDP.

Of course, disparities across countries can be expected to be more than across regions within a country. Within a country, generally, with free mobility across regions, people can be expected to migrate from poorer to richer areas and reduce disparities in the process. Furthermore, countries in a continent may emulate each other's policies to some extent, but unlike states within a country, do not operate under the same central policy regime. Yet, there are lessons to be learnt from the regional disparities across countries in Asia.

Since 1973, ADB has been focusing on its relatively backward member countries with the Asian Development Fund (ADF). To the poorest of ADB member countries, to "bridge the development gap", the ADF provides grants, as well as loans for 32 years with a grace period of eight years and interest of 1 per cent and 1.5 per cent during the grace and amortisation period, respectively. ADF-recipient status in Asia and special category status in India appear to be somewhat similar.

Prima facie, there is no overwhelming evidence that grant of the special category status has delivered accelerated development in these 11 states. Similarly, the relatively poorer ADF countries are growing slower than the rest in Asia and falling further behind the non-ADF countries. Seven economies - China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Thailand and Malaysia - continue to lead Asia's march to prosperity.

There are three lessons from the ADF that appear relevant for addressing regional disparities in India. First, law and order and conflict resolution constitute priority number one for growth. The extremely low project success rate in Afghanistan has been a frustrating experience for development practitioners. Peace-building and state-building are preconditions for better development outcomes. Little can be expected in a state where the government is unable to perform its basic functions effectively.

Second, interventions for promoting regional integration often provide very high returns. A case in point is the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) Cooperation Program. Increasing connectivity through physical infrastructure and the transforming of transport corridors into economic corridors across borders; and improving competitiveness through efficient facilitation of cross-border movement of people and goods and the integration of markets, production processes, and value chains provide rich returns for poor countries. Lao PDR and Cambodia in GMS are good examples. It appears that often moving people to jobs in a planned way is easier than moving jobs to people.

Third, successful implementation requires the local authority's buy-in into policies and ownership of projects. Throwing money without a home-grown conviction about the need, for example, for a road, school or hospital, does not deliver the appropriate outcomes. There is need to help the relatively backward states or countries, but only in the appropriate way.

Coping with regional disparitie

Eleven states in India have 'special category' status. This extra-Constitutional status, introduced for the first time in 1969, was granted by the National Development Council, composed of the prime minister, Union ministers, chief ministers and members of the erstwhile Planning Commission. These 11 have hilly and difficult terrain, lowpopulation density, a sizeable share of the population as tribals, strategic location along the borders, economic and infrastructural backwardness, and a non-viable nature of state finances.

Bihar does not satisfy all the criteria. Yet, Chief MinisterNitish Kumar has been demanding the status for a while. The story is similar to "reservation", introduced constitutionally, initially for 10 years, and only forScheduled Tribes (ST) and Scheduled Castes (SC). The demand for the extension of special category status to other states is similar to the demands for the extension of reservation to groups other than SC and ST.

Special category states enjoy a number of benefits such as excise and income tax concessions, an earmarked 30 per cent of the normal central Plan assistance and 90 per cent of such assistance as grants (compared to only 30 per cent for other states). Given that 11 per cent of normal central plan assistance was allocated to Bihar during the Eleventh Plan according to the Gadgil-Mukherjee formula, it is difficult to see how Bihar can be declared to be special category without augmenting the earmarked 30 per cent of normal central Plan assistance.

At a public rally in Arrah on August 18, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced a Rs 1.25-lakh-crore special package for Bihar for building infrastructure. Bihar badly needs such infrastructure as roads, railways, airport, refinery and power plants. Bihar Vidhan Sabha elections are due before year-end, and the opposition ascribes electoral motives behind the announcement. Leaving the politics aside, it brings the question of regional disparities in India into sharp relief.

In terms of regional disparities, India in a way is a mini-Asia, but with less accentuated differences. In Asia, in 2012, according to the Asian Development Bank (ADB), smaller countries such as Singapore, Hong Kong, Brunei Darussalam, South Korea and Taiwan had per capita gross national income between $21,620 and $54,040. These high-flyers had per capita income more than 20-50 times that of the Asian countries at the bottom of the ladder. At the bottom were Afghanistan, Nepal, Cambodia, Tajikistan and Bangladesh with per capita income between $690 and $1,010. Furthermore, economic performance of conflict-affected countries, such as Afghanistan, was poor. Though Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Manipur, for example, are not Afghanistan, the law and order problems in these states nevertheless appear to be taking its toll on economic performance.

