MUMBAI: Gen Z students from colleges and universities across Mumbai engaged in a thought-provoking debate on Thursday centred on the Government of India’s vision of Viksit Bharat, which seeks to make the country a “fully developed nation” by 2047.
Articulate and confident, the participants aged between 18 and 24 from across faculties examined whether megacities with populations exceeding 10 million could truly be sustainable. The debate was organised by R A Rajeev, former metropolitan commissioner and founder of Urban World Consulting (OPC) Pvt Ltd, at the HSNC University convocation hall in Worli.
Raj and Arya from L S Raheja College of Architecture won the first prize while Kushagra and Meher Kazi from K C Law College came second. Kazi also won the APJ Abdul Kalam medal for best speaker. Vishnu Walla and S Shwetha Iyer from NMIMS University tied at third place.
Kazi argued that cities were largely failing in their pursuit of sustainability. “Whether it is the environment, housing, or transit, cities are struggling on multiple fronts,” she said. She also pointed out that large urban centres depended heavily on resources sourced from Tier 2 cities and towns, which suffered long-term economic and social consequences. “Their quality of life declines simply to supply the materials required to make our cities sustainable,” she pointed out, adding that much of what is presented as urban sustainability was merely branding.
Vishnu Walla, who spoke for the Viksit Bharat vision, argued that large cities were inherently more sustainable. Remarking that global warming would soon submerge many coastal cities globally, he said that Mumbai could “build a sea wall and expand to Navi Mumbai”. That’s the entire reason we have Viksit Bharat 2047,” he said. “The State has identified 50 small cities, so that in the coming 50 years, we can have 50 Mumbais.”
Walla further argued that the economic strength of Tier 1 cities subsidised the growth of smaller urban centres which were building metros costing many times the size of their municipal budgets. “It is tax payers in cities like Delhi, Bangalore and Mumbai whose money is going into the pockets of small cities for sustainable development,” he said. “And that’s precisely why I say large cities are sustainable.”
A student in the audience challenged Walla’s position by asking what would happen if a disaster struck a densely populated city, potentially causing widespread economic disruption. Walla responded, “This is exactly why Viksit Bharat 2047 has proposed 50 more cities. If a plane is crashing, develop 50 more planes to divert the load of disaster.”
Offering a counter-perspective, S Shwetha Iyer emphasised the importance of strengthening smaller cities through thoughtful policy interventions. “I don’t want to focus on large cities but rather on how small cities can be converted to sustainable means using policies,” she said. “A lot of those who debated focussed on the economic aspect but sustainability depends on people and the environment apart from the economy. Large cities are sustainable but through measures that are used to repair the damage. They are not sustainable by themselves.”
Iyer also highlighted the interdependence between large and small cities. “In big cities like Mumbai, a lot of outsourcing for vegetables happens from Nagpur and other areas,” she said. “Our inputs depend on small cities. So the argument that large cities are sustainable in themselves isn’t accurate. A lot of our waste-processing goes outside because we do not have the capacity to handle it. Since we depend on small cities so much, we must give them ideas and opportunities so that they don’t make the same mistakes.”