It’s difficult to be a lifeline and yet be sustainable
Metro systems are expensive to maintain, and the less subsidised they are the more ‘antipeople’ they become
The recent and inevitable Delhi Metro fare hike raises a number of issues, though none of them are new. The question is how to go forward? Researchers at the TRIPP Institute, IIT Delhi, showed through precise economic modelling and comparative public transport analysis that the Delhi Metro would not be a sustainable form of transport compared to, say, investing big time in the city’s bus infrastructure. ‘Big time’ does not mean a six-kilometre stretch of bus rapid transit (BRT), but an integrated system of transport that both expand sand improves what was there before.
With the arrival of the Metro, we have a new idea of ‘the public’. This Metro-riding public has demands of its own. Political parties will want to speak to and for this public. Most people will let them; but it is this public that will have to assert its claim on the Metro and for the future of the Metro system to be as they would like it – efficiently run, affordable, integrated, maybe even beautiful. This will require the city’s transport, environmental N GO sand urban research groups to beat the table — with both politicians and the DMRC.
The Delhi Metro has become a lifeline for so many in the National Capital Region, across income-levels. But ‘lifeline’ carries with it a requirement of sustainability. The Delhi Metro, at least compared to malls and other world-class spaces in the city, is more ‘of the people’ since it is not a space of consumption but offers a range of experiences to more kinds of people than most other urban projects.
Each fare hike will make the Delhi Metro less ‘for the people’. The Metro will also likely never be sustainable, even if the DMRC increases its commercial schemes. Metro systems are extremely expensive to run and maintain, and the less sub sid is ed they are the more ‘anti-people’ they will become. But this was also engrained in the very idea of the Metro; how could it be otherwise?
In the course of my research on the Delhi Metro, I have talked to hundreds of commute rs, and for at least two-thirds of them afford ability is a key issue in their decision to take the Metro. What makes the Metro a lifeline is precisely its ability to serve the majority of citydwellers. If not, its very premised is appears. Thus the question: Who does government represent—visible publics or people of all stripes and income-levels? More dramatically, who lives and who does not?
This contradiction is what becoming ‘world-class’ en tails. To have those amenities that put Delhi on par with international cities; to have people experience the compression of time and space that Metro-riding affords; and yet to have a city that becomes ever more exclusive for an expanding, elevated public.