The Unique Challenges Of Planning A New Town: The .
URBAN DESIGN 099-1ORIGINAL ARTICLEThe unique challenges of planning a New Town: the GandhinagarexperienceSweta Byahut1 Springer Nature Limited 2019AbstractThe New Town of Gandhinagar was built in the 1960s as the capital of Gujarat state in western India with a spacious, moderncharacter. Over the next four decades, it developed as an administrative center, but due to development restrictions and rigidperiphery control, it was not able to effectively respond to regional growth pressures. The objective of Gandhinagar’s Development Plan for 2011 was to transform it from an administrative center into a thriving and economically vibrant communityable to accommodate the demands of a rapidly urbanizing economy. This plan marked a departure from the state-led masterplanning and development based on eminent domain, and adopted a land readjustment mechanism for urban expansion.It applied a place-based approach to preserve the formal character of the capital city, while at the same time transform thequality of its built environment. This paper provides insights into the unique challenges of re-planning a planned New Town,and particularly highlights the opportunities that urban design scenarios provide to planners to meet a variety of planningobjectives. A decade later, implementation success has been limited to urban expansion areas with the realization that thelegacy of state-led development is not easily overcome without accompanying institutional changes.Keywords Gandhinagar · New Towns · Neighborhood unit · Place-based building regulations · Urban design scenariosIntroductionGandhinagar was one of the three capital cities built in postindependent India. Its growth has been slow, and four decades since it started building in the 1960s, it emerged asan administrative center and not a multi-dimensional city.However, the surrounding region experienced intense pressures due to its proximity to Ahmedabad, Gujarat’s largestand India’s seventh-largest city, having a population of over6 million in 2011 (Census of India 2011). The GandhinagarDevelopment Plan for the target year 2011 addressed a set ofunique challenges in re-planning a New Town, and markeda departure from the traditional Master Plan.This article presents a historical narrative of developmentof Gandhinagar, and broad critiques of the form-based andurban studies approach of a mid-twentieth century new townin India and subsequent attempts at its re-invigoration. Itbriefly outlines the growth constraints of Gandhinagar,* Sweta Byahutsweta.byahut@auburn.edu1Department of Political Science, Auburn University, 8052Haley Center, Auburn, AL 36849, USAand describes the plan to transform its character from anadministrative center to an economically and culturallyvibrant city. It provides critical insights on the challengesand opportunities associated with planning a planned newtown, dismantling rigid state controls, formulating placebased regulations, adopting land readjustment mechanismto introduce private sector land development and for regulating growth in urban villages. It offers insights into the challenges of moving away from a state-led land developmentregime to a market economy within a planning framework,and highlights the opportunities that urban design scenariosoffer for formulating place-based building regulations. Thearticle explores the following research questions: what arethe challenges facing the future of post-colonial new townsthat were designed as stand-alone entities, without muchconsideration for future growth? What are some of the landdevelopment strategies for overcoming the lack of a marketbased mechanism in planning, symptomatic of the twentiethcentury new town movement in the developing world? Whatare some of the planning challenges in dealing with existing villages on the urban periphery when engulfed by urbansprawl? This article also examines the on-ground reality ofthe top-down planning in India that is dominated by multipleVol.:(0123456789)
S. Byahutagencies and jurisdictions, yet lack the mechanisms necessary to effectively plan for the region and peri-urban growth.Further, it argues that a place-based urban design approachincorporating improved density and land use mix in the planning process can help introduce some of the missing “urbanism” to new towns such as Gandhinagar.The methodology includes an extensive review of relevant literature on the planning and building of new townsand the application of the neighborhood unit in Indian cities.A critical review of several planning documents for Gandhinagar was undertaken, including several reports of the 2011Gandhinagar Development Plan and Implementation Strategy: Part 1: Studies and Analysis, Part 2: Proposals and Policies, and Part 3: General Development Control Regulations.Supporting documents were reviewed, including various surveys, studies, analyses, drawings, and urban design studiesproduced, as well as notes of over 100 stakeholder and planpreparation meetings. Gandhinagar’s original 1966 MasterPlan and the recent Draft Development Plan for 2024 werealso examined. Expert meetings