Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

India City Competitiveness Report 2012

15,404 views

Published on

Published in: Travel, Business
  • Be the first to comment

India City Competitiveness Report 2012

  1. 1. Competitiveness of India Cities
  2. 2. INDIA IS THRIVING – NOW AND WILL IN FUTURE % contribution in World’s GDP 12 2010 European Others Union 30% 9.82 26% 10 9.32 9.10 8.81 8.37 9.27 United States Japan China 8 GDP growth (annual %) India 23% 7.80 3% 9% 9% 8.28 6 5.22 5.30 2030 Projection 4 4.93 European 4.03 Others Union 3.77 35% 18% United States 2 16% India Japan China 4% 9% 18% 0 *value for 2012 and 2011 is for Q1 Source:- World Bank and Institute for Competitiveness AnalysisInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  3. 3. MAIN CONTRIBUTORS IN INDIA’S GROWTH Mumbai, Pune 800,000 700,000 2010-11 nominal GDP (in crores of rupees) Lucknow, Kanpur 600,000 Chennai Hyderabad Ahmedabad, Surat 500,000 Kolkata 400,000 Bengaluru Thiruvananthapuram Jaipur 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 Source:- RBI and Institute for Competitiveness AnalysisInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  4. 4. TREND IN POPULATION SIZE AND GROWTH RATE (1901-2011) 1800 30 1650.62 1600 24.8 24.66 1494.63 25 23.85 1400 21.51 1338.64 21.34 1210.19 20 Decadal Growth Rate (in %) 1200 Population (in millions) 1028.74 17.64 14.22 15 1000 13.31 846.42 11 800 10 683.33 600 5.75 548.16 439.23 5 400 361.09 318.66 0.1 278.98 238.4 252.09 251.32 0 200 -0.03 0 -5 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 2011 2021 2031 2041 Population (in millions) Decadal Growth rate (in %) Source:- Government of India Census and Institute for Competitiveness AnalysisInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  5. 5. THE RURAL-URBAN DIVIDE 100% 90% 80% 70% 71.5 68.8 76.7 74.3 60% 82.7 82.1 80.1 89.2 89.7 88.9 88 86.2 50% 40% 30% 20% 28.5 31.2 31.2 25.7 25.7 28.5 10% 23.3 23.3 17.3 17.9 17.9 19.9 19.9 10.8 10.3 11.1 12 13.8 17.3 10.8 10.3 11.1 12 13.8 0% 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 2011 Rural Urban Source:- Government of India Census and Institute for Competitiveness AnalysisInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  6. 6. INCREASE IN NUMBER OF TOWNS, UAS AND VILLAGES (1971-2011) Towns (in Numbers) UAs (in Numbers) 8000 7935 400 381 382 384 Number of Towns Number of UAs 6000 300 276 4689 5161 231 4029 4000 2921 200 2000 100 0 0 1971 1981 1971 1991 1981 2001 1991 2011 2001 2011 Villages (in Numbers) 620000 Number of Villages 608789 600000 593732 580000 579688 556561 556014 560000 540000 520000 1971 1981 1991 2001 2011*UAs = Urban Agglomerations Source:- Government of India Census and Institute for Competitiveness AnalysisInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  7. 7. URBANIZATION: SIGN OF A DEVELOPING EOCONOMY 90 80 70 74 64.8 60 52.21 50 43.57 40 34.45 30 28.3 18.33 20 10 0 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 2011 Degree of Urbanization Literacy Rates (%) Registered Motor Vehicles (No.) Mobile Cellular Subscription (per 100 people) Source:- Government of India Census, World Bank, Road Transport Year Book& Figure and Institute for Competitiveness AnalysisInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  8. 