In India, among all the states or Union territories, smaller ones like Goa, Delhi, Sikkim, Chandigarh and Puducherry are at the top, with per capita net state domestic product (NSDP) at factor cost at current prices between Rs 1,43,677 and Rs 2,24,138 in 2013-14, more than 1.9 times the all-India per capita net domestic product (NDP) of Rs 75,420. In the same year, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Manipur, Assam and Jharkhand, at the bottom of the ladder, had per capita NSDP between Rs 31,199 and Rs 46,131, less than 61 per cent of the all-India NDP.

Of course, disparities across countries can be expected to be more than across regions within a country. Within a country, generally, with free mobility across regions, people can be expected to migrate from poorer to richer areas and reduce disparities in the process. Furthermore, countries in a continent may emulate each other's policies to some extent, but unlike states within a country, do not operate under the same central policy regime. Yet, there are lessons to be learnt from the regional disparities across countries in Asia.

Since 1973, ADB has been focusing on its relatively backward member countries with the Asian Development Fund (ADF). To the poorest of ADB member countries, to "bridge the development gap", the ADF provides grants, as well as loans for 32 years with a grace period of eight years and interest of 1 per cent and 1.5 per cent during the grace and amortisation period, respectively. ADF-recipient status in Asia and special category status in India appear to be somewhat similar.

Prima facie, there is no overwhelming evidence that grant of the special category status has delivered accelerated development in these 11 states. Similarly, the relatively poorer ADF countries are growing slower than the rest in Asia and falling further behind the non-ADF countries. Seven economies - China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Thailand and Malaysia - continue to lead Asia's march to prosperity.

There are three lessons from the ADF that appear relevant for addressing regional disparities in India. First, law and order and conflict resolution constitute priority number one for growth. The extremely low project success rate in Afghanistan has been a frustrating experience for development practitioners. Peace-building and state-building are preconditions for better development outcomes. Little can be expected in a state where the government is unable to perform its basic functions effectively.

Second, interventions for promoting regional integration often provide very high returns. A case in point is the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) Cooperation Program. Increasing connectivity through physical infrastructure and the transforming of transport corridors into economic corridors across borders; and improving competitiveness through efficient facilitation of cross-border movement of people and goods and the integration of markets, production processes, and value chains provide rich returns for poor countries. Lao PDR and Cambodia in GMS are good examples. It appears that often moving people to jobs in a planned way is easier than moving jobs to people.

Third, successful implementation requires the local authority's buy-in into policies and ownership of projects. Throwing money without a home-grown conviction about the need, for example, for a road, school or hospital, does not deliver the appropriate outcomes. There is need to help the relatively backward states or countries, but only in the appropriate way.