were held with governmentplanners, and field visits were undertaken within Gandhinagar and its peripheral region to observe plan implementationand recent developments. This article also draws extensivelyfrom the author’s insights obtained from professional association with the 2011 Gandhinagar Development plan.New Towns in IndiaAbout 70 countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin Americagained independence from European colonial powers afterWW-II. These newly independent countries built severalnew towns such as Brazilia, Chandigarh, and Islamabad inan effort to create a new post-colonial national identity. Aftergaining independence in 1947, over the next two decades,led by national policy, India built 118 new towns, includingthree state capitals (Chandigarh, Gandhinagar, and Bhubaneshwar), numerous industrial townships/company towns(e.g., Tatanagar, Durgapur, Rourkela, Bhillai, and Bokaro),and satellite towns on the periphery of large congested cities (e.g., Salt Lake City in Kolkata) (Sinha and Singh 2011;Sood 2015; Glover 2012). The most recent example is thatof Amaravati, the new capital for Andhra Pradesh state,announced in 2014, currently under construction.Designed by the renowned French Architect Le Corbusier in the architectural modernism ideology, Chandigarhis widely considered a model of modern town planning(Haynes and Rao 2013; Glover 2012; Kalia 1997; Perera2004). Nehru, the first prime minister of India, wanted Chandigarh to be built in a modernist, secular, utopian vision“unfettered by the traditions of the past” (Prakash 2016;Shaw 2009; Kalia 2004, 2006a; Perera 2004). The threestate capitals were built on greenfield sites using the highestspace standards and planning norms, avoided urban regeneration, and bypassed the squalor and infrastructure deficitof Indian cities (Bhattacharya and Sanyal 2011). However,they struggled with the dichotomy between the traditionaland the modern, and sought to construct an ideal city staticin time but lacking in street life (Fitting 2002). Kalia (2004)characterizes Corbusier’s Chandigarh as safe and boring, yetinspiring to Indian architects and planners. It also served asa model for building new towns for other developing countries, such as the Nigerian capital Abuja built in the 1980s(Prakash 2016).Planning of Gandhinagar was also inspired by Chandigarh. It was similarly laid out on a strong, symmetrical grid,characterized by broad Town Roads, vast open spaces, anddivided into rectangular “sectors” or self-sufficient residential neighborhoods. The sector was the outcome of combining the neighborhood unit and the hierarchical classification of urban streets concepts that gained popularity in themid-twentieth century (Mehaffy et al. 2010). The neighborhood unit was introduced by Perry and Stein in the 1920sin America as a basic city building block and a physicaltool for neighborhood design (Vidyarthi 2010a, b). It aimedto increase convenience and opportunities for communityinteraction by placing schools, parks, and community facilities within walking distance, and convenience shopping incentral areas. It emphasized separation of pedestrian andvehicular traffic by placing major thoroughfares on theperimeter, internal curvilinear streets to reduce traffic, andan inward looking core connected with a separate pedestrian circulation system (Banerjee and Baer 1984). In India,the neighborhood unit was assimilated and indigenized byplanners in New Town Master Plans and expansion plans ofolder cities as a secular alternative to traditional caste-basedneighborhoods and a society based on the collective (Vidyarthi 2010a, b, 2015). They recreated the village framework by incorporating a central space for social interactionin each sector with a school, community center, or temple,but looked completely different (Glover 2012). While theneighborhood unit influenced planning across the world, ithas been criticized for physical determinism and trying toachieve social homogeneity through design (Lawhon 2009,Banerjee and Baer 1984). New Town influences can alsobe traced to the Garden City concept from early twentiethcentury England, and the Radburn model in the US, withparallel visions for a decentralized, self-contained, sociallyintegrated, low-density, modern town (Banerjee 2009; Perera2004; Kalia 2004). A major critique of the British new townlegacy is their complete absence of urbanism. As many as 32new towns were established in UK during 1946–1970 afterthe WW-II, enabled by the New Towns Acts of 1946 and1965. A House of Commons (2002) report concluded thatthese new towns are plagued with aging infrastructure andsocial and economic problems, exacerbated by low-density
