India’s urban awakening: Building inclusive cities, sustaining economic growth

India has a young and rapidly growing population—a potential demographic dividend. But India needs thriving cities if that dividend is to pay out. New MGI research estimates that cities could generate 70 percent of net new jobs created to 2030, produce around 70 percent of Indian GDP, and drive a near fourfold increase in per capita incomes across the nation.

Handled well, India can reap significant benefits from urbanization. MGI offers a range of recommendations, the vast majority of which India could implement within five to ten years. If India were to follow the recommendations, it could add 1 to 1.5 percent to annual GDP growth, bringing the economy near to the double-digit growth to which the government aspires.

Surging growth and employment in cities will be a powerful magnet. MGI projections show India’s urban population soaring from 340 million in 2008 to 590 million in 2030. And this urban expansion will happen at a speed quite unlike anything India has seen before. It took India nearly 40 years (between 1971 and 2008) for the urban population to rise by nearly 230 million. It will take only half the time to add the next 250 million.

India has the potential to unlock many new growth markets in its cities, many of them not traditionally associated with India including infrastructure, transportation, health care, education, and recreation. MGI projects that, to meet urban demand, the economy will have to build between 700 million and 900 million square meters of residential and commercial space a year. In transportation, India needs to build 350 to 400 kilometers of metros and subways every year, more than 20 times the capacity building of this type that India has achieved in the past decade. In addition, between 19,000 and 25,000 kilometers of road lanes would need to be built every year (including lanes for bus-based rapid transit systems), nearly equal to the road lanes constructed over the past decade.

Cities can also deliver a higher quality of life. Urban scale benefits means the cost of delivering basic services is 30 to 40 percent cheaper in concentrated population centers than in sparsely populated areas. But to reap such benefits, India needs to meet an unprecedented policy challenge. If it fails to do so, this could seriously jeopardize its growth and risk high unemployment.

Although urban India has attracted investment on the back of strong growth, its cities are still failing to deliver even a basic standard of living for their residents after years of chronic underinvestment. Unless it steps up investment in its cities, India could well lose the productivity dividend of urban living. Today, in per capita terms, India’s annual capital spending of $17 is only 14 percent of China’s $116 and less than 6 percent of New York’s $292.

MGI estimates that India needs to invest $1.2 trillion just in capital expenditure in its cities over the next 20 years, equivalent to $134 per capita per year, almost eight times the level of spending today. If India taps into five sources of funding used in cities around the world—monetized land assets, higher property taxes, user charges that reflect costs, debt and public-private partnerships, and formula-based government funding—its largest cities could generate as much as 80 percent of the funding they require from internal sources.

Making the Cities of India More Sustainable

Article by Warren Karlenzig at Green Flow

With Mumbai, one of the largest cities of the world, treating only 30-40 percent of its sewage, experiencing five-hour traffic delays and hosting massively expanding unplanned slums, urban sustainability needs to be viewed through a different lens than elsewhere.

India will add an additional 26 cities of one million or more by 2030 to its 42 one million+ cities today. The 2008 population in cities of 340 million in 2008 will soar to 590 million by 2030. The need for much improved urban housing and health services, let alone better planning, governance and carbon management, threatens the nation’s and thus the world’s economic stability: India’s population by 2030 is forecast to overtake China’s. 

A report released this month by the McKinsey Global Institute, " India’s Urban Awakening," provides a rich and thorough analysis of the challenges faced by Indian cities, while also providing a clear agenda for future improvements. Changes will need to occur at the local, state and national level, and will require the active participation of the international business community through public-private partnerships.

First the bad news.

As a contrast to China, which has staged much of its recent urban growth in nationally planned phases targeted at geographies, economies and infrastructure, Indian cities are experiencing rapid unplanned growth. Major financial investment, to the tune of $1.2 trillion over the next 20 years, will be needed to address how Indian cities are falling short of meeting even a basic standard of living in:

Water supply: will need to increase 3.5 times current supply to meet basic demand by 2030

Sewage: treatment will need to increase two times current levels to meet demand by 2030

Solid waste: will need to increase six times today’s treatment levels by 2030 because of consumption expected by an emerging middle class.

