·PIB·15 marks·250–350 wordsPolityEnvironment

Examine how competitive and cooperative federalism work together in India's urban sanitation governance. Are city rankings enough to sustain 'Garbage-Free' outcomes?

New · District CollectorCan you hold the district for 72 hours?Floods, a heatwave, an outbreak, a grievance queue. Take the decisions, see the consequences.Play →
In this answer
  1. Competitive federalism: ranking cities
  2. Cooperative federalism: sharing resources and capacity
  3. How the two interlock
  4. Are rankings enough? Largely no
  5. Way forward

The 74th Amendment (12th Schedule) makes solid waste management a municipal function. Swachh Bharat Mission-Urban 2.0 (SBM-U 2.0) aims to make cities 'Garbage-Free' by 2026 through a Centre–State–ULB partnership [2]. Swachh Survekshan (SS) combines competition with cooperation, but rankings alone cannot guarantee lasting outcomes.

Competitive federalism: ranking cities

  • Annual league table: SS 2025-26, the 10th edition, ranked 4,751 ULBs on 176 sub-indicators across 10 sections [1].
  • Fair comparison: separate population, River Front, Coastal and Clean Himalayan categories; a State/UT First Swachh City award gives every State a winner [1].
  • Credibility: GPS-enabled checks by over 3,000 field assessors and digitally verified evidence make it harder to game scores [1].

Cooperative federalism: sharing resources and capacity

  • Shared financing: of SBM-U 2.0's ₹1,41,600 crore cost, the Centre bears ₹36,465 crore; States and ULBs fund the rest [2].
  • Peer learning between cities: Swachh Shehar Jodi pairs 70 mentor with about 191 mentee cities across 33 States/UTs through MoUs, under the principle "Each One – Teach One" [1].

How the two interlock

SS 2024-25 ranks → toppers become mentors → Jodi scored on
combined mentor + mentee score in SS 2025-26 → new competition

Fig.: Competition picks the mentors; cooperation is then rewarded through competition.

Are rankings enough? Largely no

  • Relative, not absolute: a city can top the table while the national target is missed. Only about 61% of legacy dumpsite waste has been remediated [2].
  • Capacity deficit: a CAG audit of Uttar Pradesh found only 3 of 45 test-checked ULBs had SWM plans, and 19 SBM-U plants were built but not working [3].
  • Funds not absorbed: Rajasthan ULBs used only 20.69% of the SBM waste-management funds released to them in 2015-17 [4].
  • Gap in Jodi incentives: only each mentor's best Jodi counts, so its weakest mentees may be neglected [1].

Way forward

  • Give marks for working plants and city-wise dumpsite clearance.
  • Make SWM plans and bye-laws (required under the SWM Rules, 2016) a condition for entering the survey.
  • Link central instalments to verified outcomes, and score the average of all of a mentor's Jodis.

Competition sets the benchmark, and cooperation spreads the capacity to meet it. To keep cities Garbage-Free beyond SBM-U 2.0's 2026 horizon, rankings must be backed by empowered, well-staffed ULBs. That would fulfil the 74th Amendment's vision and advance SDG 11.6 on urban waste.

Sources

  1. 1PIB – President of India to Confer 10th Edition Swachh Survekshan 2025-26 Awards (MoHUA)10th edition, 4,751 ULBs, 176 sub-indicators, award categories, GPS-based assessment, Swachh Shehar Jodi design and scoring
  2. 2Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, Annual Report 2025-26Garbage-Free Cities by 2026 goal, SBM-U 2.0 outlay and Central share, about 61% of legacy waste remediated
  3. 3CAG Report No. 1 of 2025 – Performance Audit of Solid Waste Management in Urban Areas, Government of Uttar Pradeshmissing SWM plans, built but non-working SBM-U plants
  4. 4CAG Report No. 2 of 2018 – Local Bodies, Government of Rajasthan (Overview)only 20.69% of SBM waste-management funds used by ULBs, 2015-17
Practice
5 questions on this item
Check the answer for each question, or reveal all at once.
Practice MCQs →

More from this note

More on Polity