The unique challenges of planning a New Town: the Gandhinagar experience development, vast open spaces, and segregation of housing from jobs and businesses. Gandhinagar’s early growthis also reminiscent of the earlier British “new town blues,”as experienced by residents of these new towns, includingmental health issues due to a sense of isolation, loneliness,relocation and displacement from their communities, anda lack of social ties in a new environment (Clapson 1998).New towns were planned to accommodate a targetpopulation, and unlike comprehensive plans, there was nomechanism for periodic updating. Their Master Plans wereoften architect-centric and revered, and therefore difficult toupdate, making them static and inflexible in rapidly urbanizing and fast-growing economies (Prakash 2016; Chalana 2015; TCPO 2009; Perera 2004). Rigid state control,restriction on land development in peripheral areas, and anon-existent private property market created developmentpressures that they are not equipped to handle. For instance,Chandigarh was planned for half a million residents, butexperienced explosive growth and exceeded 1 million by2011, leading to large-scale unplanned developments andsatellite towns (Chalana 2015; Fitting 2002). There is little understanding of what planning measures—if any—newtowns such as Chandigarh, Gandhinagar, Bhubaneshwar andJamshedpur have adopted to cope with growth.Building of GandhinagarThe Gujarat state came into existence in 1960 after the bifurcation of the erstwhile Bombay State. Ahmedabad functioned as a temporary capital, but because it was old andcongested, the new and modern capital of Gandhinagar wasbuilt just 22 km north on the west bank of the River Sabarmati. While Chandigarh and Bhubaneshwar were designedby the renowned foreign architects Le Corbusier and OttoKönigsberger, respectively, Gandhinagar’s planning wasindigenous, keeping with the swadeshi1 ideals of MahatmaGandhi, after whom the city was named (Kalia 1997, 2004).The team was led by Mr. Mewada, the state planner whohad earlier worked with Corbusier in Chandigarh. Gandhinagar was built by the Gandhinagar Capital Projects Division (GCPD) of the state’s Public Works Department. Construction started in 1964, and in 1971, the first phase wascompleted with eight residential sectors, and administrativefunctions moved to the Capitol Complex. GCPD’s role wasto develop public buildings, commercial areas, and housingas well as manage the water supply, sewage, and drainagefacilities. The non-municipal Gandhinagar Notified Area1Swadeshi movement was part of the Indian independence movement that called for a boycott of British and foreign products to support Indian nationalism and locally made products.Committee (GNAC) was constituted in 19962 for civic functions including solid waste management, public health, andfire services. Planning fell under the purview of the ChiefArchitect and Town Planning office.Gandhinagar is quite different from Indian cities withits wide Town Roads and formal avenues laid out on adominant grid, a uniform architectural form, and vast greenspaces. The GNA spans 57.38 km2 and has a planned area of42.88 km2. Town Roads divide Gandhinagar into 30 sectors,most of which are 1000 m 750 m in size and 75 ha in area.Each residential sector was planned for approximately 7000people, containing schools, shopping, health clinic, library,playgrounds, parks, and other facilities. Internal streets arelooped and curvilinear, and residential streets are dead ends.Gandhinagar’s Master Plan included separate work areasincluding the Capitol Complex, government offices, lightindustries, civic center, institutions, and commerce. A CityCenter and a Zonal District Center for every 4–5 residentialsectors were planned to accommodate large civic and cultural amenities and businesses. The Capitol Complex, theCity Center, and larger office and commercial areas havetaller buildings (up to 9 stories), but residential areas weregenerally limited to 2 or 3 stories. In general, a mediumgross density of 100 persons per hectare (pph) was plannedin keeping with the spacious character of the city. With thegovernment as the largest employer, relatively higher densities (between 100 and 150 pph) were planned near government offices and industries. Much higher densities (upto 250 pph) were planned in government housing clusters.Densities are generally lower (50–100 pph) in peripheralsectors, and very low in elite residential areas.Initially, Gandhinagar was planned to accommodate150,000 residents, but in 1974, the target population for 2015was increased to 350,000. However, given slow city growth,the revised target population is unlikely to be achieved evenby 2031 (Census of India 2011). In 1991, the GandhinagarNotified Area (GNA, or Gandhinagar city) had a populationof 123,359, which increased in 2001 to 195,985, and in 2011to 206,167 (Census of India 2011; GOI 2001). Gandhinagaris one of the greenest capitals in the world, with vast areasearmarked for central vista, ornamental gardens, regionalgreens, and a new urban forest created by planting 4 million trees (Chaudhry et al. 2011). It is well connected withAhmedabad and its international airport by three excellenthighways, and is quite dependent on Ahmedabad to servetheir higher-order industrial, commercial, and educationalneeds. A significant number of people live in Ahmedabadbut work in Gandhinagar. Due to their strong connectedness and a short commute, a strong functional relationshipdeveloped between them.2Under the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963.
