Guest Column | Was the ‘Smart’ Experiment Really That Smart?

Key Takeaways

Chandigarh Smart City Limited concluded operations on March 20, 2025, leaving 32 projects unresolved.
The city’s initiative focused on tech solutions but failed to address core urban challenges, resulting in ineffective projects.
Future efforts should prioritize enhancing existing infrastructure and involving residents in decision-making processes.

Reflecting on Chandigarh’s Smart City Initiative

Chandigarh Smart City Limited (CSCL), which officially closed on March 20, 2025, leaves a mixed legacy characterized by ambitious promises and disappointing outcomes. Chandigarh, known for its well-planned layout by architect Le Corbusier, was already a model urban space before the smart city initiative launched. Instead of capitalizing on this legacy, CSCL’s efforts often resembled superficial enhancements rather than meaningful improvements.

The initiative aimed to modernize urban life using technology; however, the execution was flawed. Projects emphasizing tech integration—like AI-powered waste bins and digital dashboards—did not resolve existing issues. Malfunctioning waste bins and persistent traffic problems revealed a lack of focus on underlying infrastructure. Furthermore, the smart parking system and various other projects suffered from technical difficulties and poor execution.

Bureaucratic inefficiencies compounded these issues, as various departments within the municipal corporation and the Union Territory administration exchanged responsibilities without clear accountability. Notably, the ambitious “Smart Roads” initiative faltered due to overlapping official roles and missed deadlines. While functional public engagement is crucial for successful city planning, local residents often found out about new projects only when obstacles appeared. For instance, the pedestrian-friendly initiative in Sector 17 lacked public consultation and created more chaos than benefit.

Compounding the failures, the much-anticipated Integrated Command and Control Centre, intended to serve as the city’s digital backbone, faced technical hitches. Essential services such as public transport continued to be outdated and unreliable. With CSCL’s closure, the responsibility for the 32 ongoing projects now rests with a municipal corporation already overwhelmed by daily tasks, leaving the future of these projects uncertain.

To move forward, a revised approach is essential. Rather than pursuing extensive technological overhauls, officials should emphasize improvements to existing systems. A focus on sustainable infrastructure, effective governance, and enhanced public transport options should take precedence. Listening to residents’ needs and incorporating their feedback would foster more meaningful urban development. Involving citizens in planning—as demonstrated by successful smart city initiatives in Jaipur and Pune—can lead to practical, beneficial solutions.

Phased implementation grounded in gathering and analyzing data would also prevent rushed decisions. Testing pilot projects before larger rollouts could help avoid costly mistakes.

Now that CSCL has disbanded, there is an opportunity to redefine what a ‘smart city’ means for Chandigarh. The challenge lies not in launching ambitious initiatives but in executing them effectively to enhance residents’ lives. The success of future endeavors will depend on leadership that comprehends the core identity of Chandigarh rather than chasing fleeting tech trends. Success hinges on thoughtful progression; otherwise, the city risks repeating past missteps in its pursuit of urban modernization.

The content above is a summary. For more details, see the source article.