Content

1. Chandigarh at 75 – Urban Planning, Modernism & Democratic Deficit
2. AI for people, applying technology for social good

Chandigarh at 75 – Urban Planning, Modernism & Democratic Deficit

A. Issue in Brief

• At 75 years, Chandigarh reflects a paradox: globally admired for modernist urban planning, yet increasingly criticised for social exclusion, ecological strain, and governance rigidity.
• Conceived as a symbol of post-independence Nehruvian modernity, the city embodies order and architectural excellence but masks structural inequalities and functional stagnation.
• The Capitol Complex of Chandigarh was inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site (2016) under the transnational serial nomination “The Architectural Work of Le Corbusier”, recognising its global architectural significance.
• The article argues that Chandigarh’s decay is not accidental but stems from a modernist, elite-driven planning paradigm insulated from democratic correction.

Relevance

GS 1 (Society & Urbanisation):

• Post-independence modernist urban experiment.
• Socio-spatial segregation (elite core vs peripheral labour).
• Urbanisation, migration, informalisation trends.

GS 2 (Polity & Governance):

• Union Territory under Article 239 → limited democratic autonomy.
• 74th Constitutional Amendment spirit vs weak devolution.
• Dual governance (UT Administration + Municipal Corporation).

B. Constitutional / Legal Dimensions

• As a Union Territory, Chandigarh operates under Article 239, administered by the Centre through an appointed Administrator, limiting full-fledged democratic autonomy.
• Absence of a fully empowered municipal governance structure constrains local accountability, participatory planning, and responsive urban management.
• Urban planning intersects with 74th Constitutional Amendment (1992), which mandates decentralisation and empowerment of Urban Local Bodies (ULBs).
• Chandigarh’s dual control system (UT administration + municipal corporation) creates institutional fragmentation, slowing decision-making and weakening democratic oversight.

C. Governance / Administrative Issues

• Planned as a rigid sector-based grid city, zoning segregated residential, commercial, and institutional areas, reducing organic mixed-use urban dynamism.
• Administrative and elite residential zones cluster near the Capitol Complex, spatially separating power from informal labour and peripheral populations.
• Informal workers commute daily from peripheral areas due to exclusionary housing design, reflecting functional but unequal urban integration.
• Governance rigidity limits adaptive reuse of land, constraining innovation in affordable housing, mobility planning, and service delivery.

D. Economic Dimensions

• Chandigarh’s economy remains heavily dependent on government employment and services, limiting diversified industrial or innovation-driven growth.
• High land values and controlled development norms restrict affordable housing supply, increasing socio-spatial inequality.
• Peripheral urban spillovers toward Mohali and Panchkula demonstrate regional economic integration, yet planning coordination remains weak.
• Limited densification policies constrain economic productivity per unit land compared to dynamic metropolitan cities.

E. Social / Ethical Dimensions

• Chandigarh’s modernist design emphasised order and uniformity, yet insufficiently accounted for social heterogeneity and class realities.
• Informal labour and service providers remain spatially marginalised, reinforcing invisible hierarchies within a planned urban form.
• The Rock Garden, created by Nek Chand, symbolises citizen-driven creativity challenging rigid state planning frameworks.
• Ethical tension exists between preserving heritage aesthetics and ensuring inclusive urban transformation.

F. Environmental Dimensions

• Designed with green belts and open spaces, Chandigarh was envisioned as a low-density, pollution-free city, with assets like Sukhna Lake.
• However, low-density planning increases urban sprawl, transport dependence, and ecological pressure on surrounding regions.
• Green spaces often serve aesthetic purposes rather than functioning as integrated climate resilience infrastructure.
• Rising temperatures and urban heat island effects necessitate adaptive, climate-sensitive planning reforms.

G. Urban Planning Critique  

• Chandigarh exemplifies high modernism, prioritising geometric order and architectural symbolism over participatory governance.
• Urban theory critique: Excessive reliance on master plans can freeze cities into static forms, undermining organic growth.
• Comparative parallels drawn with planned capitals like Brasília and Canberra, which faced similar administrative centralisation challenges.
• Urban decay reflects structural planning rigidity rather than isolated administrative lapses.

H. Data & Contextual Anchors

• Founded in early 1950s as India’s first planned city post-independence.
• Serves as capital for Punjab and Haryana, while functioning as a Union Territory.
• Approaching 75 years of existence, prompting evaluation of sustainability, governance adaptability, and inclusivity.

I. Challenges

• Democratic deficit due to limited devolution of powers under UT framework.
• Housing shortages and peripheral informalisation.
• Heritage preservation vs. modern urban needs conflict.
• Environmental stress amid rising urbanisation pressures.
• Administrative duality causing coordination inefficiencies.

J. Way Forward

• Strengthen democratic accountability through enhanced devolution under the spirit of the 74th Constitutional Amendment.
• Adopt adaptive planning frameworks permitting mixed land use, densification, and affordable housing integration.
• Integrate green spaces into climate resilience strategies, including heat mitigation and water conservation systems.
• Institutionalise citizen participation platforms for urban policy reforms.
• Balance heritage conservation with inclusive redevelopment, ensuring Chandigarh evolves as a living city rather than a static museum.

K. Prelims Pointers

• Chandigarh: Planned city designed by Le Corbusier in the 1950s.
• Functions as Union Territory and joint capital of Punjab and Haryana.
• Iconic landmarks: Capitol Complex, Rock Garden, Sukhna Lake.
• Example of modernist urban planning in post-independence India.

