Nobody will mind information or views about a country or its important institutions derived objectively from really careful and unbiased examination. But misleading information can undeservedly hurt the investment and other interests of a country when conclusions are reached, seemingly authoritatively, but on the basis of half-baked, prejudicial or unreliable research

The lie that Dhaka is the second most unlivable city

Dhaka was ranked  last August as the second least livable city in the world, an improvement from last year’s title of ‘The most unlivable city in the world’. Dhaka  was  put in the lowest position of the ranking for the past five years, with little to no signs of improvement.
    In the annual livability ranking  by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), Dhaka scored 38.7 out of 100. The report listed 140 cities worldwide based on a variety of lifestyle issues such as stability, health care, education, culture, environment and infrastructure.
It is a great puzzle why an otherwise well reputed publication like the Economist is indulging in what transparently is a grossly unfair and fictitious campaign  against our capital city. But it’s a even bigger puzzle why our government is silently allowing such a campaign to pass  without doing anything of substance to expose its utter sham or hollowness.
Nobody will mind information  or views about a country or its important institutions derived objectively from really careful and unbiased examination. But misleading information  can  undeservedly  hurt the investment and other interests of a country when conclusions are  reached, seemingly authoritatively,  on the basis of   half-baked, prejudicial  or unreliable research.
The Economist’s survey is conducted in  six major areas namely stability, health services, education, infrastructures, culture and  environment . Under the first head, stability, that vitally includes law and order, political tumults, terrorist activities and related factors, Dhaka can be described as almost a serene city at least by regional comparisons.
Bangladesh has its share of political troubles but the same are like dwarfs compared to the frequent political and terrorism related  violence we note in Pakistani and Indian cities. One may say that continuous hartals, blockades  and violence that we experienced in Dhaka in 2014 and 2015 could have had a relationship in downgrading Dhaka by the Economist from the perspective of political stability. But it is important to note that branding of Dhaka as the most unlivable city started from way back in 2009 when it hardly faced any serious politically induced  instability.
The sort of   high insecurity that hangs perennially over Pakistani cities such as Karachi, Islamabad, etc., from suicide bombers and terrorist attacks, the likes of them  are  not seen  in Dhaka. The same kind of  apprehension  about their security  almost always appear to be in the minds of citizens of  the  major Indian cities -- Delhi and Mumbai. Running gun battles between law enforcers and terrorists are common sights in these Indian metropolises.
For citizens, law and order and concern for their physical security and safety of their  properties are very important indicators to determine  a city’s livability or otherwise. In this extremely important area, the Economist  surveyors seemed to be blind to the remarkably better position of Bangladesh’s capital city compared to major regional cities.  The position of Bangladesh in this area can be considered better than even some  big cities of developed countries. For example, the number of  serious crimes such as murders, rape and robberies committed on average  in New York City in a day would be many times more than the average for the same in Dhaka notwithstanding that Dhaka is home to  over 15 million people and  a bulk of them have an existence below or close to the poverty line who should have every incentive to engage in crimes.  Thus, the law and order situation in Dhaka  merits to be considered as mild compared to many  other cities in the world which got higher ranking in the survey.
As for the environment, Dhaka continues to be far more livable than many other cities. For example, well below minus degrees in many places in the northern hemisphere-- including its cities-- turn life very miserable for people there. How many times we read reports about, say, life coming to a  standstill at Washington, Toranto, Moscow and other cities in the northern hemisphere ? Many times of course  when even schools and offices in these cities are closed down for weeks as a consequence of  too severe weather. Even roads become impassable from heavy snowfall and planes cannot land and take-off from airports.    
