Stop Mumbai masala from losing flavour …………By R A J R I S H I S I N G H A L
A CITY is an organic creature. It grows, it evolves and it matures. A vibrant city is constantly changing, looking at means of incorporating and facilitating newer ways in which people can work, play and communicate. A great citywhether it was Athens in the classical Greek moment, or Rome in its imperial glory, or London as the nerve center of latter day colonial splendour, or in its present day format as a global financial services centreis also every bit a global city, acting as a gateway for people, goods and ideas.
Whatever it is that they do, cities are counted among the worlds greatest only if they are perceived as a global city in which people come together to work, exchange ideas, learn, play, trade and live peacefully. US magazine Foreign Policy has drawn up an index of Global Cities in association with global consulting firm AT Kearney and The Chicago Council on Global Affairs. The 2008 index is just out and the top five cities on that list are New York, London, Paris, Tokyo andsurprise, surpriseHong Kong.
So, what makes for a global city? Foreign Policys story on the Index, published in the November-December edition, says: The term itself conjures a command centre for the cognoscenti. It means power, sophistication, wealth and influence…The cities that host the biggest capital markets, elite universities, most diverse and well-educated populations, wealthiest multinationals, and most powerful international organisations are connected to the rest of the world like nowhere else. But, more than anything, the cities that rise to the top of the list are those that continue to forge global links despite intensely complex environments. They are the ones making urbanisation work to their advantage by providing the vast opportunities of global integration to their people
Later on in the copy, explaining the choice of the Top Five, the article mentions: As diverse as they are, the most successful global cities have several things in common: As New York proves, global cities are those that excel across multiple dimensions. Even Shanghais staggering, decades-long double-digit annual economic growth alone cant make it global. The city must also determine how to use that wealth to influence policy, attract the brightest young minds, and accurately portray the rest of the world to its citizens. Global cities continuously adapt to changing circumstances.
Where does that leave Mumbai, a youngish city eager to realise its global aspirations and struggling to discover an appropriate identity? In the 2008 index, Mumbai clocks in at rank 49, above its other Indian compatriots Bangalore (rank 58) and Kolkata (rank 60), but below New Delhi (rank 41). So, while Mumbai citizens might contest this hotly, it might be useful to figure out whats got Delhi ahead in the rankings. True to form, Mumbai scores higher than Delhi in two important criteria business activity and human capital. But in three other critical areas information exchange, cultural experience and political engagement the political capital scores over the commercial capital.
Sure, there can be many areas this index can be disputed, as many Mumbaikars certainly will. Mumbai is reputed for its better work culture and its liberal attitudes. But all these do not seem to count for much. Lets go one step further and look at some of the other surveys. Another global consulting firm, Mercer Consulting, also conducts its own survey for expats called Quality of Living Survey. The 2008 survey shows Bangalore pipping Mumbai in terms of quality of living. Mercers another survey Worldwide Cost of Living Survey also shows Mumbai as the Indias most expensive city, followed by Delhi.
Having said that, it might be useful to examine what got Mumbai ahead of other cities its attraction as a centre of trade and finance, and its ability to bring people from diverse backgrounds to create wealth together. For instance, we all know how the Gujaratis created markets, Parsis their manufacturing companies and Punjabis the entertainment industry. They have all added to Mumbais wealth, lived and swore by the city, making it the countrys true cosmopolis (the other oneKolkatawas ruined by Naxalites, CPI(M) rule, the Bangladesh war and Mrs Indira Gandhis blatantly partisan economic policies). This is also what helped Mumbai become the gateway for industrialisation and investment in interior Maharashtra.
Is there a threat to that now? Sure. Is there a way out? Certainly. Look at the Foreign Policy index and youll see the list is full of cities which are far older than MumbaiBeijing (12), Moscow (19), Istanbul (28), Rome (30) but have survived by innovating, by adapting and by pushing to make their cities more global, not by insulating themselves. Apologists for Mumbais poor infrastructure blaming it on the endless stream of immigrants would also do well to look up the index. Many Third World capitals known for their sprawling slums Bangkok (22), Sao Paulo (31), Buenos Aires (33), Bogotá (43) are ahead of Mumbai because they had the foresight to acknowledge the problem and the courage to find innovative ideas to solve them, not wring their hands and plead helplessness. Lastly, Mumbais role model Shanghai is ranked at 20, beating the city by a wide margin. So, who is going to take Mumbai into the future its citizens or its unscrupulous politicians?