Public transit access and service: 20 times the capacity of metros and subways will need to be added over what has been provided in the past ten years

Affordable housing: will need to increase 10 times by 2030 to meet expected needs.

Slum populations that now comprise 24% of India’s urban population will need to be addressed with formal affordable housing programs and housing structures.

Oddly, no forecasts were made in "India’s Urban Awakening" regarding the amount or mix of energy that will be needed to meet the needs of India’s cities. With massive growth in electricity use for buildings (at least 40% of India currently is not connected to the power grid), large increases in personal auto ownership, and volatile global energy supplies and pricing, India is faced with urban growth-associated issues that if unaddressed threaten the very core of its existence as a nation.

According to the McKinsey report, however, India has sufficient time and the means (with international financial, business and humanitarian partners) by which to address many of these pressing or devastating issues. The McKinsey Institute report also presented a framework for a plan by which India can meet the financial need to increase spending on cities from its current rate of 0.5% to 2% of GDP.

On a per-capita basis, India now spends 14% of what China spends on its cities and only 4% of what the United Kingdom spends on its cities.

The key elements of the report plan outlined five strategies for meeting its urban financial obligations, most of which India currently ranks "poor" in:

1. Monetize land assets.

2. Maximize property taxes and usage charges.

3. Establish a formula-based grants systems from state and central government.

4. Use appropriate debt and private-sector participation (i.e., public-private partnerships).

5. Create enabling systems and city development funds to facilitate use of revenue sources.

The report also outlined four significant "dimensions" besides funding, on which Indian cities need to concentrate improvements in order to successfully transform urban economies and sustainability opportunities:

1. Shape: Where people live. Unlike China, India has made no real attempt to plan where growth of cities will occur, or to determine where new cities will be most needed, and as a result unplanned urban sprawl is increasingly common.

2. Governance: How cities in particular are governed. Develop executive leadership at city level in mid-sized to large cities. India is currently the only G20 nation lacking such leadership. Cities in India are currently governed by their host states from a considerable distance in many cases. The report does cite the success of Kolkata’s (Calcutta) mayor-commission model as a potential national model for executive power combined with administrative-technical support.

3. Sectoral policies: These include economic development, sustainability management, and housing management. India does not plan enough for affordable housing, providing 200,000 units a year versus needed minimum of 2 million units. The number of people living in slums in 2008 was some 82 million, a number that could double by 2030. Recommendations are to establish funding, draw upon external expert advice and hire dedicated managers to focus on these areas.

4. Urban Planning: Change from ad hoc and sporadic planning. Develop longer-term plans (40-50 year) with nested 20-year master plans designating land uses, transportation services, infrastructure and building typologies that are actionable on the ground with transparent public processes. Use modeling and "fly-overs" to educate stakeholders of planning options (Singapore, London and New York are cited for best practices). India’s current urban planning processes exist as documents only, and are not executed or followed in reality.

The report in its introduction observes: "The speed of urbanization poses an unprecedented managerial and policy challenge–yet India has barely engaged in a discussion about how to handle this seismic shift in the makeup of the nation."

From my experience, I would dispute the assertion that the country is barely engaged in such discussions. My firm Common Current and our partners have been involved in a lively series of exchanges with high-level officials from national ministries and planning bodies in India regarding the future of its cities, with sustainability focused approaches in renewable energy, water and transportation infrastructure being key points of discussion.

How India’s national urban planning plays out on localized levels in actual cities, though, remains to be seen. Whatever may transpire, "India’s Urban Awakening" is an invaluable resource for determining just how the path forward can be understood and, hopefully, navigated.

Warren Karlenzig is president of Common Current, an internationally active urban sustainability strategy consultancy. He is author of How Green is Your City? The SustainLane US City Rankings and a Fellow at the Post Carbon Institute.

Green buildings: how to redesign

By Sunita Narain / Down To Earth

There is a buzz about green buildings. But the question is: what does one mean by building green? And how does one design policies to make the green homes of our dreams?