Clock begins to tick as 98 smart cities identified

Clock begins to tick as 98 smart cities identified

Amid an outcry of poor civic amenities in cities bursting at seams, work on the Smart cities with state of the art facilities-- automatic traffic lights, sprawling solar panels dotting neat dwellings, clean green campuses, digitalized working, round the clock vigil through close circuit cameras, has picked up momentum. Visions are coming on drawing boards and future 98 smart cities identified. Uttar Pradesh and Jammu & Kashmir have to pick up one each soon to touch 100 cities mark.             With the announcement of future smart cities list, the clock has started ticking. The Narendra Modi Government is pursuing the smart city project to give it a desired momentum with copious funds. Allocations plans have already been announced. In a related development, after recent meltdown in the Chinese financial markets and its cascading impact the world over, focus on infrastructure activities has increased. Development, especially roads and highways, would have a multiplier effect and boost rural jobs. Experts say the infrastructure is the backbone of the smart city mission which is all set to get boost due to these developments.             Finance Minister Arun  Jaitley recently said India can act as one of the “other engines” of world economic growth with China changing to slower gears. "So the world needs other engines to carry the growth process. And in a slowdown environment in the world, an economy which can grow at 8-9 per cent like India certainly has viable shoulders to provide the support to the global economy," Mr Jaitley said. He said the priority of the National Democratic Alliance Government is to ease the business environment for the global investors from the Central government, down to states and local bodies. Land acquisition, corruption, private investment with greater space for public are the main challenges which, experts say, must be tackled to ensure desired results in a stipulated period with political consensus to realize the mission.             The list of cities, unveiled recently by Urban Development Minister M Venkaiah Naidu after a nationwide "competition" between states includes Varanasi, Allahabad, Lucknow, Ghaziabad, Bareilly and Agra from Uttar Pradesh, Tiruchirapalli, Thanjavur, Salem, Vellore, Chennai, Coimbatore and Madurai from Tamil Nadu, Nashik, Thane, Solapur, Nagpur, Navi Mumbai, Aurangabad and Pune from Maharashtra, and Bhopal, Indore, Jabalpur, Gwalior and Ujjain from Madhya Pradesh. It also encompasses Ahmedabad, Gandhinagar and Baroda in Gujarat, and Bhagalpur and Muzaffarpur in Bihar.             Uttar Pradesh and Tamil Nadu have the maximum number of 12 cities under the list followed by Maharashtra with 10, Madhya Pradesh with seven, Karnataka and Gujarat with six each, Rajasthan with four, Andhra Pradesh, Bihar and Punjab with three each. Of those chosen for the project, 24 are capital cities, as many as business hubs and 18 cultural centers. The two remaining two smart cites aspirants will be decided in due course as J&K sought more time to decide on its choices for the project and UP has reported that Meerut and Raibareilly have been tied in the valuation and this is to be decided which will be the selected one.             The smart cities aspirants had been chosen through an intra-state competition. Each state and Union Territory has evaluated all the urban local bodies in respective states and Union territories, based on existing service levels, financial and institutional capacities and past track record and reforms and nominated the top scores, as per the slots given to each state and UT. Eight smart cities nominees have a population of one lakh and below, while 35 cities and towns between one to five lakh. There are 21 cities, with a population ranging between five to 10 lakh, 28 cities above 10 lakh and below 25 lakh. A set of five cities are in the population range of 25 to50 lakh.             Four cities- Chennai, Greater Hyderabad, Ahmedabad and Greater Mumbai-have population of above 50 lakh. Population statistics suggest that 64 towns and cities are in the category of small to medium, while the remaining 34 are large ones. Nine capital cities- Itanagar, Patna, Shimla, Bengaluru, Daman, Thiruvananthapuram , Puducherry, Gangtok and Kolkata could not be nominated for smart cities development. “In one sense, this non-inclusion goes to prove that the selection of first stage of competition was not swayed by the status or importance of cities and the selection was objective and as per the stipulated criteria’’, Mr. Naidu clarified.             Names were finalized after competitive selection process taking into consideration all parameters including job opportunities and enhanced economic activities. Strategies are being drawn to involve locals in evolving smart solutions. Locals will be involved in urban interventions. Declaration of names, however, has caused acrimony among those left out in the 98 cities list. The firming up of almost all smart city aspirants, the ‘city challenge’ competition has now entered the second stage.             In the next couple of days, the Government will release Rs 2 crore for each of the 98 cities for preparation of smart city plans. The region-wise panels of reputed agencies for assisting smart cities aspirants for preparation of smart city plans have been formed by the urban ministry. In the second stage of the city challenge competition, all smart city plans received by the Urban Development ministry will be evaluated, based on a set of six broad criteria. The top scoring 20 cities in the first round of competition in the second stage will be chosen for financing during this financial year. The remaining will be asked to address the deficiencies identified before participating in the second and the third rounds of competition. Forty cities each will be identified for financing during the second and third rounds.             The Central government proposes to give financial support to Mission to the extent of Rs 48,000 crore over five years. The chosen smarty city will be given Rs 100 crore per city per year over the next five years. Accordingly, the Central government has made a provision of Rs 48000 crore for the next five years for the smart cities mission. The States/UTs and Urban local bodies have to make an equal matching contribution. This in effect means that Central and state governments and ULBs will invest about Rs 1 lakh crore over the next five years for making 100 chosen cities smart.             