What the Swachh Scorecard Really Rewards
- Neural City Team
- Sep 3
- 4 min read
On a humid morning in Lucknow, officials posed beside a fresh banner: “City Achieves 7-Star Garbage-Free Rating.” Photographs were dispatched to Delhi, congratulatory tweets flew, and local leaders basked in the glow.
But a kilometre away in Aminabad market, shopkeepers were sweeping plastic wrappers into an open drain. “They say we are 7-Star, but you can still smell the drain before you see it,” a trader quipped.
And this scene isn’t unique to Lucknow. Similar contrasts have been reported in Hyderabad, Chandigarh, Bhopal, and almost every city chasing top ranks. The badge is national; so is the gap.
Scoring Change
These certifications are not trivial. They were introduced by MoHUA to standardize outcomes, link rankings to Swachh Survekshan, and funnel incentives.
But between 2023 and 2024–25, the rules changed—and the new rules reward paperwork and capacity far more than lived cleanliness.
Citizen Voice has shrunk from 23% → 4%, while municipal process & paperwork (Service Level Progress → Four-Phase Assessment) has expanded to dominate the score.
This tilts the ranking toward infrastructure and documentation rather than citizen experience of cleanliness.
The 2023 Scorecard: Citizens Counted
In 2023, Swachh Survekshan had a 9,500-point system:
Service Level Progress – 4,830 (51%)
Certifications (ODF, GFC, Water+) – 2,500 (26%)
Citizen Voice – 2,170 (23%)
This meant nearly a quarter of a city’s rank came directly from people—through surveys, app feedback, and calls. Even imperfect systems had to show citizens felt an improvement. It was messy, but it forced commissioners to keep one eye on the street.
Citizen Voice going from 22% to 4%
The 2024–25 Scorecard: Citizens Shrink
In 2024–25, the system ballooned to 12,500 points, but with a very different weightage:
Four-Phase Assessment – 10,000 (80%)
Certifications – 2,500 (20%)
Citizen feedback? A token 500 points (just 4%) buried within the Four-Phase Assessment. “Visible cleanliness” stayed at 1,500 points (15%), but even this was assessed by sample audits, not continuous citizen voice.
The new design signals a clear philosophy: trust the paperwork, trust the audits, not the residents.
The Headlines that Betray the Badge
And yet, on the ground, residents keep pointing to the dirt that certifications can’t hide.
Chandigarh: “Heaps of garbage narrate a different tale” (Tribune India). Even as the city flaunted Swachh honours, Dadumajra dumpsite’s 80,000 tonnes loomed as a mountain of shame.
Hyderabad: “Hyderabad tops State with 7-Star status, SCB recognised for clean practices” (NewsMeter). Yet commuters complained of litter around crossings and black-spots that reappeared within days.
Bhopal: “Indore bags 7-star rating… Bhopal gets 5-stars” (Free Press Journal). Local reports noted door-to-door collection actually slipped from 90% to 80%, even as segregation numbers improved on paper.
In city after city, the Swachh trophy was celebrated, but headlines—and residents—asked: clean for whom?
Reading the Scorecard
As a capacity signal, not a satisfaction signal: A high rank shows the city has infrastructure and documentation in place.
Check the “experiential delta”: Are drains, CT/PTs, and markets actually clean? If not, the badge is only half the story.
Demand Track Two: India needs a Service Experience Track alongside the existing Capacity Track. The scorecard must once again measure what people actually feel.
What This Means for Urban Governance
Architecture of reward shifted: Now, the majority of city scores come from documentary evidence and infrastructure ticks—not from what residents see or feel.
Risk of token compliance: When you need only 4% from citizen feedback, cities may satisfy auditors on audit day but ignore lived experience the rest of the year.
Cost of misalignment: Infrastructure without citizen trust weakens credibility. Residents won’t believe the “clean city” tag until they feel it.
A Path Forward
For Policy Makers (IAS, Commissioners, Smart City officials):Rankings now shape budget flows and political capital. When citizen voice is diluted, chasing stars and certifications becomes the safest bet—even if the public feels shortchanged.
For Media & Thought Leaders:The scoreboard can mislead. A city celebrated as “Top 10” may still have black-spots and unsafe CT/PTs. The narrative looks clean, the reality less so. This mismatch is fertile ground for both investigative journalism and evidence-based reform.
For Innovators (GovTech, civic tech, global programs):The new methodology creates white spaces. If the official scorecard can’t capture lived experience, startups and civic innovators can step in—through low-cost sensors, crowd-sourced cleanliness mapping, or real-time toilet audits.
For Contributors (residents, interns, data partners):The rankings are no longer your voice. But your data—the photos you click, the complaints you log, the micro-surveys you answer—can be the counterweight that ensures city governments don’t lose touch with the street.
The Future of Clean Credibility
The first decade of Swachh Bharat was about building: toilets, trucks, treatment plants. The scorecard rewarded capacity, and rightly so. But the next decade is about credibility.
Credibility is not won in audit files. It’s won when:
a mother feels safe using a CT at night,
a market lane is free of garbage after closing time,
a complaint on the app is resolved within 48 hours.
Until those lived experiences are weighted back into the score, Swachh Survekshan will remain a competition of certificates, not citizens.
Comments