We had previously looked at Kuala Lumpur, Hong Kong and Singapore – South East Asian cities with which we share similar colonial histories, though not similar current status. We look today at the Indian city of Mumbai, a city with a colonial past that parallels Manila’s. Mumbai has an urban morphology (city form) like ours, which evolved from a fort and years of reclamation. It has a bayside drive that is remarkably like Roxas Boulevard with coconut trees swaying in the sea breeze. On the negative side, it has similar problems of slums, sprawl, and septic surrounds. Yet Mumbai has picked itself up by the bootstraps, continues to improve and is now probably the most vibrant city in the whole of South Asia.
In 1662, as part of the realignment that was usual of 17th century European politics, the King of Portugal gave Bombay away as a dowry to King Charles II of England. The island was part of the marriage treaty of the king’s daughter, Catherine de Braganza. But ol’ King Charles found the city a bother so he gave it away to the East India Company for a rent of 10 pounds a year.
The British company moved their main base of operations from their previous northern location in Surat to Bombay soon afterward. This was marked by the building of a large fortification, which was like Intramuros, built with thick walls, ravelins, gates and surrounded by a moat. Also like Intramuros, this complex housed the main structures of colonial power – the town hall, cathedral, customs house, and mint. Unlike Intramuros, Mumbai’s walls lasted only two centuries or so. They were demolished in 1862. The buildings inside, however, unlike Intramuros, remained and today form the core of Mumbai’s rich architectural heritage.
Like many of the colonial cities in Asia, Mumbai’s trade boomed in the second half of the 19th century. This was due to the opening of the Suez Canal and faster, larger and more reliable shipping. The rest of the story reads like most of the other colonial cities – increased commerce and industry brings an unstoppable population growth because of migration from surrounding rural areas. This growth is also reflected in the consolidation of land for factories, housing and infrastructure by reclamation or filling in of lowland (as in Manila, Singapore and Jakarta).
The city’s history in the first half of the 20th century is India’s modern history as a nation – a subject better covered elsewhere. But by the end of World War II and independence, Mumbai was a full-fledged metropolis. The basis for Mumbai’s initial commercial success was cotton. Mills formed the bulk of its periphery then. But this was just the start. Today Mumbai is India’s center for finance and banking. Manufacturing is also a major driver of growth with manufacturing complexes linking Mumbai with Pune in the south (much like Manila and the Batangas area – although India has a wider industrial base with heavy industry as well as more modern electronics). In fact, the region also possesses an elevated district like Tagaytay (roughly the same elevation) with breathtaking views of an inland lake (but without a volcano).
Of course, this all comes at a price. The metropolitan population of both Mumbai and Manila are about the same — 10 million, at least officially. The Mumbai Metropolitan Region (roughly similar in area to our National Capital Region) has five million more or thereabouts, again much like the NCR. But unlike Manila, Mumbai is making a headway in solving its urban problems. Mumbai of the 1960s had squatter settlements in water pipes and thousands of shacks overspilling from Mahim creek (Mumbai’s main estero). This is all gone with a housing program that at least takes the effort of addressing the problem.
Most industries have been moving south and the old cotton mills are to be redeveloped into housing and mixed use to accommodate the growing population. (Manila’s industries are also moving but many are still in the metropolis, not to mention complexes such as fuel depots and military camps.)
Mumbai’s current airport is located about the same distance as the NAIA is from the city center but plans are being made to move the facility further down the coast roughly a distance equivalent of Manila to Cavite. This new airport is planned to be near a new recreation and tourism zone that takes advantage of roughly ten kilometers of breathtaking Arabian Sea frontage. (We could do the same for Calabarzon if we relocated the NAIA – an issue I ha brought up in a recent series of articles on our airport.)
Back in the city proper one can sees that Mumbaikars cherish their architectural heritage. Heritage conservation is a big thing in Mumbai and this is driven a lot by civil society in cooperation with the government’s Archeological Survey of India and the Heritage Committee. On my last trip in the city, I stayed at an old Art Deco building that had been adaptively reused as a boutique hotel. My window view was of Marine Drive, Mumbai’s much longer version of Roxas Boulevard. The sunsets rival our own but the promenade is much cleaner — and no squatters live along the breakwater.
I also took a tour of the city’s many maidans (parks), civic plazas and waterfronts. The advantage of Mumbai is that the working port is separated from the seaside boulevard. This eliminates the current conflict and traffic we have in our own ports and that of container vans clogging up our central Manila streets. Besides, the Indians have a good freight-train capability. In fact, they are beefing this up with plans to integrate air, train and trucking into an intermodal system that will rival Hong Kong’s.
Munjee continues, "Simulating economic growth through economic reforms linked to liberalization without sufficient attention being devoted to city planning and urban development is likely to prove a short-run phenomenon, infrastructure constraints (will obviate) the entire process. Urban governance is perhaps the single most important factor that can transform cities into vibrant economic, social and cultural centers without marginalizing vast segments of the population."
The other factor is civil society. Mumbai has both the warm body count of citizens with high awareness of issues (not just the latest entertainment gossip) and the NGOs to catalyze this awareness into action. Among the most influential of these is the Mumbai First Society, an NGO focused on urban issues. The society draws its members from key citizens (who actually live in the city) who form five main action groups — Land Use and Housing, Transport, Telecommunications, Mumbai as a Financial Center, and Mumbai as an Education and Training Center. (We could use a Manila First Society …to replace the Me First (ako muna) Society we now have!)
Mumbai is a fascinating city. The food is fantastic. It is as modern as any world city with skyscrapers and high-class facilities. It is made more distinctive and vibrant because it has kept both its older monuments and conserved its more contemporary building fabric. Sidewalks are generally kept clean and free of debris at least in the major streets. There are beggars but they seemed far fewer than what we in Manila encounter on almost every street corner now. There are street vendors but amazingly they sell books (by Indian Nobel prize winners) and magazines instead of idiotic tabloids or cell phone re-chargers. (Mumbaikars are highly literate. It’s a pleasure to be able to strike up an intellectual conversation with a stranger instead of having to resort to the latest jologs banter!)
We should study what Mumbai and other similar Asian cities are doing to cope with their problems. We should, like the citizens of Mumbai, look seriously at urban planning, regional governance, and foster active and meaningful participation by civil society.
The quality of our urban lives is disappearing fast. We now fail to compare our beloved Manila favorably with any city in Asia. If we act now, we still do have a chance at redeeming ourselves and this metropolis of ours.
And please do not tell me that it all hinges on 2004!