8. INDIAN STATES WITH HIGH GROWTH HAVE HIGH URBANIZATION RATE 120.00 Delhi 100.00 80.00 Goa Maharashtra Tamil Nadu Urbanization level (in %) 60.00 Kerala Mizoram Gujarat Karnataka Punjab Andhra Pradesh Haryana West Bengal 40.00 Uttarakhand Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh Rajasthan Manipur Jammu & Kashmir Nagaland Jharkhand Tripura Chhattisgarh Sikkim Arunachal Pradesh Orissa Meghalaya Assam Bihar 20.00 Himachal Pradesh 0.00-200000 0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000 -20.00 GDP (Dec-11) in Rs. CroreInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  9. 9. DISTRIBUTION OF TOWNS BY SIZE CLASS Cities Population 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 2011 Classification Class I > 1,00,000 76 102 148 218 300 393 Class II 50,000-1,00,000 91 129 173 270 345 401 Class III 20,000-50,000 327 437 558 743 947 1151 Class IV 10,000-20,000 608 719 827 1059 1167 1344 Class V 5,000-10,000 1124 711 623 758 740 888 Class VI < 5,000 567 172 147 253 197 191 Greater Mumbai UA Class I UAs/Towns 468 (12.05%) Million plus UAs/Towns 53 Delhi UA Mega Cities 3 (26.69%) Kolkata UA (6.87%) Source:- Government of India Census and Institute for Competitiveness AnalysisInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  10. 10. SNAPSHOT OF URBAN INDIA IN 2011 Cities Size Class By Population 10 - 30 million 5 - 10 million 1 - 5 million 0.1 – 1 million Source:- India Urban Conference 2011: Evidence & Experience - IIHSInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  11. 11. ENHANCING THE PROSPERITY OF URBAN INDIA via COMPETITIVENESS  Competitiveness is the productivity with which a region utilizes its human, capital, and natural resources  Productivity determines wages and the standard of living – Productivity growth determines sustainable economic growth  It is not what industries a nation competes in that matters for prosperity, but how productively it competes in those industries  Productivity in an economy depends on a combination of domestic and foreign firms  Innovation in products and processes is necessary to drive productivity growth  Only productive businesses can create wealth and jobs States compete to offer the most productive environment for business  The public and private sectors play different but interrelated roles in creating a productive economy Leading to the prosperity of the regionInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  12. 12. INFLUENCES ON COMPETITIVENESS Multiple Geographic Levels WORLD ECONOMY BROAD ECONOMIC AREAS GROUP OF NEIGHBOURING NATIONS NATIONS STATES, PROVINCES METROPOLITAN AREAS, RURAL AREAS [Our Focus] Source:- Institute for Strategy and CompetitivenessInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  13. 13. DRIVERS OF COMPETITIVENESS Quality of overall business Concentration of resources Policy Coordination among Multiple Levels of environment and urban growth Geography/GovernmentInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  14. 14. MEASURING COMPETITIVENESS: THE FRAMEWORK Context for Firm Strategy and Rivalry • Local rules and incentives that encourage investment and productivity . - E.g. performance based salaries, incentives for capital investments, intellectual property protection Factor Demand • Vigorous local competition i.e., Conditions - Openness to foreign and local Conditions competition - Sophistication of company operations Access to high quality business inputs i.e., Sophisticated and demanding local - Natural endowments customers and needs e.g., - Human resources - Strict quality, safety, and environmental - Capital availability standards - Physical infrastructure – Consumer protection laws - Administrative infrastructure – Government procurement of - Information infrastructure Related and advanced technology - Scientific and technological infrastructure Supporting – Early demand for products and Services. Industries • Local availability of suppliers and supporting industries • Presence of clusters instead of isolated firmsInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  15. 