Green is not about first building structures using lots of material and energy, and then fixing them so that they become a little more efficient. Building green is about optimizing on the local ecology, using local material as far as possible and, most importantly, building to cut the power, water and material requirements.

Take the glitzy airport building Delhi will soon get. Developers say it will come with a green tag. This is because the airport is investing in energy-efficient lighting, sewage disposal and rainwater harvesting. All these are important initiatives but the question remains: could the airport have been designed differently so that it used much less energy in the first place? For instance, the challenge before green airports today is to make them compact to reduce the time it takes from entering the building to entering the aircraft. This ‘frugal’ planning will make everything more efficient—take less building materials to build and less energy to cool and heat. But planners first think of building the biggest structures and then try sugarcoating them. I say this without even discussing the need for airports to give way to other modes of much more efficient transport like railways.

If one begins to think green in a locally appropriate way, one will realize that traditional architecture was green in many ways. Every part of India had its unique stamp of buildings. This is because creative and architectural diversity was built on biological diversity. So buildings in hot regions would ensure corridors directed the wind so that it naturally cooled the interiors. In wetter regions architects would build using the natural breeze and light. All in all, traditional architects knew how to optimize the use of elements.

Today, Indians have forgotten how to build for their environment. Instead, modern buildings are examples of monocultures—lifted from the building books of cold countries where glass facades are good to look at and appropriate for their climate. The same building in India is a nightmare; the glass traps the heat. The building cannot be naturally cooled because windows cannot be opened. It needs central air-conditioning and heating. In this situation, turning the building green means using very expensive glass to insulate better. Builders avoid this. So the only band-aid green measures left are to include a few token items like efficient lights and water-saving devices in the toilets.

Architects say God is in the details. In this case, the details are about both simplicity and diversity. In large parts of India, where the sun is both the source of light and heat, traditional architecture made use of a small but critical detail: the window shade. Modern facades are built without these shades because they don’t fit the image of the western building. Just raise your head and look at the glitzy building out there, you won’t find this simple but effective detail.

Clearly, the buildings of the green future have to be different. This will require setting the right policy so that practice can follow. The fact is even today we have no mandatory green standards for builders to follow. The National Building Code does not include energy, water or material efficiency standard. The only standard that exists is for energy—the Energy Conservation Building Code—and it is voluntary. The first and urgent step is to incorporate this voluntary energy code into the mandatory National Building Code. The second step is to ensure its implementation so that builders measure and reduce the energy usage of their construction.

But most importantly, the code must be developed so that it sets the mandatory benchmark for builders to follow—tough standards for energy usage for each square metre of built-up area. This will then allow architects and builders to do things differently. They can build for efficiency and cut costs rather than build for inefficiency and then spend money on making the building more efficient. This will bring back the knowledge and practice of building to maximize passive energy, natural light and wind, while keeping away the heat.

Simultaneously, the code needs to be expanded to include water and waste standards—to reduce water usage in toilets—and to ensure that institutions and large residential complexes recycle and reuse sewage. Similarly, these complexes must be provided space to compost kitchen waste. But priority should be segregating solid waste. Separate what can be composted or recycled and minimize what cannot be reused (like plastic).

This is only the beginning. Green buildings alone won’t make a city green. If green homes cannot be connected with public transport then the lives of the people living in them and the environment would still be brown and dirty.

—Sunita Narain

By Anupama Mohanram / The Hindu

Not only has GRIHA evaluated and incorporated most of the green building criteria originally developed by LEED, a green building rating system that was developed in the US and adopted by the Indian Green Building Council in 2001, it has also added further requirements to make the system more suitable to the Indian building context. In addition, MNRE has made it mandatory for buildings to obtain a GRIHA rating to avail subsidies and other financial assistance allocated for green development. The Ministry also provides incentives to local bodies that offer rebate in property tax for GRIHA rated buildings.

Key features

Some of the key additional features that GRIHA requires are:

Basic building codes and standards: LEED originated in the US, where basic construction norms and regulations such as construction worker safety, health & sanitation, minimum visual and thermal comfort are strictly complied with and without which construction approvals are not granted. LEED’s criteria assumes adherence to these basic codes and norms which may not be mandatory in India.