S. ByahutFig. 1 Barren and dilapidated residential areas, vacant lands, and undeveloped open spaces in GNA. Source GUDA (2001a)Fig. 2 Informal shops, street hawkers, and unauthorized retail in residential buildings. Source GUDA (2001a)Lack of vibrant city lifeWhile meticulously planned, with its concentrated focus ondelivering governmental administrative functions and housing for government employees, many residents and visitorsperceive Gandhinagar to be dull and uninteresting. With limited opportunities for retail, commercial, economic, cultural,or entertainment development, the economy did not diversify to attract businesses or people (Dikshit 1993; GUDA2001a). Retail growth was particularly sluggish as only 20%of planned commercial areas developed after nearly fourdecades, and most of it away from populated areas (GUDA2001a). The sectors were inward looking with the backsof small homes facing main Town Roads, and many largeroad-facing and corner lots remaining vacant. Located inthe center of sectors, shopping areas were not in areas withhigh retail potential or footfalls, and had low visibility andaccessibility. With retail activity not permitted along TownRoads, they were devoid of people, civic life, and activities.This created an atmosphere of sterile dullness and monotonyduring the day, and deserted and unsafe streets at nights.Town Roads carrying high-speed traffic became barriersto bike and pedestrian connectivity and isolated sectors/neighborhoods. While Gandhinagar’s original Master Planincluded a separate bicycle and pedestrian system for eachneighborhood, these were never built. Separation of movement and accessibility did not allow Town Roads to developas vibrant social spaces, nor as urban economic generators(Mehaffy et al. 2010). It also led to unauthorized retail inresidential buildings.Large areas marked for commercial, industrial, institution,public, and undefined uses remained undeveloped, and vastopen spaces also remained underdeveloped, ill maintained,and underused. In spite of massive tree plantation, residential areas within the sectors looked barren (Fig. 1). The District Center and the famous tourist destination Akshardhamattract many people, but lacked parking, sidewalks, or facilities. In 1991, there were over 700 informal shops near largeinstitutional and government areas, along Town Roads andintersections, and in residential areas, which created parking,street encroachments, and traffic problems (Fig. 2).In the 1990s, the state government began to promote Gandhinagar as an important cultural, educational, and corporate destination, focusing on the area between Gandhinagarand Ahmedabad west of the Sabarmati River. Recreationalfacilities such as amusement parks, regional greens, and
The unique challenges of planning a New Town: the Gandhinagar experience multiplexes became major attractions for the GandhinagarAhmedabad region. Efforts were made to diversify theeconomy by establishing an electronics industrial estate,the Info-City complex, and several colleges and corporateoffices. Since the original Master Plan had conceptualizedGandhinagar’s existence in isolation from Ahmedabad, thesenew developments were inconsistent with the periphery control imposed when the city was built.Land development and periphery controlGandhinagar was developed by the state government viabulk land acquisition from farmers at cheap prices usingeminent domain. All land development and disposal werethrough state allotments and auctions. Initially, the reserveprice was kept low to motivate people to move to the NewTown, so did not fully recover land and infrastructure costs.With controlled land disposal and lack of amenities, GNAexperienced slow growth and development. The housingstock consisted largely of government quarters, with thelimited amount of private housing also primarily owned bygovernment employees. Various categories of housing werebuilt carefully according to employee ranks, and residentiallots (ranging from 50 to 1650 m2) were also allotted to them.The Master Plan made strict lot-by-lot determination for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, or administrative uses. Residential, commercial, or industrial lots wereavailable only through government auctions, which had nottaken place in a decade. Restricted development, a tightlycontrolled land market, and regulated prices resulted in artificial land scarcity, unrealistically high property prices, andoverall stagnation. In 1997, over 7500 lots (about 930 ha)were vacant that had capacity to accommodate additional56,500 residents, and 15% land remained to be plotted, auctioned, or allotted (GUDA 2001a).Lack of private sector participation in Gandhinagar’sdevelopment did not allow a private land market to developwithin the city. At the same time, the periphery surrounding the GNA came under intense development pressure,which led to haphazard growth in villages nearby. Similarto legislation in Chandigarh, the Gandhinagar New CapitalPeriphery Control Act was enforced in 1960 to maintainpristine rural surroundings within a 5-mile radius (Shahand Bagchi 