15. HIERARCHY OF CITY COMPETITIVENESS INDEX Overall Competitiveness Factor Demand Context for Strategy Related & Conditions Conditions & Rivalry Supporting Industry 1. Financial 1. Demographics 1. Competition 1. Supplier 2. Physical 2. Income Distribution Intensity & Diversity Sophistication 3. Communication and Spending of Firms 2. Institutional Support 4. Administrative Pattern 2. Business Incentives 5. Human Capacity 6. Innovation Nearly 200 IndicatorsInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  16. 16. CITIES THAT WE STUDY Srinagar Jammu Shimla Amritsar Ludhiana Dehradun Chandigarh FaridabadDelhi Meerut Gurgaon Noida Agra Jaipur Kanpur Lucknow Guwahati Allahabad Patna Varanasi Asansol Jabalpur Dhanbad Bhopal Ranchi Kolkata Ahmedabad Indore Jamshedpur Vadodara Raipur Rajkot Surat Nagpur Bhubaneswar Nashik Mumbai Pune Vishakhapatnam Hyderabad Vijayawada Bengaluru Mysore Chennai Coimbatore Puducherry Kozhikod e Madurai Kochi ThiruvananthapuramInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  17. 17. EVERY CITY HAS A DIFFERENT STORY Crucial to understand each city as what is right for one city will not necessarily be right for the other. “Mega Cities” “Million plus Cities” Variables DELHI KOLKATA JAMSHEDPUR KOCHI Population 16753235 4486679 2291032 3279860 No. of Branches of Commercial Banks 2177 1121 179 634 Literacy Rate: Female 80.93 84.98 67.33 94.27 No. of GSM users (per lakh) 265 145 11 19 Molestation Incidence 550 226 6 67 Ownership of consumer durable- 23 25 19 31 Home Theater Share of total passenger traffic 21.8 15.1 0.7 1.1 (airways) Consumer Price Index for Industrial 169 178 103* 158 Workers Starting a business cost (% per capita 51.1 39.6 51.5 47.2 income)Institute for Competitiveness, India
  18. 18. LOOK AT THE ENTIRE PICTURE For instance, Mumbai Weak Areas Strong Areas 20925 Paying Taxes (Time) 271 Population density Total-corruption cases registered 1228 Work Force Participation Rate (per 1000) 434Variables 9093 Variables Number of accidental deaths 94.28 Literacy rate: Males Number of slums 61300 Media Reach-Press 98.8Institute for Competitiveness, India
  19. 19. A GLIMPSE: CITY COMPETITIVENESS RANK First 25 Cities Overall Competitiveness Context for Firm Related & Supporting Rank City Factor Conditions Demand Conditions Score Strategy & Rivalry Industries 1 Delhi 69.732 1 1 1 10 2 Mumbai 67.856 2 2 2 4 3 Chennai 62.323 4 5 5 2 4 Hyderabad 61.782 3 12 7 1 5 Kolkata 61.464 6 11 6 3 6 Gurgaon 61.167 7 7 4 23 7 Bengaluru 61.100 5 3 8 18 8 Noida 60.406 9 38 3 5 9 Pune 59.854 8 4 9 8 10 Ahmedabad 58.036 15 8 15 7 11 Nagpur 56.942 17 15 12 14 12 Chandigarh 56.842 10 17 25 15 13 Jaipur 56.263 18 6 19 26 14 Coimbatore 55.955 29 45 10 6 15 Kochi 55.884 28 23 14 11 16 Surat 55.726 26 10 17 20 17 Nashik 55.651 33 9 21 9 18 Indore 55.637 11 35 22 37 19 Thiruvananthapuram 55.434 22 18 18 28 20 Kozhikode 55.212 35 19 11 32 21 Mysore 55.118 12 39 30 33 22 Bhubaneswar 54.642 13 42 27 43 23 Vadodara 54.627 32 25 16 25 24 Rajkot 54.607 36 14 20 27 25 Lucknow 54.584 23 16 39 22Institute for Competitiveness, India