On the other hand, GRIHA requires compliance with certain basic codes and norms prescribed by Indian standards such as the National Building Code (NBC), Energy Conservation Building Code (ECBC) and Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), by selectively enforcing a few of these even though they may not be required by local development authorities for construction approvals. This approach ensures that these basic standards are also achieved along with environmental performance. A few of these basic standards in GRIHA include:

- Minimum level of sanitation/safety facilities for construction workers.

- Minimum natural day lighting requirements as per the NBC

- Minimum artificial lighting requirements as per the ECBC

- Urban context consideration

Focus on non-airconditioned buildings: Traditionally, buildings in India have been designed with climate sensitivity in mind, trying to achieve thermal comfort for occupants without the use of mechanical interventions. GRIHA’s criteria provide more credit to climate responsive architecture and design to minimise energy use compared to LEED criteria.

Mandatory minimum requirement for solar energy: Backed up by MNRE subsidies, GRIHA requires, as a mandatory criterion, 1 per cent of the total energy needs for the development to be sourced from solar power. Quality of ground water in India is not guaranteed as in other countries such as the U.S. GRIHA mandates the treatment of ground water for drinking and irrigation to the norms as prescribed by ISI.

Noise pollution: LEED does not evaluate acoustical comfort. GRIHA requires adherence to Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and NBC guidelines for acceptable outdoor and indoor noise levels. All of the above make GRIHA very comprehensive. Incentives and subsidies by the MNRE: Buildings that achieve a minimum of 3-star GRIHA rating will be eligible for reimbursement of registration fees and cash incentives to their architects and consultants. Financial support for solar PV installations is also being offered. In addition , the MNRE is also offering Rs.50 lakhs to municipal corporations and Rs.25 lakhs to other urban local bodies that announce rebate in property tax for GRIHA rated buildings and make it mandatory for new government and public sector buildings to be rated under GRIHA.

Over the years, LEED has achieved global recognition as the rating system of choice for eco-friendly development. On the other hand, the availability of MNRE incentives and its greater relevance to the Indian context makes GRIHA an attractive option to government, quasi-government and private corporations with a predominantly Indian customer base. We spoke to Gaurav Shorey, GRIHA Secretariat, about the future of GRIHA . The next steps would be specific ratings for existing buildings and for low-income and rural housing developments that would be formulated in collaboration with organisations such as the HUDCO. The possibility of relaxation of FAR regulations for building developments with a GRIHA rating is also being weighed.

Architects, planners and others with green caps and fingers are unveiling a plan to promote use of green principles for eco-friendly

infrastructure, necessitated by climate change.

Confederation of Indian Industry (CII, Goa) and Indian Institute of Architects (IIA) Goa chapter have initiated a joint effort towards creating a cell in Goa to promote green buildings for housing, industries and commercial sector. "We are working on the building design, incorporating the green concept and doing computer test models to ensure that the buildings are really energy-saving before we actually build them," said Dean D’Cruz, architect and former chairman of IIA (Goa chapter).

Conceding that awareness is just building up in Goa at the moment, D’Cruz said research shows that conventional buildings consume 40% of the energy used on earth. "If we are to address the issue of climate change, green buildings are important for Goa," he explained. Raya Shankhwalker, a Panaji-based architect, said that "in Goa, nothing is being done on an organized level, but as a private initiative some architects are consciously moving towards the green building concept".

As a first step, Indian Green Building Council (IGBC) is trying to set up its Goa cell with assistance from Goa chapters of CII and IIA. "IGBC has been successfully nationally and if the Goa chapter is set up it will help in spreading the green building concept," Shankhwalker said.

D’Cruz explained that IGBC encourages promoters of green buildings to make them accessible to the public. "In this way, these can serve as demonstration models for awareness to be created at public level," he said. While plans are being drawn for such a model in Goa, IGBC held a conference in the city recently to take the concept forward.