2016; Chalana 2015; Kalia 2004, 1985; GoG1960; GUDA 2001a). This prevented conversion of agricultural lands to urban use and froze land development fordecades. Village settlement or built-up areas (gamtals) hadnot increased, and non-agriculture (N.A.)3 permissions3In Gujarat, non-agriculture (N.A.) use permissions are granted bythe state’s land revenue department, which functions independentlyfrom the urban development department. By 1999, N.A. permissionsfor approximately 300 ha. land had been granted and another 125 ha.were sparingly given. This also contributed to artificial landscarcity, high prices, and resulted in considerable illegaldevelopment in villages and near highways. Between 2001and 2011, the GNA population increased by less than 7000people, but GUDA population outside the GNA increasedby over 46,000 (Census of India 2011). In spite of theperiphery control, or perhaps due to it, the highly desirablearea between Ahmedabad and Gandhinagar experienced anintense demand for land from the private sector leading tolarge-scale speculative investments in the 1990s.GUDA development plan for 2011Recognizing regional growth pressures and constraineddevelopment conditions under Gandhinagar’s originalMaster Plan, the state constituted the Gandhinagar UrbanDevelopment Area in 1996 having a jurisdiction of 387 km2including the GNA and surrounding 39 villages. The Gandhinagar Urban Development Authority (GUDA) was established to prepare a comprehensive, long-range, statutoryDevelopment Plan,4 under the Gujarat Town Planning andUrban Development Act (GTPUDA) of 1976 (GoG 1976).The objective of this plan was to transform Gandhinagarfrom an administrative capital to an economically and culturally vibrant city, and promote regional growth particularlyin areas outside the GNA.A Development Plan typically includes road network,land use zoning, development control regulations, and otherplanning elements. The planning process included studiesof existing land uses, economic activities, and demographicanalysis. Studies focused on vacant land redevelopment,street façades, urban design and built form, and detailed areastudies of various sectors and fast-growing villages (GUDA2001a). About 100 meetings were held with stakeholdersincluding various government agencies,5 39 village councils, and stakeholder groups. However, broader communityand citizen participation was lacking in Gandhinagar’s planning process. These focused on the needs and developmentFootnote 3 (continued)land was developed without permission. Altogether 550 ha. land wasdeveloped in rural areas, of which 375 ha. was residential.4Environmental Planning Collaborative (EPC) was appointed byGUDA to prepare the Development Plan and Implementation Strategy for the year 2011 AD. EPC is a not-for-profit, urban planningfirm based in Ahmedabad, India.5Including the Collector’s Office, Gandhinagar Capital ProjectsDivision, Gandhinagar Notified Area Committee, Roads and BuildingDepartment, Ahmedabad Municipal Commission, Ahmedabad UrbanDevelopment Authority, Railways, Airport Authority; Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation, Gujarat Infrastructure DevelopmentBoard, Directorate of Horticulture; and business groups such as brickkiln manufacturers and real estate developers.
S. Byahutvision for Gandhinagar such as pattern of urbanization anddensities; the nature, direction, and extent of future growth;built form characteristics; zoning and land uses; physicaland social infrastructure; transportation; open spaces andenvironment; heritage and tourism; and development controlregulations. Urban design scenarios were generated to anticipate the character of the resultant built form for various areasto formulate place-based regulations (GUDA 2001b, c). Theplan was published in the State Gazette and enforced in 2003after undergoing two rounds of public review and modifications.6 Finally, implementation strategies and financingmechanisms were outlined.The plan introduced retail and mixed use developmentalong select Town Roads and densification by private sectorinfill development on larger vacant lots. These areas werecarefully identified to maintain the stately and green character of the Capitol Complex and the formal avenues, whileat the same time encourage more optimal land utilization.Service roads were proposed so that new activities and traffic would not spillover onto Town Roads. Gandhinagar andAhmedabad are expected to merge into one mega-regionover time due to their close proximity and mutual interdependencies, development demand, and future growth.The plan responded to the development pressures towardsAhmedabad and recommended expansion towards it. Itidentified two broad categories for urban expansion: newsectors adjacent to the GNA, and nucleus villages adjacentto the city and major highways. Detailed land use surveys,indicators of real estate demand such as records of NA permissions, and demographic analyses formed the basis fordetermining urban expansion. Considerable areas south ofGNA between Ahmedabad and Gandhinagar were identifiedfor systematic sector-type expansion along the