  20. 20. A GLIMPSE: CITY COMPETITIVENESS RANK Next set of 25 Cities Overall Competitiveness Context for Firm Strategy Related & Supporting Rank City Factor Conditions Demand Conditions Score & Rivalry Industries 26 Madurai 54.570 38 36 13 24 27 Bhopal 54.322 16 40 28 40 28 Kanpur 54.318 19 49 38 12 29 Faridabad 54.097 20 32 36 34 30 Ludhiana 54.022 27 28 23 42 31 Vijayawada 53.964 30 20 32 30 32 Guwahati 53.961 14 46 31 46 33 Raipur 53.849 25 31 26 38 34 Vishakhapatnam 53.741 34 22 33 31 35 Patna 53.580 37 21 42 21 36 Jabalpur 53.249 24 50 34 35 37 Agra 53.157 39 29 46 16 38 Varanasi 53.039 45 41 37 13 39 Meerut 52.975 43 34 40 17 40 Puducherry 52.905 42 27 29 39 41 Asansol 52.813 47 13 35 36 42 Dehradun 52.725 31 30 47 41 43 Ranchi 52.575 40 33 41 29 44 Allahabad 52.573 46 26 48 19 45 Shimla 52.295 21 43 43 49 46 Amritsar 52.181 41 24 24 47 47 Jammu 50.621 44 47 49 48 48 Jamshedpur 50.475 49 44 44 44 49 Dhanbad 49.829 50 48 45 45 50 Srinagar 49.732 48 37 50 50Institute for Competitiveness, India
  21. 21. TOTAL POPULATION VERSUS COMPETITIVENESS 18000000 Del 16000000 14000000 Mum 12000000 y = 49162x - 2E+07 R² = 0.456Total Populaiton 10000000 Ben Pun 8000000 Asa Jai Ahm Sur 6000000 All Pat Nas Vij Luc Kan Agr Vis Vad Kol Che Rai Nag Var Raj 4000000 Mee Lud Coi ThiKoc Ind Mad Koz Mys Hyd Dha Ran Jab Bho Jam Amr 2000000 Far Bhu Sri Deh Cha Noi Gur Jam Pud Guw Shi 0 48.00 53.00 58.00 63.00 68.00 Microeconomic Competitiveness Score Institute for Competitiveness, India
  22. 22. TEACHERS IN GOVERNMENT SCHOOL VERSUS COMPETITIVENESS 9000 All Vis 8000 Pun Agr 7000 Nas Kol Guw KanTeachers in Government School 6000 Pat Del Var Luc Jai Vij 5000 Mee Jab Vad Ind 4000 Lud Coi Cha y = -26.06x + 5060. Ran Shi Amr Nag R² = 0.001 3000 Dha Jam Bho Mys Mad Thi Hyd Bhu 2000 Noi Deh Mum Jam Ahm Far Koz Sur Koc Gur Che Asa Ben 1000 Sri Pud Raj 0 48.00 53.00 58.00 63.00 68.00 Microeconomic Competitiveness Score Institute for Competitiveness, India
  23. 23. FEMALE LITERACY RATE VERSUS COMPETITIVENESS 100 95 Koc Koz Thi y = 1.001x + 20.11 90 R² = 0.232 Che Mum Kol Guw Ben 85 Nag Sur ChaFemale Literacy Rate Bhu Pun Del Coi Ahm 80 Pud Lud Deh Kan Mad Bho Gur Jab Raj Ind Hyd Jam Shi Vad Far Luc 75 Amr Nas Noi Vij Asa 70 Var Jam Ran Mys Mee Rai Jai 65 Dha Pat Sri All Vis Agr 60 55 48.00 53.00 58.00 63.00 68.00 Microeconomic Competitiveness ScoreInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  24. 24. EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT INDEX VERSUS COMPETITIVENESS 0.8 Koz Koc Thi Mad Coi Che y = 0.010x + 0.020 0.75 Lud Cha R² = 0.159 Amr Del 0.7 Far Gur Vis Vad Vij Raj Mys Sur Education Development Index Pun Mum Nas Nag Ahm Ben 0.65 Pud Hyd Shi 0.6 Deh Jai 0.55 Agr Var Mee Kan Luc Sri All Noi Rai Kol Jam AsaJab Bho Ind 0.5 Bhu 0.45 Dha Jam Ran Guw Pat 0.4 48.00 53.00 58.00 63.00 68.00 Microeconomic Competitiveness ScoreInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  25. 25. CHEATING INCIDENCE VERSUS COMPETITIVENESS 1420 y = 105.8x - 5342. R² = 0.283 Kol 1220 Bhu 1020 Cheating Incidence 820 Luc Thi Pun 620 Che Kan Lud 420 Vij Vis Koz Koc Agr Amr Mee Gur Var Rai Nag Bho Ahm 220 Deh Ran Pat Guw IndCoi Cha All Jab Far Mad Sur Vad Nas Sri Jam Jam Asa Raj Dha Pud Noi 20 Shi 48.00 53.00 58.00 63.00 68.00 Microeconomic Competitiveness ScoreInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  26. 26. DECADAL GROWTH RATE VERSUS COMPETITIVENESS 60 Noi 50 Ben Sur % decadal growth rate (2001-11) 40 Rai Ind Deh Far Bho Pun 30 Jai Luc y = 0.392x - 1.341 Pud R² = 0.014 Sri Ran Agr Pat Ahm Del All Raj Nas Mad Coi 20 Var Cha Mee Bhu LudGuw Jam Amr Jab Vad Mys Vis Nag Dha Asa Jam Kan Shi Vij Che 10 Koz Mum Koc Thi Hyd 0 48.00 53.00 58.00 63.00 68.00 Microeconomic Competitiveness ScoreInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  27. 