Public Realm: What has changed?

Public spaces as defined by UN-Habitat are “all places, including streets, publicly owned or of public use, accessible and enjoyable by all for free and without a profit motive” (Habitat, 2013) A city is not identified by its gated communities, but its public spaces. These act as a mesh of connection between people and the city. The history of the public realm has been very vibrant a place of a point of departure where people of all sectors would socialize and have a better sense of belonging. The Greek Agora, the Roman Forum, the European squares and Indian ‘chowks’ are few examples which leave people craving (Mahadeviya, 2015) .

The concept of ‘public’ and ‘publicness’ is lost in the myriads of development of Indian cities. Division of the Indian society in levels of tiers and social exclusion is further intensifying the situation. Public spaces have become a platform of politics in today's scenario of segregated suburbs, gated communities, privatized spaces and surveillance controlled malls.

Public Realm: What has changed?      

As there is a shortage of funds and staff or lack of capacity the local government level, timely delivery of the services, limited intervention from the government has opened the path for privatization at the city as well as neighborhood level for urban revitalization. Other reasons for the decline in the Public realm could be the outcomes of liberalization and advancement in technology which has led to more workforce participation in the tertiary sector. These factors have remodeled the traditional concepts of the public realm and sense of community both locally and at the global level. The rich and the elite class has started to rely more on individualism and socially available only in places which gives a sense of security thus, they prefer to be segregated. They may be able to afford the luxury of open spaces like parks, playgrounds for walking and relaxing and even for their children to play; the middle-income class usually ends up sacrificing such amenities for they come with a price tag and leave alone the economically weaker sections.

One cannot escape from the fact that fast and growing urban world will continue to shape the future of the public realm in the cities. People in the modern or big cities today are more happy and comfortable spending time inside a mall, which is not an issue. Such places though form a part of the modern day public realm, however, they do not include everyone in the city. The owners of these malls or high-end cafes and restaurants may not allow anyone who just by the looks of it does not seem to pay for it. This in a way impedes with the “Right to a city”. Neglect of public spaces is one aspect of our poor urban development; our cities are continuously losing their character without any sense of connectedness. Public spaces are imperative because they return benefits of greater inclusion, safety, democratic engagement, quality of life, gender parity and economic returns (Dhar, 2018) . The challenge for today’s urban planners is how to plan its cities so that there is an optimum balance between the needs and aspirations of the people in terms of the kind of spaces in the Public Realm.

How do improvise living experience in Indian cities?

A city is all about a wide spectrum of informed choices for its inhabitants. The East part of Ahmedabad city is devoid of public amenities and open spaces and is less developed as compared to the West part of the city. This part of the city is inhabited by a majority of the low-income group and economically weaker sections, Kankariya lake being the only open space is high in demand and entry fees excludes its potential users living in the vicinity for rejuvenating their family and social life. It not only affects the amount saved by the economically weaker section for unforeseen conditions but introduces a sense of inferiority in younger generations. Since there is a lack of choices offered in the surroundings, many urban planning mechanisms could be innovatively used to create the choices effectively.

(i) Focusing on Non-Motorized Transport in the vicinity would emphasize on the humanist element of our cities, where people would gather without the symbol of exclusivity.

(ii) Jane Jacob says, streets are fundamental units for creating neighborly environment and keeping cities safe. Street activities work as ‘eyes on the street’ an interesting solution used in China (Mahadeviya, 2015) . Even footpath can offer interesting experience of public spaces. The city administration can identify big spaces, the utility of neighbourhood parks and wide footpaths have great utility and make the cities livable.

 (iii) Private neighbourhood should be encouraged by municipalities to adopt nearby public spaces. This could be a win-win situation. The municipalities could select initiatives through the challenge method and reward them by co-funding the initiatives.

(iv) Indian public spaces that are rendered unused can be revived if the local government addresses the four basic needs of infrastructure, hygiene, security, and accessibility (Dhar, 2018) .

(v) There are neglected areas where slums appear and garbage seems to collect. There are many wastelands and lakes present in East Ahmedabad such as Chandola, Shodhan which could be revitalized of recreational purposes without any exclusion.

Initiatives like the Raahgiri in the Connaught place of New Delhi inspired from the city of Bogota in Columbia and the happy streets concept in Ahmedabad are examples which have tried to make use of the existing spaces in the public domain by giving them a vibrant and lively touch. After all public spaces of cities reflect public life of its inhabitants.