Raising Diverse Voices in Smart City Proposals for Muzaffarpur and Jhansi

A number of municipal corporations are working on upgrading their proposals for Round 2 of the Smart City Mission. One of the key processes of the Mission is to engage with citizens at every stage in order to prioritize the areas for intervention. PRIA supported the engagement of citizens from all walks of life in Muzaffarpur, Bihar and Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh to voice their suggestions.

The municipal corporations of Muzaffarpur and Jhansi requested their city’s citizens to examine the earlier proposals in detail and identify gaps in light of the guidelines issued by the urban development ministry. Citizens were asked to post their remarks/feedback on a discussion thread opened online and to fill in feedback forms. The municipality also wanted the Smart City feedback forms to be filled through door to door surveys. They partnered with CBOs and NGOs, such as PRIA, and chosen animators were trained for filling the forms.

PRIA organized camps in Jhansi from 6 to 10 June 2016 and in Muzaffarpur from 4 to 11 June 2016 to facilitate the Smart City feedback process. Usually, camps conducted by municipalities are organized only in good residential colonies and in main city areas. PRIA’s belief in ensuring diversity of voices in citizen engagement resulted in camps being organized in slums, among the youth and specifically with women in slums to ensure a multiplicity of concerns were shared and heard.

                                  


Preliminary preparations included meetings in the municipalities with the mayor, municipal commissioner, consultants and officers of the Smart City cell. Discussions were also held with individual ward councillors to appraise them of the citizen participation exercise. In Muzaffarpur, the municipal commissioner issued a letter officially taking PRIA’s support for citizen engagement. A letter was also written to all ward councillors and other stakeholders informing them of PRIA’s engagement. Information on places identified for camps, timings, purpose of the camp, etc., was shared with communities across the city. Through an awareness drive and public announcements, citizens were mobilized and motivated to give their suggestions.

The camps were held for 5 days, in campaign mode. PRIA set itself a goal of filling at least a 1000 forms over this period. In addition, at least 300 forms were filled in the door to door survey. In Jhansi, the camp was inaugurated by the mayor of Jhansi, Smt. Kiran Verma. 

Involving the youth of the city in deciding what their city of the future should look like was central to the campaign. Innovatively, educational institutions and coaching centres were selected where students were asked to fill in the Smart City citizen feedback forms. Youth groups formed under the Kadam Badhate Chalo initiative in Muzaffarpur performed nukkad nataks (street theatre) to spread the message in communities about the need for all citizens to get involved in suggesting proposals.

                         


Facebook and WhatsApp was also widely used. Jhansi Nagar Nigam constantly updated its Facebook page, “Smart City Jhansi”, with photographs. It had advertised on radio as well. There was complete support from the media who gave adequate publicity to the camps that were held. This lent further support to the campaign and raised awareness in the city.

As a result of holding camps, the percentage of suggestions and voting for Smart City proposals has improved. Slum residents have become aware of the Smart City Mission. Women in particular learnt the words “Smart City” for the first time and understood the objectives of the programme. Recognition of PRIA in the community as well as in the municipal corporation is now stronger.

A range of issues and public opinion on making Muzaffarpur and Jhansi smart have been collected. It is interesting that the concerns and priorities of the urban poor and non-poor are different, and it is this diversity of voices which municipalities need to hear and take on board when preparing their proposals.

The citizen engagement process was not without its challenges. Some ward councillors felt that engaging citizens would mean citizens negatively assessing their work, which made them hesitant to visit the camps. The Smart City feedback forms were both in English and Hindi, but were too long and not easily understood by the public. Poor network connectivity affected the online voting process. In some slums, residents were apprehensive of the Smart City initiative, believing that such cities will not have space for them and they will be asked to leave the city. In Muzaffarpur, citizens shared negative comments against the municipal corporation’s work style and perceived negligence in the forms.

Yet, the process has created a stronger atmosphere for citizen engagement and helped, in part, to remove the barriers in communication between city governance and its citizens. What could be smarter than that?