Amish Patel, a valuer and mechanical engineer speaking at a national seminar on valuation of assets in Margao on October 9 and 10, referred to the potential for developing greener infrastructure in India’s fast growing construction sector. "This is both valid from an economic as well as environment point of view. An early step taken during the designing stage of construction activity can result in tremendous savings over the longer period of utilization of the construction," he said.

As part of the green initiative, the promoters will help people access the green technology. "If people want to go for green homes or buildings, CII can extend support to them," said D’Cruz. The CII will provide them links to manufacturers of environment-friendly material and machinery and also guidelines to be followed while undertaking green constructions.

On its part, the IIA will promote among architects the idea of green buildings. "We want to do it so that they are encouraged to use green principles in their work," explains D’Cruz, whose firm has a few such projects in Noida, Goa and elsewhere.

Sources say a few projects using green principles are under construction. "But there are also some builders who make false claims on the basis of installing some solar panels and a few plants on their premises," a source said.

Obtaining green ratings from IGBC, which is tantamount to certification like ISO, can help hotels and other housing ventures commercially. But green principles can be followed without inviting a rating agency to certify the building. "Private residences need not go for ratings as costs are involved, but they can follow the principles," D’Cruz said.

A standard definition of a green building is that it uses less water, optimises energy efficiency, conserves natural resources, generates less waste and provides healthier spaces for occupants, as compared to a conventional building. Explains D’Cruz, "Green buildings uses less energy, and initially cost 5% to 7% more because users are paying for new systems and research and development costs, but within five years, they can recover the costs and start saving."

But some like Shankhwalker advocate that the concept of conservation of energy in buildings and constructions be taken to the grassroot level. "One of the best ways of achieving this is to incorporate green initiatives in building bye laws, and one of these is to make rainwater harvesting and recharge mandatory for every construction being taken up in Goa."

The other initiatives would be to encourage use of solar energy in buildings for heating of water, which is being pursued by Goa Energy Development Agency. "Architects can employ innovative techniques for building homes that are cooler without airconditioning while government can start by replacing all incandescent bulbs in its offices and quarters with CFL ones," Shankhwalker said.

Morad Ahmed, chief town planner, town and country planning department, said a recommendation of environment minister Aleixo Sequeira regarding green buildings had been acted upon. "We have written a note to the government to adopt green principles for government buildings," said Ahmed.

Original article here.

Can you look at a building and tell if it’s green? Sometimes, appearances can be deceptive. We clue you in on what really makes a building environment-friendly

By Himanshu Burte / LiveMint

Sustainability is the buzzword. Every manner of building makes a claim to “greenness” today. While there are various ways of judging how green a building is, we often assume its look also offers a clue.

This seems reasonable. If a building is made largely of a material that consumes less energy and produces fewer emissions, the building is likely to be greener than others. Buildings that expose stone, brick or a wood skeleton consume less cement because they are not plastered. Also, if this material is local, little energy is consumed in transportation. So can there actually be a green look for a building?

That depends on how the question is phrased. We may ask, “Can we judge how sustainable a building is from its looks?” Or “Are there some aesthetic values that lead to more sustainable architecture?”

Let’s take the first question first. From the late eco-architect Laurie Baker’s buildings in Kerala, we may conclude that using natural materials and showing them off will lead to a greener building. Such strategies reduce the use of energy-guzzling materials such as cement, steel, aluminium and glass. Yet as Surya Kakani, an Ahmedabad-based architect who has built several eco-sensitive institutional and industrial facilities, says, “A building in mud may not be truly green in its impact if the mud is transported from a faraway location, using up a lot of fuel.”

Waste material locally available may be the best. Some years ago, Kakani used earthquake rubble to build load-bearing walls for a school in Rajkot, which he then plastered and painted—a conventional look with deep green veins. At a recently completed garment factory in Ahmedabad (which is day-lit and naturally ventilated), he exposed the mix of fly-ash bricks (75%) and burnt bricks (25%) in a distinctive look that flaunts environment-friendly underpinnings.

