MUMBAI SPEAKS SURVEY brief note by Dr Manjula Bharathy (TISS)

Executive Summary of Mumbai Speaks: Mapping Citizen Engagement through 5,400

Stories across 227 Wards

Introduction

Mumbai Speaksis a landmark study conducted by the Mumbai Citizens’ Forum and the School of Habitat Studies, TISS, capturing the voices of 5,400 citizens across all 227 electoral wards. It is one of India’s most comprehensive urban engagement assessments, situating citizens atthe centre of governance. At a time when urban administration is shifting from state-centric models to participatory governance, the report underscores the citizen as a primary stakeholder in policymaking, service delivery, and accountability.

As Mumbai prepares for upcoming civic elections and urban reforms, this study offers

policymakers, planners, and civil society a data-backed foundation to design a more

participatory, accountable, and responsive city — one where every citizen’s voice truly

matters.

Through a mixed-methods approach—quantitative surveys and qualitative narratives—the

study redefines civic participation as a dynamic, socially contoured process reflecting the

everyday realities of Mumbai’s residents.

Key Insights

1. Participation is Uneven but Pervasive

• Voting rates remain robust, especially in slum settlements and among older citizens.

• Institutional participation (ward committees, fund tracking, corporator reviews) is

sporadic and uneven across gender, age, income, and housing types.

2. Demographics Matter

• Women (non-slum areas): High electoral participation but low institutional

engagement.

• Youth: Digitally active yet least engaged in formal civic processes, highlighting the

need to bridge online activism with institutional mechanisms.

3. Slum vs. Non-Slum Divide

• Slum residents: More likely to contact corporators, attend forums, and mobilize

collective problem-solving.

• Non-slum residents: Often passive, engaging only when directly affected by service

failures.

4. Institutional Gaps and Information Deficits

• Awareness of ward committees, corporators’ roles, and budget allocations is strikingly

low citywide.

• Even educated groups show mistrust, time constraints, and information asymmetry,

leading to selective institutional listening.

5. Rise of the Digital Civic Space

• Digital platforms are emerging as new arenas of participation, especially for the

educated middle class.

• However, digital inequities persist: low-income and elderly groups face barriers,

limiting inclusivity.

Methodology

• Quantitative analyses: Frequency tables, cross-tabulations, chi-square tests across

gender, income, housing, and engagement parameters.

• Qualitative analyses: Cluster-level thematic studies of 24 socio-spatially diverse

clusters.

• Global indices adapted locally: HDI, GDI, and ULI contextualized for civic patterns.

Clusters studied include Bandra, Dharavi, Colaba, Kandivali East, among others, revealing how

spatial inequalities and civic cultures shape participation. These serve as pilot-ready

microcosms for ward-specific interventions.

Theoretical Framing

• Elinor Ostrom’s co-production theory: Citizens as co-creators of governance.

• Tilly & Tarrow’s political opportunity structure: Participation shaped by institutional

openings.

• Bourdieu’s social capital framework: Access and agency as determinants of civic

action.

• Arnstein’s Ladder of Participation (reinterpreted): Exposes barriers preventing citizens

from moving beyond tokenistic consultation to empowered governance.

Policy Recommendations

1. Institutional Activation

o Mandate and monitor Ward Committees and Area Sabhas.

o Ensure transparent fund utilization and citizen representation.

2. Civic Education

o Introduce civic literacy modules in schools, colleges, and community centres.

o Build long-term civic consciousness.

3. Digital Inclusion

o Develop multilingual, mobile-friendly civic platforms.

o Enable participatory budgeting, grievance redressal, and policy feedback.

4. Monitoring Frameworks

• Establish a Ward-Level Civic Participation Index (CPI).

• Measure, compare, and incentivize active citizen engagement.

Conclusion

Mumbai Speaks transcends numbers to become a citizen-centric blueprint for inclusive urban

governance. By mapping awareness, participation, and exclusion across 227 wards, it reveals

the latent civic potential that can transform governance from being for the people to with the people.