By Amit Kapoor and inputs from Nabha Joshi
Agglomeration Without Planning: Why Gurugram and Kolkata Demand Climate-Smart Cities
As India races towards its Viksit Bharat ambitions, a new constellation of cities, including Pune, Ujjain, Bhubaneswar, Hosur, Dholera, and Greater Noida, among others, are surging to prominence. This breakneck expansion demands a closer look at two cautionary precedents already on the map: Kolkata. In this sprawling metropolis, colonial foundations and industrial clusters strain under population pressures, while Gurugram, a satellite city that has vaulted from farmland to a financial hub in a single generation. These urban tales showcase the double edge of agglomeration: the same forces that drive growth can harden into liabilities when foresight and climate-responsive planning fall short. From sinking under deluge to intense heat-island effects and fragile infrastructure, both cities expose how India’s celebrated success stories can mask systemic risks.
The first case is of the de facto capital of British India and the gateway of eastern India: Kolkata. As the Empire’s second-largest city, Kolkata experienced rapid industrial growth from the 1850s. Colonial urbanism, though spatially partial towards “White Towns”, initiated the agglomeration of resources through infrastructure investments, telegraph connections, Howrah port development, and industrial clustering. Post-independence, Kolkata, along with Jute, developed a heavy engineering industry and port infrastructure. Several State Policies, such as the West Bengal Investment and Industrial Policy 2013, aimed to attract investments and provide faster clearances for services like environmental clearances and power connections, along with sector-specific policies for Jute, Steel, and Heavy Industries, as well as the West Bengal Industrial Corridor Policy 2023. Today. Kolkata’s economy spans steel, heavy engineering, mining, pharmaceuticals, and IT services, contributing 30% of West Bengal’s GDP despite covering just 1,850 sq. km. The Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority, established in 1970, manages this complex urban system across 3 Municipal Corporations and 38 Municipalities, creating India’s most densely populated metropolitan area at 8,500 persons per sq. km. This explosive population growth has led to issues of accommodation, poor waste management and sanitation, and ineffective water supply.
Kolkata’s recent flooding disaster, claiming at least 10 lives, including nine electrocution deaths during the city’s heaviest rainfall in four decades, exposes critical weaknesses in sustainable urban planning, implementation of public policies and risks of density. Kolkata’s lauded “Mission Nikashi”, which managed previous monsoons, buckled under this extreme rainfall. The downpour transformed major arteries, such as EM Bypass, AJC Bose Road, and Central Avenue, into waterways, creating gridlock that lasted for hours. The ensuing blame game between the Chief Minister and CESC power utility reveals the coordination failures, where multiple agencies managing different infrastructure systems have created accountability gaps that undermine urban safety.
The second case is of Gurugram, an unremarkable city dotted with agricultural lands and primitive infrastructure, metamorphosed into “The Millennium City”. The city witnessed improved productivity through strategic investments, innovation, a favourable regulatory environment, and connectivity with Delhi and major urban centres. In the NCR region, Gurugram showed the highest increase in urban infrastructure development. The built-up area out of the total area of Gurugram mushroomed from 10% (50.6 sq. km) in 1990 to 17.25% (80.5 sq. km) in 2002, which further increased to 45.1% (210.4 sq. km) in 2018, revealing the scale of transformation. The city reported success in most metrics, achieving India’s second-highest per capita income at ₹9.05 lakh, right behind Telangana’s Rangareddy at ₹9.46 lakh. The city of Gurugram also records one of the highest car ownership rates in India, of 323 vehicles per 1,000 residents. It attracts over 350 Fortune 500 companies alongside luxury residential developments and corporate offices that rival international infrastructure developments. But this trajectory has eventually reached an inflexion point. The very factors that enabled Gurugram’s success, such as proximity to the national capital, the accelerated creation of urban spaces, and the massive influx of a working population, are now turning into constraining factors to liability and operational efficiency.