27. OWNERSHIP OF CONSUMER DURABLES - MOBILE VERSUS COMPETITIVENESS 100.5 Sri Jab Luc Jai Cha Kol Asa Ben Gur Del 100 Deh Shi IndNas Jam Pud GuwOwnership of Consumer Durables- Mobile Far Mum Vis Bho Mys Vij Mad Kan Che All Nag y = 0.016x + 98.61 Amr Raj Sur R² = 0.019 Pun Hyd 99.5 Var Ahm Vad Koz Koc Thi Dha Jam 99 Mee Agr Rai Lud Coi Ran Pat Bhu 98.5 Noi 98 48.00 53.00 58.00 63.00 68.00 Microeconomic Competitiveness ScoreInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  28. 28. THE UNTAPPED ASSET OF INDIA: TIER 2-3 CITIES  Consists of a pool of opportunities  Avoids the pitfalls of the megacities  More people are moving towards them as they are facing scarcity of land in Mega cities  Each city has its own competitive edge  Preferred by many people Growth of organized retail 50% 40% Growth (in %) 30% 50% 35% 20% 10% 0% Tier I cities Tier II and III cities Source:- Report on “India Boarding” by TCS and Institute for Competitiveness AnalysisInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  29. 29. URBANIZATION LEVEL OF TIER 2 CITIES Vishakapatnam 47.51 Vijaywada 41.01 Varanasi 43.43 Vadodara 49.54 Thiruvananthapuram 53.80 Surat 43.48 Rajkot 43.48 Patna 43.48 Nashik 42.53 Nagpur 68.30 Meerut 51.13 Maduari 60.64 Ludhiana 59.14 Lucknow 66.20 Kozhikode 67.15 Kochi 68.07 Kanpur 65.93 Jamshedpur 55.55 Jaipur 52.51 Indore 74.09 Dhanbad 58.13 Coimbatore 75.83 Bhopal 80.84 Asansol 66.93 Agra 45.87 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 90.00 Urbanization level (in%) Source:- Census 2011 and Institute for Competitiveness AnalysisInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  30. 30. UNTANGLING THE LINKAGES BETWEEN CITY, COMPETITIVENESS & ECONOMIC GROWTH  More advanced economies are more urbanized economies  Cities tend to be the only place where companies and individuals find opportunities for successful economic activity  Rise of cities is seen as an inevitable part of development but also as a policy challenge  Avoid a political schism between metropolitan and rural regions  Cities have a different role to play in advanced economies  From the competitiveness perspective, the policy imperative is crucial for cities as well as for rural regions  Cities and the rural regions around them should cooperate closely The case with Mumbai  Tried to manage the growth by creating artificial boundaries  The approach failed and made living conditions worse  Different policy approach is required that focuses on better public services and land use inside the city  Competitiveness-oriented policy approach can be used that changes the economic fundamentals of where people live and workInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  31. 31. SECTORWISE TOTAL INVESTMENTS IN PPP PROJECTS IN INDIA : 2011 99324.61 Urban Development Roads 244289.176 Railways 3913.03 Ports 82402.67 Health Care 1887.2 Energy 85141.18 Education 1922.47 Airports 19131 0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 Project Cost (Rs. Crore) Source:- PPP Database and Institute for Competitiveness AnalysisInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  32. 32. URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE: TRANSPORTATION IN INDIAN CITIES Chaotic situation in most cities except the mega cities where the number of commuters is so high that the transportation seems weak Challenges: - Vast gaps between demand and supply - Poor infrastructure such as insufficient routes and roads - Increase in private vehicles which leads to congestion and also slows down the speed of other vehicles such as buses etc. to 10-12 km - Leads to environmental pollution - Absence of comprehensive parking facilities in the city Operations of Road Transportation in Major Cities: 2010-11 7000 300 278.59 6110 6000 5771 250 5000 205.38 4652 200 In km/Bus/Day In Number 4000 3414 154.02 152.71 138.66 150 3000 99.9 100 2000 942 956 50 1000 0 0 Chennai Bengaluru Mumbai Ahmedabad Kolkata Delhi Total Fleet Held Vehicle Productivity (km/Bus/Day) Source:- Road Transport and highways Ministry, 2010-11 and Institute for Competitiveness AnalysisInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  33. 33. OTHER MODES OF TRANSPORTATION • The other major mode of transportation in cities is Railways • Though it is dominant for the inter city transportation only in cities • Also has a different face in every region such as in - Delhi – Metro Rapid Transit System (MRTS) is main lifeline but Local Rails are also present - Kolkata – The Underground Metro, The Local Rails and the tram, all are widely used by commuters - Mumbai – Local Trains however, metro will be operational after short period, as reported by authorities - Bengaluru – The introduction of Metro in the city has change the travelling experience of the commuters Passengers carried by railways (million passenger-km) South Africa 18865 India 903465 China 791158 Germany 78582 Japan 244235 United States 9518 United Kingdom 55019 In million passenger - km Source:- World Bank and Institute for Competitiveness AnalysisInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  34. 34. URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE: WATER 0.9 14 0.8 12 12 Production/Population (m3/d/c) 11 0.7 10 Water Availability (hours) 0.6 0.808 8.3 0.5 8 7 0.4 6 6 4.5 5 5 4.3 0.3 4 3.5 4AVERAGE= 0.244 0.2 2 3 2.5 3 0.305 1.5 0.332 0.246 0.217 0.244 0.75 0.267 2 0.1 0.131 0.286 0.246 0.248 0.146 0.22 0.213 0.185 0.108 0.188 0.168 0.182 1 0.3 0 0 Production/Population (m3/d/c) Water availability (hours) Source:- India Infrastructure Report 2011 and Institute for Competitiveness Analysis Institute for Competitiveness, India
  35. 35. URBAN CLUSTERS “Geographical concentrations of industries that gain performance advantage through co-location”  Brings together companies, suppliers, service providers and associated institutions in a particular field  The close proximity – by geography and activities - provides economic benefits  Facilitate commercialization and new business formation through spinoffs and startups  Cluster initiatives can act as policy catalysts for competitiveness  Growth of one competitive firm generate demand for other related industries  Forces firms to improve and innovate  Facilitate technology and knowledge transfer that strengthens the cluster and promotes future growth City Industrial Cluster Raipur Iron & Steel Cluster Ahmedabad Chemical Cluster Surat Gem & Jewelry Cluster Nashik Engineering cluster Guwahati Bamboo Cluster Vijayawada, Chennai Auto Components Cluster Bangalore Machine Tools Cluster Hyderabad Pharma Cluster Kanpur Leather Cluster Ludhiana Textile ClusterInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  36. 