- Email: [email protected]
Mumbai slums since independence: Evaluating the policy outcomes
Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Habitat International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/habitatint
Mumbai slums since independence: Evaluating the policy outcomes Ronita Bardhan a, Sayantani Sarkar a, Arnab Jana a, *, Nagendra R. Velaga b a b
Centre for Urban Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai 400076, India Civil Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai 400076, India
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 8 May 2015 Received in revised form 24 June 2015 Accepted 16 July 2015 Available online xxx
The urbanization process in Mumbai is closely integrated with housing crisis and informality in settlement growth. Slums have emerged as a significant settlement form, catering to the housing demand of a large section of the population of Mumbai, primarily for the urban poor. Statistics show that nearly half of the Mumbai population lives in slum areas which in turn spatially occupy a very small portion of the city. Since 1947 (i.e., after independence), a range of policies related to housing and slums have been implemented at various points of time in the city planning framework. However, the housing crisis situation has worsened over time and resulted in further slum growth. In the past, research has concentrated on spatio-temporal identification and spread of slums. However, the policy impacts on reduction of slums is relatively a less touched area, especially in developing cities like Mumbai. In this study, authors argue that the housing and land policies implemented in Mumbai to solve the problem of slums have actually provided the momentum to the undercurrents that fuel further proliferation of informality. The paper analyses these policies chronologically and focuses on the persuasive top down approach of policy implementation. Using the framework of bounded rationality, authors develop a “cause-effect” model to identify the impact of ten major housing and land policies implemented since independence. Further, a gap coherence analysis revealed the lack of participation of direct stakeholders (i.e., the slum dwellers). The study proposes participatory approach as an alternative to the current policy frameworks. Internalizing the strengths of the actual users in the policy framework may unlock the opportunities for the success of the policies. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Slums Undercurrent Policy Participation
1. Introduction The inability of the federated “State” to meet the growing housing demand for population has emerged as a major crisis in Indian metro cities such as Mumbai. In spite of various policy based efforts to reduce the housing demand gap, the dilemma still persists. Mumbai has been the financial capital of India as well as the largest urban agglomeration of the country. The city has attracted a large population from different parts of the country both informal and informal sectors. During 1960s the industrialization phase of Mumbai had been coupled with huge immigration of low skilled labor force in to the city. These workers were predominantly poor and the only choice of affordable shelter available to them was the slums. A glaring evidence of this failure has been the mushrooming of informal settlement, commonly known as slums, in Mumbai.
* Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (R. Bardhan), sayantani64@gmail. com (S. Sarkar), [email protected] (A. Jana), [email protected] (N.R. Velaga). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.07.009 0197-3975/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Slums have been an integral part of urbanization process of Mumbai and are invoked as an iconic example in the twenty-first century (Anand & Rademacher, 2011). Census of India defines slums as “residential areas where dwellings are unfit for human habitation by reasons of dilapidation, overcrowding, faulty arrangements and design of such buildings, narrowness or faulty arrangement of street, lack of ventilation, light, or sanitation facilities or any combination of these factors which are detrimental to the safety and health”. The slums are further classified into three heads (as per Census of India): (1) notified slums, (2) recognized slums and (3) identified slums. a. Notified slums-All notified areas in a town or city notified as ‘Slum’ by State, Union Territory (UT) Administration or Local Government under any Act including a ‘Slum Act’. b. Recognized slums-All areas recognized as ‘Slum’ by State, UT Administration or Local Government, Housing and Slum Boards, which may have not been formally notified as slum under any act.
