BANGALORE: The IT capital is no great place to live in. This is one of the findings of an 11-city survey by Janaagraha , a Bangalore-based NGO.

Conducted across Indian tier-1 and tier-2 cities, the survey comprised two parts: Annual Survey of India’s City-Systems (ASICS) and Voice of India’s Citizen Survey on quality of life in the cities. The cities were benchmarked against London and New York.

The quality of life survey ranked Bangalore ninth among 11 cities. Surat topped the list, followed by Pune and Ahmedabad.

The citizen survey interviewed 4,200 people. It rated the cities on mobility system, cleanliness, water, public amenities, crime, pollution control and other parameters. Bangalore fared well in none.

After Kanpur, Delhi and Jaipur, Bangalore had the highest crime ranking. The IT City was ranked No. 10 for availability of water and adequate mobility system. The garden city was ranked eighth in greenery and pollution control and No. 9 in cleanliness. Ahmedabad was the best in public amenities, while Bangalore was at No 9.

The survey analyzed the quality of the cities in terms of planning. New York and London, the benchmark for urban design, scored eight and nine out of 10, while the Indian cities could not go beyond 5.

The only good news is that Bangalore seems to have a good urban planning and design when compared to other Indian cities. Bangalore shared the third spot with Hyderabad after Kolkata and Delhi. Interestingly, Kolkata shared the top position with New York and London.

One of the fastest growing cities in India, Bangalore had the lowest score in urban capacities and resources. The city’s civic agencies’ low access and weak control over finances and human resources found mention. They have to get the state government’s approval even for the annual budget and have absolutely no borrowing powers, it was pointed out.

Bangalore is also the poorest in empowered and legitimate political representation. The civic agencies have the least number of critical functions handled by them. The scoring also depends on the presence of an independent body to conduct city council elections, voting percentage and the authority of the mayor.

The Karnataka capital though fared relatively well in transparency, accountability and participation of citizens. The presence of a local ombudsman, the ease with which files moved and availability of a complaint management system were some of the parameters that were taken into account for rating this.

BOTTOM OF THE HEAP

Surat

Pune

Ahmedabad

Mumbai

Chennai

Kolkata

Jaipur

Hyderabad

Bangalore

Delhi

Kanpur

BLOW HOT, BLOW COLD

Thumbs down: Scores low in urban resources, public amenities, crime, pollution, water availability, mobility, greenery, political representation.

Thumbs up: The only areas where the IT capital scored relatively better were urban planning and design, as well as transparency, accountability and participation of citizens.