36. SUCCESS STORY OF CLUSTER IN BENGALURU The ICT Cluster in Bengaluru has attracted people and is also known as the Silicon Valley of India Currently Boasts of over 1500 IT firms out of about 3500 IT firms in India Indian companies such as Infosys, Wipro, Iflex have strong presence Fully owned subsidiaries of MNCs such as Motorola, Texas Instruments and Hewlett Packard have their base in the city Around 1/3rd of all of India’s software exports are from the city Ranked 4th in the category of global hub of technological innovation by United Nations Human Development ReportFactors that contribute Educational Institutions and training centers (IISC, IIIT, IIM etc.) Research Institutions (ISRO) Government policies (central and local) Y2K Problem (resulted in giving an important impetus to IT development) Quality issues Jobs creation “Bengaluru is a model of how an agglomeration can bring prosperity to a poor country” - Edward Glaeser, Harvard UniversityInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  37. 37. ESTABLISHED IT/ITES HUBS IN INDIATotal STPI Registered Units by 2006-07: 1400IT/ITeS Majors: IBM, Genpact Oracle, American Total STPI Registered Units by 2006-07: 166Express, Convergys, HP, General Motors IT/ITeS Majors: IBM, Cognizant, TCS, Infosys, Wipro NCR Delhi Total STPI Registered Units by 2006-07: 630 IT/ITeS Majors: TCS, Infosys, Wipro, Siemens, Acce nture Kolkata Total STPI Registered Units by Mumbai 2006-07: 635 Total STPI Registered Units by 2006-07: 1060 IT/ITeS Majors: Cognizant, Pune IT/ITeS Majors: Convergys, EXL, KPIT, Msource Hyderabad Hp, Amazon, Verizon, Convergys, EXL, Infosys, TCS Total STPI Registered Units by 2006-07: 1700 Bangalore IT/ITeS Majors: Wipro, TCS, HP, Chennai Siemens, HSBC, Compaq Cumulative software exports from Bangalore are estimated to be Total STPI Registered Units by 2006-07: 900 US$ 11 billion, positioning it as IT/ITeS Majors: Infosys, Wipro, Accenture, Cognizant the leading IT hub of India Source:- Paper on “Knowledge-based Custer Development in India Opportunities and Challenges”, MIT Institute for Competitiveness, India
  38. 38. AUTOMOTIVE CLUSTERS IN INDIA NORTH EAST Maruti Himachal Pradesh TATA, HMSuzuki, Honda, Hero, Yamaha, LM L Haryana DELHI West Bengal Gujarat Kolkata MumbaiGM, TATA, Fiat, Bajaj, Mahindra, Maharashtra Mercedes Andhra PradeshBenz, Volkswagen, Eicher, Force, Skoda, Audi, Mahindra Karnatak Hyundai, Ford, Mitsubishi Motors, a Renault, Swaraj Mazda Bangalore Chennai TVS, Toyota, Volvo, Royal Enfield, BMW, Nissan, Renault Nissan Tamil Naidu Source:- Harvard Business School – Spring 2012Institute for Competitiveness, India
  39. 39. ENHANCING CITY COMPETITIVENESS Focus on - Increases the ease of business, fetches innovative ideas, provide potential for financing 1. Public-Private Partnerships - One of the successful model is the Delhi Noida Bridge - Understand the city challenges & search their solutions, improve internal & external environment 2. Dealing with Urbanization - Some Tier-2 & 3 cities like Guwahati, Bhopal, Faridabad, Coimbatore are urbanizing at a fast pace - Leads to vulnerable conditions, create issues with respect to sanitation, water, health , education etc. 3. Urban Poverty - Government programmes: Swarna Jayanti Shahari Raozgar Yojana (SJSRY), JNNURM, Rajiv Awas Yojana - Engage major stakeholders in most of the development activities 4. Transparency and Civic Engagement - A tool for the betterment of the democracy and thus the city 5. Other Common Areas - Includes basic amenities, infrastructure, facilities etc. required for a decent standard of livingInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  40. 