India Culture, Business, Sports and Food. Get all the buzz in India now

FUTURE OF INDIA’S TEEMING CITIES

Even though India’s urbanisation rate has been lower than the average urbanisation rate of newly industrialising nations, there have been alarmist predictions about the imminent collapse of some of India’s large cities, dating as far back as the early 1960s when Dr B.
C. Roy, the then chief minister of West Bengal, sought Ford Foundation’s assistance.

Such alarmist predictions are usually based on predictions of the steadily increasing need for housing, infrastructure and employment, and the sluggish response by both the market and the Government to meet such needs. In the past, such alarmist predictions used to conclude with a call for external assistance. Recent studies do not emphasise the need for external assistance, but the tone of alarm still pervades most analysis, including reports commissioned by the Planning Commission, which demonstrate empirically the huge gap between the supply and demand for housing, employment and infrastructure in both large and medium sized cities.

True, there is a new perception that the nation can mobilize its own resources to fill the gap between supply and demand; and that a new set of public policies can also encourage market forces to respond better to growing needs. But such cautious optimism is quickly lost as the vulnerabilities of Indian cities are exposed by a sudden flood, or an earthquake, or some other "natural calamity". Such moments usually evoke strong criticism of both government negligence and market greed.

Another related criticism-one that has gained momentum since the liberalization of the Indian economy in the early 1990s-is that old regulations, like rent control and land ceiling, have had a perverse effect on cities, stifling entrepreneurial initiatives of the kind that helped modernize cities in the West. This sort of criticism usually concludes by recommending deregulation of land, labour and capital markets, with an implicit warning that continuing old regulations would only widen the gap between supply and demand for jobs and housing, leading to the collapse of the large Indian cities.

There is much to be learnt from the criticisms of both the government and market agents. But harsh criticism of past approaches is not conducive to confidence-building, which is necessary for creatively addressing the problems Indian cities are likely to face as the population increases, the economy grows, and the demand for consumption of goods and services increases by leaps and bounds. Such confidence-building requires that we acknowledge that contrary to alarmist predictions, Indian cities have survived the challenges posed by a large and a relatively poor nation.

Despite the common criticisms, Indian cities are functional: investments are made, goods and services are produced and sold, and shelter is built and upgraded. The pace of improvement might be slow, but most Indian cities continue to function surprisingly well even as they struggle, daily, with numerous problems.

This is true even for Kolkata-a city which used to be called, not so long ago, "the black hole of humanity". It is astounding how a city with such high levels of unemployment and housing shortages has managed to function and steadily improve the quality of life of its residents. Not that Kolkata still doesn’t have a long way to go; it does. But it has proven to be much more resilient and resourceful than anyone predicted.

Who deserves credit for the resilience and vibrancy of Indian cities?
Is it only due to the liberalisation of the economy and the growth of information technology? We need to acknowledge that the government deserves some credit, after all, for the functioning of Indian cities. I realise that this is not a particularly popular proposition, not in a country where criticism of government policies is a favourite pastime. But it becomes important as the cities strive to strengthen institutional capacities to respond to growing urban needs.
Let me rephrase the question: How does one explain why Kolkata did not collapse? And why does Mumbai continue to be the hub of many economic activities? One answer to such questions is that the government, at all levels, has performed much better than what it is given credit for. And, one reason for this is what many in India as well as abroad questioned until very recently-namely, India’s political system and its viability.

 I remember how only a few years ago, questions used to be raised persistently whether Indian democracy was at a crossroads. The undertone of anxiety that characterised such questions disregarded the amazing pace of India’s political maturity. Thanks to the last few elections, this condescending tone regarding India’s political and economic maturity has subsided somewhat. It is time the discussion about India’s cities changes, because cities continue to provide the spatial setting for intense political deliberation.

Political deliberations alone do not make good cities, but without them cities would lose a key element of their vitality. More importantly, without democracy, governments would not be held accountable; and in the end that may be the answer to why Indian cities managed to survive despite numerous problems. It is my prediction that the much criticised Indian government will continue to express the wishes of its citizens, as it has for the last 60 years, perhaps not as efficiently as we would like, but slowly, consistently and most importantly, humanely.

DESIGNER BABIES IN FUTURE

Senior scientists often sarcastically refer to the term ‘designer baby’ as a ‘media phrase’ that tends to mislead the public into believing that babies are ‘designable’.
To a scientist, the concept of the ‘designer baby’ involves several different reproductive techniques, all of which just impart a little more control to parents over what their offspring will be like.

Technically, the notion of the ‘designer baby’ is a blend of break-throughs in advanced reproductive technologies, genetics and genomics and presents us with a promise and a predicament. The promise is that we may be able to prevent a host of debilitating diseases in generations to come. The predicament is that our newfound technology may lead to a generation of ‘customised’ individuals with prefabricated personalities, brains and even beauty. Many bioethicists are of the belief that eugenics-the practice of improving the human gene pool by eliminating the undesirable-could soon become a reality. When science moves faster than moral understanding, it tends to leave ethical considerations behind.

The technique of Pre implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) has enabled us to screen embryos for high-risk diseases and unknown conditions so that an embryo with an inherited condition need not be implanted in the womb. Although choosing an embryo for specific traits is not a possibility today, it will be possible in the time to come, and make it possible for parents to choose an embryo based on its profile using microchip technology. Scientists are already pushing the frontiers of genetic engineering, which has become a term virtually synonymous with biotechnology.

Genetic engineering has borne several off-springs. Pharmaceutical companies regularly use altered genes to produce ‘designer’ drugs, and researchers are experimentally treating certain inherited diseases by altering the genes of individuals, a new form of medicine which is called gene therapy.

For some time now, human genetic engineering has centered on cloning for therapeutic purposes, or for creating a new individual who has exactly the same genes as an existing one. Genetic manipulation of the embryo for aesthetic purposes will be conceivable as our knowledge of the human genome increases and our ability to modify and change genes reaches a point of perfection.

The prospect of designing babies and the genomic revolution has induced a moral vertigo and has raised some of the most challenging ethical questions regarding its propriety.
The prominent arguments against genetic enhancement, and any form of bioengineering, point at a violation of a child’s right to an open future.

They indicate that such technology would predetermine choices for a child by not permitting development of one’s own right. Counter-arguments imply that an alternative to a cloned or genetically enhanced child is not one whose future is unbound by particular talents, but one at the mercy of the genetic lottery.

In terms of future human evolution, PGD and the as-yet-unrefined associated technologies can and probably will be used to create designer babies. It can only be hoped that the technology will be used responsibly. But it is possible to imagine a society free from some of the more horrendous genetic disorders, a society where humans can be bred for specific purposes like off-planet living, where genetic manipulation is essential for survival.

As we look back upon the chequered history of our species on this planet, we cannot but be filled with pride, amazement and nail biting anxiety. So many times we almost didn’t make it. Yet we survived and flourished. Now we are on the verge of manipulating our own future. Let us pray that humility and not arrogance guides us. On a personal note, I believe in a God that protects us and am always bullish when betting on mankind’s stock.