Smart city plans will be implemented by a special purpose vehicle to be set up for each identified city to enable a focused effort for effective implementation. States/UTs and Urban local bodies will have 50:50 equity in SPV. Private sector can also be roped in with equity with the management control remaining with states/UTs.             Under the Smart cities and the Atal Missions, about 80 per cent of the country’s urban population would be reached out with the objective of enhancing the quality of life, which is the need for the hour. The prime objective of the Smart cities mission is to enhance quality of urban life. Smart cities will have the core infrastructure and will give a quality and decent life to citizens. It will enable a clean environment and provide smart solutions to problems. More than a dozen leading countries have expressed keen interest to associate themselves with this mission. These include the US, UK, France, Spain, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, Japan, China, Singapore, Israel and Australia.             The smart cities mission seeks to ensure basic infrastructure services to enable a decent quality of life in urban pockets and a clean and sustainable environment and adoption of smart solutions and providing more public spaces to poor.            It will be implemented through areas based approach consisting of retrofitting, re-development, pan city initiatives and development of new cities. The project would herald a qualitative change in the living standards of the lucky residents as it would have clean energy with lush green campuses and good quality of air quotient and speedy but pollution free private and public transport. Even schools will have digitalized facilities to ensure regular monitoring of both teachers and students. The proposed cities will be bereft of slums and industrial units will be organized in the manner to have zero impact on the civic life despite high production in the industrial peaceful units.                         Urban population, according to 2011 census, was about 37 crore accounting for 31 per cent of total population. Currently, 31% of India’s population lives in cities; these cities also generate 63% of the nation’s economic activity. These numbers are rapidly increasing, with almost half of India’s population projected to live in its cities by 2030.             Mr Naidu says the need today is a Smart livable city with transparency & accountability. Revenue generation & mobilization should be the main focus of Urban Local Bodies. He has encouraged the Urban Local Bodies, “Be bold enough to raise user charges.”             A statutory town is one that has a municipal body. There are 4,041 statutory cities/ town as per 2011 records. Out of these, about 500 cities with a population of above one lakh each, are focus of AMRUT. These 500 cities account for 73 per cent of India’s population. Number of cities that can be nominated for AMRUT so far are like this : A&N ( 1), Andhra Pradesh (31), Arunachal Pradesh (1 ),  Assam(7), Delhi( 1), Karnataka( 27), Kerala( 18), Uttar Pradesh (54), WB (28) Maharashtra ( 37), Bihar ( 27), Jharkhand(11) etc. While assigning the 100 smart city slots among states/UTs, geographical equity has been taken in to consideration to ensure that each state/UT gets at least one smart city. Cities nominated by each state will participate in the second stage of the inter city competition among all such 100 cities which a related to prepare smart city plans to be evaluated by the ministry’s panel of experts on a set of laid out criteria.             Pan city components could be interventions like intelligent transport solutions that benefit all residents by reducing commuting time. Both Smart city mission and AMRUT are linked with are virtually biologically linked. AMRUT, entailing an investment of Rs50,000 crore, envisages proper infrastructure services relating to water supply, sewerage, seepage management, storm water drains, transport and development of green spaces and parks with special plans of meeting needs of children.          The Mission inter alia aims at achieving urban reforms such as e-governance, building of professional municipal cadre, devolving funds and functions to urban local bodies, review of building bye laws, improvement in assessment and collection of municipal taxes, credit rating of urban local bodies, energy and water audit and citizen centric urban planning. The AMRUT Mission will be implemented in 500 cities and towns each with a population of one lakh and above. It will also be carried out in some cities situated on stems of main rivers, a few capital cities and important cities located in hilly areas, islands and tourist areas.             The smart city initiative planners have agenda for core infrastructure services like adequate and clean water supply, sanitation and solid waste management, efficient urban mobility and public transport, affordable housing for the poor, power supply, robust IT connectivity, governance, especially-governance, security and safety of inhabitants, well developed health, education services besides sustainable urban development. The Mission inter alia aims at achieving urban reforms such as e-governance, building of professional municipal cadre, devolving funds and functions to urban local bodies, review of building bye laws, improvement in assessment and collection of municipal taxes, credit rating of urban local bodies, energy and water audit and citizen centric urban planning.             A reform matrix with timelines will be circulated to states in the guidelines. Sources said the government has already approved central funding under AMRUT to the projects sanctioned under JNNURM and not completed. JNNURM projects relating to the urban development sanctioned during 2005-2012 and achieved physical progress of fifty per cent availing 50 per cent central assistance released and those sanctioned during 2012-2014 will be supported till March 2017. Accordingly, 102 and 296 projects will get central support for balance funding to complete these projects.             “The Ball is now in the court of states & urban local bodies to take full advantage of this enthusiasm by being appropriately pro-active .The next 10 years are‘ Very crucial’ for rewriting our urban landscape . We can’t afford to miss this opportunity. It is like perform or perish for the states & urban bodies. The Clock has begun to tick.” says Mr Venkaiah Naidu.