Nobody in living memory can probably recall  any such paralytic condition descending on our capital city or it becoming so adversely affected by weather conditions. Even during the rather unique flooding that Dhaka suffered during the great flood of 1988, it could nonetheless maintain at that time  a semblance of normalcy and mobility unlike the cities of the northern hemisphere that are often naturally too distressed by very  bad weather or physical environment.
In our own region, South Asia, summer temperature rises well over 40 degrees Celsius in places like Delhi and Karachi. In the present year many heat related deaths were noted in India and Pakistan. But Bangladesh’s capital hardly ever suffer from such rising summer time temperatures. Our summer temperatures are ‘mild’ by comparison and the same can be said about our winter temperatures too.  If  pleasant weather the year round is an indicator of how livable a place is, Bangladesh’s  capital city should score quite high in this area.  Dhaka  faces no  great climatic or  environmental hazards .
It is also questionable how far the Economist’s assessments of Dhaka city in terms of culture and even education  reflect accuracy. Dhaka may not be culturally at the top of the world’s cities. But it is still distinguished for its cultural vibrancy compared to many other cities of  the world. Its educational base is low compared to cities of developed countries but should not fare so badly in contrast to many other developing countries. For example, it should be an utter travesty of truth to say that in the realm of education and culture Dhaka trails behind even Yangoon, Thimpu,Kathmandu,etc.
Therefore, it appears that there are many reasons to feel awfully disheartened and outraged  by the Economist’s report on Dhaka city. It should have rather praised Dhaka for  tackling so much when it its population density is the highest among the world’s cities.
However, the above is not to say that the ones in charge of governance in Bangladesh can afford to be casual in treating Dhaka’s problems. This city is already home to over 15 million people when it was planned for living by, say, not more than two to four million people. Dhaka’s population is expected to soar to 25 million  by 2020 and to 35 million by 2030.  Dhaka could indeed be overwhelmed by its population pressure and inadequate utilities and services if the present lackadaisical approach to  responding to its problems continues in the much the same manner like now.
But that is another story. For now it needs recognition that Dhaka’s conditions  are certainly not so unlivable and that with greater stress put on proper plans and their  full  and timely implementation, a  positive turnaround  of the city is quite possible.  At any rate,  the present conditions of Dhaka—assessed objectively—would not show it to be so unlivable as the Economist survey showed it.  
Even in its degraded conditions , Dhaka, realistically ranked,  should be seen as better endowed than many other cities of the world. One only has to  grasp the point that a city which has become so unlivable does not draw people to it  at such a brisk rate as Dhaka.  People rather tend to flee away from such a city. That  the rush to Dhaka city from the countryside is turning only stronger by the day is proof of the fact that its attraction for people remains unchanged or  its pull factors remain undiminished.
Dhaka’s problems stem mainly from utter lack of planning or enforcing strictly whatever plans are there on the  boards.  The Detailed Area Plan (DAP) for Dhaka  that has been prepared must be fully and very well implement at the fastest. Every effort should be made to make the plan inclusive of the requirements of the vast number of the poor and underprivileged  people living in Dhaka. But the growing formidable problems of Dhaka and the urgent need to attend to them, can have nothing to do with describing the city as if  it  has been already pushed into the abyss.
The Economist magazine published from UK  has been well known over the years for competence and dependability.
It also runs a parallel service, called the Economist Intelligence Unit, that publishes rating of countries and institutions from the economic and business perspectives. But it is increasingly posing as  a question  how far this famous publication will continue to retain its expected character or  dependability if it keeps on indulging in such careless reporting such as the one on the unlivability of  Dhaka . Our government  must  effectively protest such misinformation and seek to wipe out the same  from the international conception  in the very vital interests of protecting the image of the country.