Practice Question

• “Chandigarh represents both the promise and limitations of high modernist urban planning in India.” Critically examine in the context of democratic governance and inclusive urban development.(250 Words)

AI for people, applying technology for social good

A. Issue in Brief

• As India hosts the AI Impact Summit in New Delhi, coinciding with the World Day of Social Justice (February 20), the focus shifts from AI disruption to human-centred AI governance.
• India has the world’s largest share of monthly active users of ChatGPT mobile application, reflecting rapid digital adoption and mass AI exposure.
• By 2030, AI could generate over 3 million new technology jobs in India while reshaping more than 10 million existing roles, signalling structural labour transformation.
• The central policy question is not job replacement but ensuring AI advances social justice, decent work, and inclusive growth.

Relevance

GS 1 (Society & Social Justice):

• AI and labour transformation.
• Digital divide and inequality risks.
• Work as dignity (youth demographic dividend).

GS 3 (Science & Technology):

• Generative AI exposure (1 in 4 workers globally – ILO).
• Indigenous AI Mission & skilling architecture.
• AI diffusion in public employment systems.

B. Global Labour & Governance Context

• According to the International Labour Organization, around one in four workers globally is employed in occupations exposed to generative AI, with transformation outweighing total displacement.
• AI discourse is polarised between productivity optimism and job-loss pessimism, yet outcomes depend primarily on governance, institutions, and social dialogue.
• In low-income countries, only 11.5% of employment is exposed to generative AI, compared with roughly one-third in high-income economies, reflecting structural disparities.
• Inclusive AI deployment requires worker participation, collective bargaining, and regulatory safeguards, ensuring technological change strengthens equity rather than deepens inequality.

C. Constitutional / Legal Dimensions

• Article 21 (Right to Life & Dignity) implies dignified work conditions; AI governance must safeguard employment security and workplace fairness.
• Articles 38 and 39 mandate reduction of inequalities and equitable distribution of material resources, guiding AI policy toward shared prosperity.
• Article 41 (Right to Work, Education & Public Assistance) under DPSPs reinforces the State’s responsibility in managing technological transitions.
• Implementation must align with the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, ensuring responsible AI data governance.

D. India’s Policy & Institutional Response

• India’s AI Mission, National Quantum Mission, Anusandhan National Research Fund, and Research, Development and Innovation Fund reflect proactive technological preparedness.
• The Union Budget 2026–27 announced a High-Powered ‘Education to Employment and Enterprise’ Standing Committee to assess AI’s employment and skilling impacts.
• The Committee will recommend embedding AI education from school level onwards and enabling AI-driven job matching systems.
• This institutional approach positions India as a potential Global South model for balancing innovation with labour inclusion.

E. Technology for Social Protection – e-Shram Case

• India’s e-Shram portal has registered over 315 million informal workers, strengthening access to welfare and formal recognition.
• Social protection coverage expanded from 19% (2015) to 64.3% (2025), demonstrating measurable institutional gains.
• Major investments, including Microsoft’s $17.5 billion AI diffusion commitment, support integration of AI into e-Shram and the National Career Service portal.
• AI-enabled platforms can improve job matching, skills mapping, grievance systems, and social protection targeting for informal workers.

F. Economic & Employment Dimensions

• AI-driven productivity gains can enhance organisational performance, innovation capacity, and global competitiveness.
• Labour transformation will primarily involve task reconfiguration, augmenting human roles rather than wholesale job elimination.
• Skill demand will shift toward digital literacy, AI system management, data analytics, and interdisciplinary capabilities.
• Strategic skilling investments are essential to convert AI disruption into demographic dividend realisation.

G. Social / Ethical Dimensions

• AI must promote inclusive development, preventing algorithmic bias against marginalised groups across gender, caste, age, and region.
• Ethical governance requires transparency, accountability, and explainability in algorithmic decision-making.
• Strong social dialogue mechanisms ensure worker voice in AI deployment decisions at enterprise and national levels.
• AI governance must reinforce work as a source of dignity, social cohesion, and peaceful societies.

H. Challenges / Risks

• Unequal AI access across regions risks widening the digital divide and reinforcing structural inequalities.
• Skill mismatches could create technological unemployment pockets, particularly among low-skilled workers.
• Governance lag may result in regulatory vacuums, enabling exploitative surveillance or algorithmic discrimination.
• Concentration of AI capabilities among large firms risks market monopolisation and reduced competition.

I. Way Forward

• Institutionalise Human-Centred AI Governance Frameworks grounded in labour standards and social justice principles.
• Expand universal skilling programmes integrating AI competencies across school, vocational, and higher education systems.
• Strengthen global cooperation through platforms like the Global Coalition for Social Justice to harmonise inclusive AI norms.
• Ensure AI integration within social protection systems prioritises data security, consent, and accountability safeguards.
• Promote tripartite dialogue among government, employers, and workers to align technological ambition with equitable employment outcomes.

J. Prelims Pointers

• AI Impact Summit hosted by India; aligned with World Day of Social Justice (February 20).
• One in four workers globally exposed to generative AI (ILO estimate).
• e-Shram registrations: 315+ million informal workers.
• Social protection coverage increased from 19% (2015) to 64.3% (2025).
• Microsoft AI diffusion commitment: $17.5 billion.

Practice Question

• “Technology alone does not determine labour market outcomes; governance does.” Discuss in the context of Artificial Intelligence and social justice in India, highlighting institutional and policy responses.(250 Words)