[Answered] Assess the impact of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, on the socio-economic status of vendors across urban India.

The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, marked a significant milestone in recognizing and protecting the rights of street vendors in Indian cities.

Positive Impacts

• Recognition and Legal Protection: The Act recognizes street vending as a legitimate livelihood and provides legal protection against arbitrary evictions and harassment by authorities.
• Regulation and Order: It aims to regulate street vending, designating specific vending zones, potentially improving traffic flow and public safety in urban areas.
• Improved Working Conditions: The Act mandates the provision of basic amenities like toilets, drinking water, and waste disposal facilities in designated vending zones, potentially enhancing vendors’ working conditions.
• Social Security Schemes: The Act encourages the creation of social security schemes for vendors, including health insurance and pension plans.

Challenges

• Administrative Challenges: Despite the Act’s emphasis on protecting vendors from harassment and eviction, administrative hurdles and a lack of awareness have led to increased instances of harassment and eviction. Outdated bureaucratic mindsets and limited sensitization about the Act among authorities and vendors contribute to this challenge. The representation of vendors in Town Vending Committees (TVCs) is often inadequate, with women vendors being especially underrepresented.
• Governance Weaknesses: Existing urban governance mechanisms often lack the capacity to effectively implement the Act. Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) may lack sufficient powers and capacities, and schemes like the Smart Cities Mission may prioritize infrastructure development over the inclusion of street vendors in city planning. Integration of the Act with the framework established by the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act for urban governance remains a challenge.
• Societal Perceptions: The prevailing image of a “world class city” tends to marginalize and stigmatize street vendors, viewing them as obstacles to urban development rather than legitimate contributors to the urban economy. This societal perception influences city designs, urban policies, and public attitudes towards street vending.

Conclusion

The Street Vendors Act needs initial top-down support but must transition to decentralized implementation. Initiatives like PM SVANidhi show positive steps in this direction. ULBs must be empowered for effective planning. Adapting to challenges like climate change and e-commerce requires creative use of welfare provisions. Incorporating street vending into urban policies is crucial for addressing evolving needs. The Act offers lessons for future policymaking on urban governance and worker rights.