The writer is Associate Editor of theindependent. E-mail : [email protected]/[email protected]

 

Nobody will mind information or views about a country or its important institutions derived objectively from really careful and unbiased examination. But misleading information can undeservedly hurt the investment and other interests of a country when conclusions are reached, seemingly authoritatively, but on the basis of half-baked, prejudicial or unreliable research

The lie that Dhaka is the second most unlivable city

Dhaka was ranked last August as the second least livable city in the world, an improvement from last years title of The most unlivable city in the world. Dhaka was put in the lowest position of the ranking for the past five years, with little to no signs of improvement. In the annual livability ranking by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), Dhaka scored 38.7 out of 100. The report listed 140 cities worldwide based on a variety of lifestyle issues such as stability, health care, education, culture, environment and infrastructure. It is a great puzzle why an otherwise well reputed publication like the Economist is indulging in what transparently is a grossly unfair and fictitious campaign against our capital city. But its a even bigger puzzle why our government is silently allowing such a campaign to pass without doing anything of substance to expose its utter sham or hollowness. Nobody will mind information or views about a country or its important institutions derived objectively from really careful and unbiased examination. But misleading information can undeservedly hurt the investment and other interests of a country when conclusions are reached, seemingly authoritatively, on the basis of half-baked, prejudicial or unreliable research. The Economists survey is conducted in six major areas namely stability, health services, education, infrastructures, culture and environment . Under the first head, stability, that vitally includes law and order, political tumults, terrorist activities and related factors, Dhaka can be described as almost a serene city at least by regional comparisons. Bangladesh has its share of political troubles but the same are like dwarfs compared to the frequent political and terrorism related violence we note in Pakistani and Indian cities. One may say that continuous hartals, blockades and violence that we experienced in Dhaka in 2014 and 2015 could have had a relationship in downgrading Dhaka by the Economist from the perspective of political stability. But it is important to note that branding of Dhaka as the most unlivable city started from way back in 2009 when it hardly faced any serious politically induced instability. The sort of high insecurity that hangs perennially over Pakistani cities such as Karachi, Islamabad, etc., from suicide bombers and terrorist attacks, the likes of them are not seen in Dhaka. The same kind of apprehension about their security almost always appear to be in the minds of citizens of the major Indian cities -- Delhi and Mumbai. Running gun battles between law enforcers and terrorists are common sights in these Indian metropolises. For citizens, law and order and concern for their physical security and safety of their properties are very important indicators to determine a citys livability or otherwise. In this extremely important area, the Economist surveyors seemed to be blind to the remarkably better position of Bangladeshs capital city compared to major regional cities. The position of Bangladesh in this area can be considered better than even some big cities of developed countries. For example, the number of serious crimes such as murders, rape and robberies committed on average in New York City in a day would be many times more than the average for the same in Dhaka notwithstanding that Dhaka is home to over 15 million people and a bulk of them have an existence below or close to the poverty line who should have every incentive to engage in crimes. Thus, the law and order situation in Dhaka merits to be considered as mild compared to many other cities in the world which got higher ranking in the survey. As for the environment, Dhaka continues to be far more livable than many other cities. For example, well below minus degrees in many places in the northern hemisphere-- including its cities-- turn life very miserable for people there. How many times we read reports about, say, life coming to a standstill at Washington, Toranto, Moscow and other cities in the northern hemisphere ? Many times of course when even schools and offices in these cities are closed down for weeks as a consequence of too severe weather. Even roads become impassable from heavy snowfall and planes cannot land and take-off from airports. Nobody in living memory can probably recall any such paralytic condition descending on our capital city or it becoming so adversely affected by weather conditions. Even during the rather unique flooding that Dhaka suffered during the great flood of 1988, it could nonetheless maintain at that time a semblance of normalcy and mobility unlike the cities of the northern hemisphere that are often naturally too distressed by very bad weather or physical environment. In our own region, South Asia, summer temperature rises well over 40 degrees Celsius in places like Delhi and Karachi. In the present year many heat related deaths were noted in India and Pakistan. But Bangladeshs capital hardly ever suffer from such rising summer time temperatures. Our summer temperatures are mild by comparison and the same can be said about our winter temperatures too. If pleasant weather the year round is an indicator of how livable a place is, Bangladeshs capital city should score quite high in this area. Dhaka faces no great climatic or environmental hazards . It is also questionable how far the Economists assessments of Dhaka city in terms of culture and even education reflect accuracy. Dhaka may not be culturally at the top of the worlds cities. But it is still distinguished for its cultural vibrancy compared to many other cities of the world. Its educational base is low compared to cities of developed countries but should not fare so badly in contrast to many other developing countries. For example, it should be an utter travesty of truth to say that in the realm of education and culture Dhaka trails behind even Yangoon, Thimpu,Kathmandu,etc. Therefore, it appears that there are many reasons to feel awfully disheartened and outraged by the Economists report on Dhaka city. It should have rather praised Dhaka for tackling so much when it its population density is the highest among the worlds cities. However, the above is not to say that the ones in charge of governance in Bangladesh can afford to be casual in treating Dhakas problems. This city is already home to over 15 million people when it was planned for living by, say, not more than two to four million people. Dhakas population is expected to soar to 25 million by 2020 and to 35 million by 2030. Dhaka could indeed be overwhelmed by its population pressure and inadequate utilities and services if the present lackadaisical approach to responding to its problems continues in the much the same manner like now. But that is another story. For now it needs recognition that Dhakas conditions are certainly not so unlivable and that with greater stress put on proper plans and their full and timely implementation, a positive turnaround of the city is quite possible. At any rate, the present conditions of Dhakaassessed objectivelywould not show it to be so unlivable as the Economist survey showed it. Even in its degraded conditions , Dhaka, realistically ranked, should be seen as better endowed than many other cities of the world. One only has to grasp the point that a city which has become so unlivable does not draw people to it at such a brisk rate as Dhaka. People rather tend to flee away from such a city. That the rush to Dhaka city from the countryside is turning only stronger by the day is proof of the fact that its attraction for people remains unchanged or its pull factors remain undiminished. Dhakas problems stem mainly from utter lack of planning or enforcing strictly whatever plans are there on the boards. The Detailed Area Plan (DAP) for Dhaka that has been prepared must be fully and very well implement at the fastest. Every effort should be made to make the plan inclusive of the requirements of the vast number of the poor and underprivileged people living in Dhaka. But the growing formidable problems of Dhaka and the urgent need to attend to them, can have nothing to do with describing the city as if it has been already pushed into the abyss. The Economist magazine published from UK has been well known over the years for competence and dependability. It also runs a parallel service, called the Economist Intelligence Unit, that publishes rating of countries and institutions from the economic and business perspectives. But it is increasingly posing as a question how far this famous publication will continue to retain its expected character or dependability if it keeps on indulging in such careless reporting such as the one on the unlivability of Dhaka . Our government must effectively protest such misinformation and seek to wipe out the same from the international conception in the very vital interests of protecting the image of the country. The writer is Associate Editor of theindependent. E-mail : [email protected]/[email protected]