We have all used formulas in mathematics and science. At its core, a formula exists to ensure that, without going through the entire process every single time, we can still arrive at an accurate result. In that sense, it reduces repetitive effort and makes the process far more efficient without compromising the intended outcome. When this idea is extended to other spheres of life, it takes the form of an SOP (Standard Operating Procedure), designed to streamline systems and bring consistency to complex tasks. The question then arises: what SOP, or formula, does India follow for the establishment and expansion of its urban centres?
Take the example of Delhi, the national capital. Every monsoon, large stretches of the city are submerged under rainwater, revealing glaring weaknesses in drainage systems. In several neighbourhoods, a persistent pungent smell hangs in the air, often linked to poor waste management and sanitation. And then there is the chronic air pollution, which returns with alarming intensity each winter, triggering nationwide debate and public outrage. Against this backdrop, the Government of India’s Smart Cities Mission was launched with the promise of transforming urban governance and infrastructure. However, an important question remains: how much of this ambitious initiative has translated into tangible improvements on the ground, and how much still exists only on paper? That, perhaps, is a matter that warrants serious scrutiny and audit.
A peculiar pattern can often be observed in India’s political system: as the stature of public office rises, accountability tends to increase, while the arbitrary use of power diminishes. At the lowest tiers of governance, however, authority is often exercised with the least restraint and the least accountability. Municipal bodies—the closest layer of administration to citizens—frequently appear the most indifferent toward the governance of their jurisdictions. The result is a vacuum of responsibility at the grassroots level: one may travel smoothly on a six-lane highway between cities, only to spend hours trapped in traffic once inside them. But what is the way out?
Establishing a foundational blueprint, a formula, or an SOP for infrastructure development in the urban centre is an appropriate approach to address the growing problem of accountability deficits at the local level. One does not have to reinvent the wheel repeatedly; rather, once, by investing effort and resources in developing basic rules and building blocks, one can enable our cities to grow sustainably without requiring constant intervention by local leadership, which anyway is absent, and in most cases one does not even know who their local leader is because the vote was given not to the individual but to the party. When such is the case, why not reduce the scope of arbitrariness in urban development itself by designing systems that function independently of personalities? A clearly defined set of urban rules—covering drainage, waste management, road design, zoning, and public services—could act as a structural guarantee that certain minimum standards are always maintained, irrespective of who occupies the local office. In this way, governance gradually shifts from being dependent on the efficiency or goodwill of individuals to being anchored in durable institutions and predictable systems.
The 74th Constitutional Amendment Act institutionalised urban local bodies and, in theory, was meant to create a clear governance framework for cities. In practice, however, states have rarely transferred meaningful power to these institutions. As a result, accountability formally rests with municipal bodies, while real authority remains elsewhere. A system structured in this manner inevitably produces weak outcomes: responsibility without power rarely leads to effective governance. In such a situation, an already constrained administrative layer could be supplemented—or in many routine functions even replaced—by a self-sustaining framework built on clearly defined urban standards and supported by technology. By embedding basic infrastructure rules into systems rather than leaving them entirely to discretionary decision-making, cities could begin to function with greater consistency, transparency, and resilience.