2
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
c. Identified slums e A compact area of at least 300 populations or about 60e70 households of poorly built congested tenements, in unhygienic environment usually with inadequate infrastructure and lacking in proper sanitary and drinking water facilities. These slums accommodate the urban poor who also seek accommodation in “chawls”(explained in subsequent section) or live as pavement dwellers. Though the living conditions of both the “chawls” and the pavement dwellers are similar to that of the slums, but by definition these cannot be considered as same. Thus, it becomes self-explanatory that the slums cannot be considered as a livable habitat. A general tendency of a “planned city” has been to exclude the poor (i.e. major urban planning policies tend towards removal of informality from the urban space for efficient planning (Watson, 2009)). Slums are generally looked upon as seedbeds for crime and are considered mandatory to be evicted to make the cities livable and safe (UNSP, 1996). Such measures have also been witnessed in most of the initial planning policies of Mumbai. Efforts to remove vulnerability from urban spaces have often translated to displacement of these slums if not their complete eradication (Stecko & Barber, 2007). As Mumbai moves toward becoming a global city, providing shelter will remain a major challenge. As per Census 2001, more than half of the city's population lived in the slums; it has seen a marginal decrease to 41.9% in the last decade. The distribution of slum population in different wards of Mumbai shows that majority of the wards have more than 50% of the population living in slums (see Fig 1). The stacked chart in Fig. 1 shows the proportion of slum population to the total population of the wards. Such distribution does not follow any regular pattern and is highly dispersed in the form of slum pockets throughout the city. In other words, in every part of the city there is some kind of slum development. The provision of shelter has been considered to be the responsibility of the Government. The Indian Constitution also provides land, housing, urban development and provision of civic infrastructure as State subjects, and are under direct jurisdiction of State Government. As far as the question of affordability is concerned, the higher income groups have plethora of choices. With the housing loans provided by the banks and the financial institutes, it caters to the middle income households' housing demands. However, housing emerges as a problem for the lower income groups (LIG) and the economically weaker section (EWS), which constitute the urban poor class. According to Choguill (1993), though historically housing has been regarded as a non-productive investment and an individual responsibility, provision of housing for the poor has been taken up to be the responsibility of the State. As stated earlier, there have been many policies formulated and implemented in the last six decades to solve this problem, but the attainment of success can hardly be claimed. The crisis still persists; and in many cases has accelerated after the policy implementation. The present study highlights the impact of various policy initiatives on the housing issues, especially that of slums, in Mumbai. Existing research on Indian slums mostly focus on spatiotemporal identification and its spatial spread; however, understanding the policy impacts on reduction of slums is relatively less studied. This is especially true for developing cities like Mumbai (Bakore, 2007). In a study by Kit, Lüdeke, and Reckien (2012), they attempted identification of slum areas in Hyderabad (one of the metropolitan cities in India) using “lacunarity” based pattern € ck and Kraff (2014) studied the recognition. Similarly, Taubenbo slums from morphological point of view and identified the physical features of slums in Mumbai. Kohli, Sliuzas, Kerle, and Stein (2012) tried to amalgamate the general indicators of settlement types at three spatial levels namely environment, settlement and objects.
Fig. 1. Ward wise distribution of Slum population (in percentage). Note: Alphabets within the polygons depict respective ward name. Source: Adapted from Census of India 2011.
The indicators considered location and neighborhood characteristics for environment; shape and density of the settlement; and access network and building characteristic for object spatial level. Baud, Pfeffer, Sridharan, and Nainan (2009) identified hot spots of poverty clustering in different degrees besides the slum area, in Indian metropolitan cities like Mumbai, Delhi and Chennai. Patel, Koizumi, and Crooks (2014) estimated the total number of slum households in Mumbai and Kolkata based on a new criterion Slum Severity Index and found that there is an existing gap between identification of slums by the Census of India and United Nation (UN) Habitat in Mumbai and Kolkata. They concluded that the Census categories might not be fruitful for urban planning and policymaking. Roy, Lees, Palavalli, Pfeffer, and Sloot (2014) devised a new technique called slumulation to model the informal growth
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
pattern based on factors like local politics, local topology, street pattern and role of informal economy. The basic question, which needs to be answered here, is that why has a city like Mumbai continued to have slums in spite of multiple policy initiatives and considerable investments from the government. The paper continues as follows: In the first section, authors discuss about the nature and character of slums in Mumbai. The next section illustrates the historical growth of Mumbai and the relevant literature related to the issues of housing, affordability and slums at global and national levels. Section 3 elaborates on the various policies of housing and slums in Mumbai, chronologically. In section 4, authors further analyze the policies to find the missing link in the planning process and provide suggestive measures for further planning and it is followed by concluding remarks. 2. Mumbai's growth and initiation of informal settlement Mumbai grew from a cluster of seven islands to a port. It is only after the growth of the cotton textile industry in 19th century that it began to evolve as an economic node. “The major force underlying Bombay's population growth in the 19th century was industrialization and in particular the employment demands of the cotton textile industry” (Pacione, 2006). As cotton textile industry needed huge supply of labor, which led to migration towards the growing industrial region. “The majority of the work force was made up of migrants from outlying districts of Maharashtra including Satara, Sangli, Kolhapur and the Konkan coast, with a smaller number migrating from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar” (Whitehead, 2008). The economy was further augmented by the discovery of petroleum in 1970s along its coast, which led to the growth of petro-chemical industries. However, over immigration stressed the existing housing stocks. Initially, the migration was only male centric and the housing pattern was designed as such. The one-room tenements called “chawls” solely serve the purpose of single dwelling. But, later when the entire families migrated to the city, the pressure increased and the living conditions worsened. There exists a fine line between the living conditions of “chawls” and slums in Mumbai. “Chawls are buildings with one or two room units of not more than two hundred square feet attached by a common corridor with shared toilets on each floor” (Karandikar, 2010). The “chawls” were initially built to rent out to the industrial/mill workers which later degenerated into slum like conditions. Besides the “chawls” and slums, a third category of informality that exists in the city is the growing number of “pavement dwellers”. As such Mumbai can be taken as an example of a dual city (Raiser, 2005), where the slums and squatters along with the skyscrapers are the two mutually dependent sides of globalization. 3. Housing policies in India: a background Slums can be regarded as the result of the policies and plans with failed motives. “In general, slums are the products of failed policies, bad governance, corruption, inappropriate regulations, dysfunctional land markets, unresponsive financial systems and a fundamental lack of political will” (UNHSP, 2003). The UN has identified five indicators of deprivation related to housing viz, lack
Fig. 2. Phases of housing policies. Source: Authors' interpretation based on Choguill (2007).