40. GOVERNANCE Movement of power Center State Urban Local Government City Mayor City Management Service Delivery Agencies Therefore,  Clear boundaries between Metropolitan governance body and municipal corporation  Need to make institutional arrangements  Empower Local bodies  Create well defined model for governance structure  Focus should be on managing the change wherein expectations of all stakeholders is taken into consideration provide quality services in adequate quantities to the residents A ‘GOOD’ City = sound political and governance system are responsive towards the requirements of the businessesInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  41. 41. CITY BRANDING FROM WITHIN Focus on - Governed by planning norms, building controls and urban policy 1. Build Character - Immediate spatial and visual impact of city’s “Hardware” positively influence the psyche of people - Urban contexts of the city strike a deep chord with its residents 2. Urban identity - Characteristics such as historicity, accessibility, multi-vocal qualities and inclusive nature are valued - It replicates itself in recognizable pattern at multiple scales 3. Urban behavior - Helps to openly engage, individually and collectively - Adds immeasurable value to the city 4. Interstitial urbanism - Vitalizes a city, encourage a sense of belonging amongst residents and their engagement with the city Delhi can be branded if following possibilities are looked upon:  Innovatively utilizing the old structures even when urban infrastructure are being constructed  Enhancing the inclusiveness of the city via urban villages & historic settlements so as to make them vibrant contributors to Delhi’s urban experience  Improving the basic amenities within the city etc.Institute for Competitiveness, India
  42. 42. INDIA CITIES ON GLOBAL BENCHMARK Delhi (46.7) Ahmedabad (41.9) Mumbai (46.6) Kolkata (37.8) Hyderabad (39.4) Bangalore (44.6) Chennai (38.1) London (70.4) Zurich (66.8) Chicago (65.9) Paris(69.3) New York (71.4) Los Angeles (61.5) Shanghai (55.2) Tokyo (68) Hong Kong (69.3) Singapore (70) Source:- Economist Intelligence Unit and Institute for Competitiveness AnalysisInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  43. 43. KEYS FOR SUCCESSFUL CITIES ambition for future + desire Vision + shared value system Include principles such as, participation, coherency, co shaping people and not mpetitiveness, subsidiarity, sust Governance Entrepreneurship merely “shaping ainability knowledge” Creative city planning understand every city’s unique which, addresses social issues Social cohesion Specialization characteristicsInstitute for Competitiveness, India
  44. 44. THE CITIES OF FUTURE  Present cities seems stressed on multiple accounts that is, overpopulation, sketchy resources, exorbitantly high cost of living index, mal governance etc.  So the cities of future would primarily be an itsy-bitsy variation of current cities  Current cities have built in so many contra forces that they are now leviathan white elephants. However it is being suggested that city of future would be fragmentisation of population clusters  Every employee shall serve many firms  Geography and power would no longer correlate  21st century man is absolutely asocial  Technology will keep on pouring and will make one city advanced and other obsolete  Therefore, cities needs to see their future and then address the stresses bothering them and should not depend on the vacuous pronouncements of politiciansInstitute for Competitiveness, India

×