Size matters too. An air-conditioned, 5,000 sq. ft bachelor’s pad, even if built with local mud, would not be the best illustration of sustainable architecture. In this case, size alone would negate the low-energy consumption of the building material, even before power-guzzling appliances come into play. The natural look of mud construction can hide a very unnatural attitude to consumption.

Perhaps there is no green look then. Or maybe looks have nothing to do with sustainability.

A less sustainable look?

Consider the other side of the coin—is there an aesthetic that is inherently non-green?

One look at oversized glass and aluminium composite panel (ACP) building blocks in Gurgaon, neighbouring Delhi, or Whitefields, near Bangalore, and you know these are not sustainable buildings. The huge glass walls face any direction, including the west, from where the hottest low-angle sun streams in. Glass lets in light and traps heat. So these corporations must consume a lot of energy (and cash) to keep the interiors cool. And all this because of the “progressive” look they desired.

Certainly, the glass and ACP facades are an aesthetic choice. We have been conditioned by the use of glass in American skyscrapers into believing that it best expresses corporate identity. Over the second half of the 20th century, private corporations rose in power, and glass became the architectural motif of power and prestige.

So much so that glass (and ACP) is the exterior material of choice for many non-corporate entities, even many governments. You can find cultural centres and small businesses adorned with glass even in scorching semi-desert climates. The state-built PL Deshpande Maharashtra Kala Academy, built over the old Ravindra Natya Mandir at Prabhadevi in Mumbai, is an example. A small hotel in Bhuj, Gujarat, in which I stayed two weeks ago, had a large glass surface catching the hot morning sun. Behind the glass was the air-conditioned lobby.

So the glazed look would certainly seem to have an unsustainable ecological impact. However, things are not quite so simple.

Indiscriminate glazing can certainly make buildings unbearably hot and increase energy consumption in the form of air conditioners. But glass is not the villain. If expanses of glass face shaded courtyards and let in reflected light, we could get free daylight, while avoiding the heat and glare. The Apollo Tyres headquarters, designed by Morphogenesis in Gurgaon, does this with the style of a typical corporate office in glass, aluminium and stainless steel.

Climatic considerations

The real problem is our fascination for a particular look irrespective of its climatic and ecological appropriateness. Through the buildings they design, architects often engineer and strengthen this fascination. If large numbers of architects continue to favour one look, they push people’s imagination towards it.

Yet, sometimes, the work of even a single architect can counter this—such as that of the late Joseph Allen Stein, who nudged the imagination of architects and laypeople in New Delhi towards a more nature-friendly taste. The values embodied in Stein’s work, such as the brick-walled India Habitat Centre, constitute a much more ecologically responsible approach.

This puts a special responsibility on architects. Not only do they need to know the actual ecological impact of their design decisions, they must also consider the cultural impact. “Whatever aesthetic an architect wants to explore must be explored responsibly,” says Jaigopal G. Rao, an Ernakulam-based architect with expertise in eco-sensitive architecture. “We can’t casually choose a look that needs energy-guzzling materials and goes against climatic logic.”

For his part, Rao has already developed a unique style of building, combining bamboo with concrete to create light, airy and ecologically gentle architecture.

Now, it’s up to the rest of us.

*******

Pointers for greener buildings

• Reduce: Build as little as possible, so that you consume little even with conventional technology. If possible, reduce the use of energy-guzzling materials such as cement, steel and aluminium. Look for alternatives. A tip: Labour-intensive technology can often reduce total fossil fuel energy use

• Reuse: Buy doors, windows and similar building parts from second-hand dealers

• Recycle: Recycle water, waste, garbage and anything else you can think of

• Reset: Expectations of comfort and style can be limited to what may be naturally available through good architectural design without mechanical equipment. If you must use an air conditioner, accept a temperature of 27 degrees Celsius, instead of 22, and save energy costs. Also, change your lifestyle to save every drop of water and electricity

• Resource: Local material saves transportation energy. Cement, steel and the tiles available in your local store don’t count as local material. Instead, explore the possibilities of local stone, mud, bamboo and terracotta. Also, explore ferrocement and innovative brickwork techniques