The city is nearing its maximum threshold for human, environmental, and vehicle density. The sky-high rents and scarce affordable housing force thousands to commute from surrounding areas to Gurugram. The average commute time from Delhi to Gurugram ranges from 1.5 to 2 hours, with recent incidents documenting 7-kilometre traffic jams lasting up to 8 hours during the monsoons. The hidden costs of operational delays, travel, and lost work hours, due to the affordability crisis and traffic bottlenecks, cause a severe productivity leakage in the economy. According to GMDA’s mobility management plan, 21.9 lakh daily intra-city trips occur, out of which 85% trips are taken for work or education-related activities. Considering the modest minimum wages in India, traffic congestion can result in a loss of 1.17 billion man-hours and an economic loss of up to $1.3 billion.
Similar to the Kolkata case, Climate vulnerability compounds density and urban planning challenges. In the summer, Gurugram becomes an urban heat-island, reporting the highest Land Surface Temperature variations among NCR satellite cities. During rains, roads flood and paralyse transport, driven by concrete surfaces, reduced vegetation, and increased built-up areas. This stems from decisions made during the rapid development phase, as well as the consistent neglect of climate- and people-responsive planning. During the developmental process, the initial policy framework created favourable conditions for private sector urban development. Haryana enacted strategic legislation in the 1970s: the legislature passed several laws to enable large-scale land acquisition for private firms to develop townships by relaxation of NAC requirements, and empowering private players to procure licenses and acquire extensive agricultural lands for development of townships through the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act of 1975 and the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act of 1977. This led to government fragmentation, with multiple agencies (GMDA, MCG, HUDA) that operate with overlapping jurisdictions but lack effective coordination and accountability mechanisms.
This led to an unregulated building spree, which ultimately transformed into an environmental crisis due to the oversight of regulations, climate change, and inadequate sustainable urban development strategies. The widespread encroachment and construction activities on natural drainage systems, including nullahs, wetlands, riverbeds, and historical water bodies that previously functioned as flood management infrastructure, have marred the natural channels of water flow, reducing the hydraulic capacity to manage monsoon runoff and contributing to the severity of waterlogging issues. These issues also create mobility and accessibility challenges for the working population, in addition to urban design inadequacies such as insufficient highway connections and exit points, which hinder the circular movement of people and resources, resulting in recurring traffic bottlenecks. To achieve sustainable urban design, corporate buildings have achieved LEED sustainable certifications and commitments to net-zero by 2050 have been made. But the broader infrastructure framework incentivises carbon-intensive transportation patterns. To enhance the current limited metro connectivity in the city, the GMDA launched a Comprehensive Mobility Plan, which estimated that 1,550 buses would be needed by 2026. However, the current fleet has only 200 operational CNG buses (150 in Gurugram, 50 in Faridabad). This gap clearly illustrates the underinvestment in public transit infrastructure relative to the scale of urban development. Looking ahead, the city’s strategies should heavily rely on sustainable urban planning strategies and decongestion. Developing sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS), such as permeable pavements, rain gardens, and retention ponds, can help manage runoff more effectively. This can be achieved by implementing a system of proactive maintenance, regular drain desilting, and inter-agency coordination.
Both cities reflect the flip side of agglomeration economics: if cities don’t adapt, the agglomeration effect disappears. As we see around today, most cities in India have reached a point where addressing deficits is costly or only damage control is possible. Still, the emerging satellite cities can avoid similar trajectories by implementing climate-responsive planning, integrated public transit systems, sustainable urban planning strategies that account for the inbound working force, and coordinated governance structures from the outset. Future urban centres must internalise the full social costs of agglomeration, rather than externalising environmental and mobility burdens onto the aspirational population that they drive. If these upcoming urban hubs learn from the experience of cities like Kolkata and Gurugram, they might not have to make the Faustian bargain between development and liveability, sacrificing social benefit at the cost of urban development.
The article was published with Economic Times on September 28, 2025.
