The Ministry of Urban Development launched the ‘City Liveability Index’ for measuring the quality of life in 116 major cities including smart cities, capital cities and cities with a population of above one million each.
In a first of its kind Index to be introduced in the country, cities will be assessed on a comprehensive set of 79 paratmeters to capture the extent and quality of infrastructure including availability of roads, education and health care, mobility, employment opportunities, emergency response, grievance redressal, pollution, availability of open and green spaces, cultural and entertainment opportunities etc.
After selecting the agency for undertaking this assessment next month, data collection will be completed in the next about six months.
Andhra Pradesh topped the list scoring 96.06% marks. Others who received the incentive fund in order of merit were; Odisha (95.38%), Jharkhand (91.98%), Chattisgarh (91.37%), Madhya Pradesh (90.20%), Telangana (86.92%), Rajasthan (84.62%), Punjab (77.02%), Kerala (75.73%), Goa (75.38*), Mizoram (75.00%), Gujarat (73.80%), Chandigarh (72.73%), Uttar Pradesh (70.67%) and Maharashtra (70.52). Marks scored by these States was considered for deciding the quantum of incentive with high scorers getting more.
The Index, a Common Minimum Reference Framework to enable the cities know where they stand in terms of quality of life and the interventions required to improve.
The Ministry of Urban Development disbursed Rs.500 cr as incentive to 16 States that performed well in implementing urban reforms during 2016-17.
Progress in respect of reforms like e-governance, Audit of accounts, Tax revision policies and extent of tax revenue collection, Energy and Water Audit, Establishing State Level Financial Intermediaries for resource mobilization, Credit Rating etc., was taken into account.
Reform incentive fund for the next three financial years will be increased from the present allocation of Rs.900 cr to Rs.10,000 cr to promote next generation reforms that would make a substantial difference to urban governance and service delivery and resource mobilization by urban local bodies.