highways.The Town Road grid was extended south and southwesttowards Ahmedabad (Fig. 3). Three types of residentialzones were delineated outside GNA: approximately 495 haas R-5 (medium-density residential zone along main growthcorridors), 90 ha as R-6 (low-density residential towardsthe River Sabarmati), and 875 ha as R-7 (medium-densityvillage expansion zone around seven fast growing nucleusvillages to facilitate affordable housing for villagers andmigrants). Planned density at saturation is 300 persons perhectare (pph) for R-5, 27 pph for R-6, and 312.5 pph for R-7.Institutional and large recreational regions were plannedalong the river to encourage institutional, corporate, and recreational uses. A no-development zone was proposed alongthe river and canal edge with minimum intervention that6In the first round, almost 300 objections and suggestions to thedraft plan were received. Preparation of the Development Plan is aquasi-legal process. Key steps in plan preparation, review, and updateare defined in the GTPUD Act of 1976.allowed only specific low-density activities. The PeripheryControl Act was partially repealed to allow for new growth(GoG 2003). This plan represents a significant departurefrom the original Master Plan, which had conceptualizedGandhinagar in isolation from Ahmedabad, imposed strongperiphery control, and failed to anticipate where demand forgrowth was likely to occur.Seven villages were identified as nucleus villages due totheir high growth, strategic location near highways, proximity to GNA, village infrastructure, and market demand. From1991 to 2001, these villages experienced double the decadalgrowth rate as compared to other GUDA villages and weretransforming into small towns. Unregulated and haphazarddevelopment without adequate infrastructure had encroachedonto narrow village lanes, leading to unhealthy living conditions. The village expansion zone was demarcated aroundthese village gamtals based on growth projections and physical features such as lakes, streams, and river edge. Majorroads were incorporated into the plan to ensure contiguitybetween existing and proposed developments and retain theROW for village access.Introducing the private sector for landdevelopmentIn the original Master Plan, each sector had a strictly regulated layout, and new urban expansion areas south of theGNA were planned to be consistent with Gandhinagar’scharacter. Delivery of serviced land in urban areas in Gujaratstate is managed through a two-step process defined by theGTPUDA (GoG 1976). First, a decadal macro-level Development Plan for the entire region is prepared. Second, manyneighborhood-level Town Planning Schemes (TP Schemes)are prepared for areas delineated for new development(Fig. 4). Urban expansion areas in Gandhinagar maintainthe sector-type neighborhood character and are equivalentin shape and size to the existing sectors within GNA, buttheir development mechanism involves the private sector.The plan proposed land readjustment and land pooling in theform of TP Schemes, which have been successfully appliedin neighboring Ahmedabad and other cities of Gujarat (Ballaney and Patel 2009). Major grid roads were proposed inthe Development Plan to demarcate the TP Schemes. Thepurpose was to create a private land market and reduce landspeculation, reduce intense state control, and avoid the useof eminent domain or bulk land acquisition. Expansion ofseven nucleus villages would also be facilitated through TPSchemes.TP Schemes are considered a market-friendly, democratic, and equitable method of land development (Ballaney2008). In this process, agricultural lots and irregular-shapedfarmland are reconstituted into regular-shaped lots for urban
The unique challenges of planning a New Town: the Gandhinagar experience Fig. 3 Development plan of GUDA for 2011 shows urban expansion areas extending sector-type grid south of GNA. The inner line shows Gandhinagar City or GNA extent. Source GUDA (2001b), prepared by EPCdevelopment. The authority also provides them public roadaccess and infrastructure such as water supply, sewage, andstreetlights. In the land reconstitution process, the authority deducts approximately 30–40% of the original land todevelop open spaces and roads, affordable housing, parks,and other amenities.7 The
The unique challenges of planning a New Town: the Gandhinagar experience development,vastopenspaces,andsegregatio
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được
Le genou de Lucy. Odile Jacob. 1999. Coppens Y. Pré-textes. L’homme préhistorique en morceaux. Eds Odile Jacob. 2011. Costentin J., Delaveau P. Café, thé, chocolat, les bons effets sur le cerveau et pour le corps. Editions Odile Jacob. 2010. Crawford M., Marsh D. The driving force : food in human evolution and the future.
Le genou de Lucy. Odile Jacob. 1999. Coppens Y. Pré-textes. L’homme préhistorique en morceaux. Eds Odile Jacob. 2011. Costentin J., Delaveau P. Café, thé, chocolat, les bons effets sur le cerveau et pour le corps. Editions Odile Jacob. 2010. 3 Crawford M., Marsh D. The driving force : food in human evolution and the future.