‘Focus on Image, Innovation, Initiative and Interaction’: Javadekar

‘Focus on Image, Innovation, Initiative and Interaction’: Javadekar

Environment Minister Addresses Conference of Forest, Wildlife Officers

The Minister of State (Independent Charge) of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Shri Javadekar, today emphasised that forest and wildlife officers must focus on the 4 ‘I’s – Image, Innovation, Initiative and Interaction. Addressing the inaugural session of the two-day Conference of all Principal Chief Conservators of Forests and Wildlife Wardens here today, Shri Javadekar said that maintaining and improving the quality of forests is a major challenge. He said, “We must ensure that degraded forest must be converted into moderately dense forest in 10 years and moderately dense forest must be converted into dense forests in 5 years. To that end, water harvesting and changing some species is a must. Forest research institutes must draw up a distinct plan of improving the quality of each forest, taking the existing flora and climate into consideration”. He laid emphasis on ensuring people’s participation in changing the quality of forests. He also urged the officers to provide solutions to various challenges. The Minister said that a lot of good work is being done and such success stories and initiatives must be highlighted prominently.

The two-day Conference will discuss various issues related to forest and wildlife, such as Forest Conservation Act, Eco Sensitive Zones (ESZs) and minimising human-wildlife conflict. Seventy-five PCCFs and higher officials representing all the 32 States are participating in the Conference.

Shri Javadekar released a report – “Management effectiveness evaluation of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries in India, 2006-2014”. The agreement to establish the world’s first centre of World Natural Heritage & Training at the Wildlife Institute of India was signed on the occasion. The Union Cabinet had recently given its approval for signing of agreement between UNESCO and the Government of India and had authorised Director General (Forests) and Special Secretary to Government of India to sign this agreement on behalf of the Government of India. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, UNESCO, has initiated a process of decentralisation and empowerment of the member countries of the UNESCO convention. As a part of this process, UNESCO has identified nine countries in the world for establishment of Category 2 centres for protection of cultural heritage. In the field of natural heritage, UNESCO has selected India for the establishment of the world’s first centre of World Natural Heritage Management & Training at the Wildlife Institute of India.

Speaking on the occasion, Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Shri Ashok Lavasa, said that there is a greater need to adhere to the prescribed timelines. He also said that since last year, there has been an increased transparency in the functioning of the Ministry. 

‘Focus on Image, Innovation, Initiative and Interaction’: Javadekar

‘Focus on Image, Innovation, Initiative and Interaction’: Javadekar

Environment Minister Addresses Conference of Forest, Wildlife Officers

The Minister of State (Independent Charge) of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Shri Javadekar, today emphasised that forest and wildlife officers must focus on the 4 ‘I’s – Image, Innovation, Initiative and Interaction. Addressing the inaugural session of the two-day Conference of all Principal Chief Conservators of Forests and Wildlife Wardens here today, Shri Javadekar said that maintaining and improving the quality of forests is a major challenge. He said, “We must ensure that degraded forest must be converted into moderately dense forest in 10 years and moderately dense forest must be converted into dense forests in 5 years. To that end, water harvesting and changing some species is a must. Forest research institutes must draw up a distinct plan of improving the quality of each forest, taking the existing flora and climate into consideration”. He laid emphasis on ensuring people’s participation in changing the quality of forests. He also urged the officers to provide solutions to various challenges. The Minister said that a lot of good work is being done and such success stories and initiatives must be highlighted prominently.

The two-day Conference will discuss various issues related to forest and wildlife, such as Forest Conservation Act, Eco Sensitive Zones (ESZs) and minimising human-wildlife conflict. Seventy-five PCCFs and higher officials representing all the 32 States are participating in the Conference.

Shri Javadekar released a report – “Management effectiveness evaluation of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries in India, 2006-2014”. The agreement to establish the world’s first centre of World Natural Heritage & Training at the Wildlife Institute of India was signed on the occasion. The Union Cabinet had recently given its approval for signing of agreement between UNESCO and the Government of India and had authorised Director General (Forests) and Special Secretary to Government of India to sign this agreement on behalf of the Government of India. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, UNESCO, has initiated a process of decentralisation and empowerment of the member countries of the UNESCO convention. As a part of this process, UNESCO has identified nine countries in the world for establishment of Category 2 centres for protection of cultural heritage. In the field of natural heritage, UNESCO has selected India for the establishment of the world’s first centre of World Natural Heritage Management & Training at the Wildlife Institute of India.

Speaking on the occasion, Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Shri Ashok Lavasa, said that there is a greater need to adhere to the prescribed timelines. He also said that since last year, there has been an increased transparency in the functioning of the Ministry.