« Casualties of Protectionism | Main | A Populist’s War on the Poor »
December 20, 2006
Enforcing Mixed-Use Zoning Laws in Delhi
Shikha Dalmia explains the consequences on the op-ed pages of the WSJ:
India's Supreme Court earlier this year ordered an extraordinary campaign to close all businesses in the residential areas of New Delhi because they violate the city's zoning laws against mixed use. But if the court proceeds with this misguided crusade, India's capital may never attain its "world class city" aspirations. This is the lesson from America, where similar laws contributed to the decay of once-vital core cities and created anemic, sterile suburbs…
The Confederation of All India Traders maintains that enforcing this plan could potentially shutter 500,000 businesses and render nearly 2.5 million people unemployed. It is hardly surprising then that the initial round of business closings ordered by the court triggered massive protests that caused four deaths and forced authorities to call in paramilitary units. The drive was subsequently suspended until Jan. 31. But the question remains: Will inflicting all this pain and suffering on businesses actually produce a better New Delhi?
Some of the businesses might be able to pay the exorbitant rents of newly constructed, Western-style malls and relocate, as the court wants. But the vast majority won't be able to move, notes Parth Shah, founder of the Center for Civil Society, a Hauz Khas-based think tank that he created by carving out office space in his flat. This is not only a matter of expense; rather, many of these businesses depend on their communities and can't be transplanted elsewhere. For instance, neighborhood grocery stores will lose their function if they are relocated to a strip mall a mile away. Women who have to balance work with household chores will be unable to stay in business. The upshot will be a net attrition of the economy.
This article has all the more meaning as I met with Dr. Shah in his Hauz Khas-based office when we were in Delhi last April.
It is also interesting to note that although Wal-Mart is currently barred from setting up shop in India, when they do gain entry into the country enforcing these laws will benefit them enormously. Meanwhile, here in the U.S. we’re banning Wal-Marts under the premise of making our cities more like Delhi (i.e. “walkable, livable communities, not big, megastructures that inhibit people’s lives.”)
Of course, leaving it up to people to voluntarily decide where to shop is, in both countries, always out of the question.
Posted by Peter Mork at December 20, 2006 7:33 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.economicswithaface.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/418/[What is Peter Mork's first name?]
(Please add the answer to the question to the end of the link in order to trackback this entry.)
Comments
Email Comments Here