3
of durable housing, sufficient living space, access to improved drinking water, access to improved sanitation and secured tenure. The provision of housing for the urban poor has emerged as a principal challenge of the Governments in the rapidly urbanizing (developing) nations. They are faced with the twofold responsibility of (1) improving the quality of housing in the existing slum and squatter settlements and (2) providing land and housing to those without shelter (Bredenoord & van Lindert, 2010). With the emergence of the neo e liberal approaches and the overwhelming dominance of the market led forces, the housing sector has come under the gamut of the private investors. According to Choguill (1993), “Government policies directed at actually providing housing were in turn inappropriate to stimulate private sector efforts which might have alleviated the seriousness of housing shortage”. Choguill (2007) has again classified the housing policies into three phases. The first phase dealt with construction of more public housings. During the second phase the emphasis shifted to selfhelp and finally in the third phase adopted enablement strategy. It is summarized in Fig. 2. The triangles in the above diagram symbolize the gaps in the schemes implemented. The gap in the first phase refers to the houses built that did not reach the poor and their needs remained unfulfilled. In the second phase, though the emphasis was on generating housing through self-help, it proved to be a very expensive endeavor. Finally, according to Choguill (2007), the emphasis was shifted to enablement approach, where individual nations could develop policies to solve their indigenous problems and that the effort will be on removing the bottleneck so that the housing schemes can be smoothly implemented. Ironically, though the national housing policy of India identifies shelter as a basic human need, there had been no comprehensive plan for housing till 1988 in the country (The first National Housing Scheme was introduced in 1988). Initially all the policies had an ad hoc piecemeal population base, targeted to selected sections of the society only. In the First Five Years Plan, the government focused in providing housing for the LIGs, with schemes like Housing Scheme for Industrial Workers (1952), Housing for Low Income Group (1954) and Housing Scheme for Plantation Workers (1952). With the Second Five Year Plan the focus shifted to slums, their improvement and resettlement. Until the fifth plan period from 1974 to 79, the emphasis was only on certain weaker sections of the society. From the Sixth plan period onwards, the community development programmes were promoted with active role of the non-profit organizations. After liberalization of Indian Economy in the nineties, (i.e., from the Eighth plan onwards) the market forces gained more importance and the role of the State was transformed from a provider to that of an enabler (Mukhija, 2004). Though the housing needs were truly given recognition after 40 years of independence, the requirements of the LIGs and the EWSs were hardly met. The National Housing Policy of 1988 was more inclined towards the housing provisions for the higher and the middleincome section. In 1994 this Housing policy was revised with the aim to provide affordable housing for all in the country and strengthen the enabling strategies (Sivam & Karuppannan, 2002). Both public and private sector provide housing in India
4
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
Fig. 3. Methodology.
contributing 16 and 84% respectively. The private sector is active in both the formal and informal categories of housing. The formal housing stocks are unaffordable for the economically weaker section and hence they are provided with the informal housing stocks in the form of slums. The inability of the Government to see housing as a major economic sector has resulted in the absence of any financial structure until 1970. The Housing and Urban Development Corporation (HUDCO) was created in 1970 for providing financial assistance to the LIGs for augmenting the housing stock. Other important contributors to housing finance are Housing Development and Financial Corporation and Life Insurance Company. In 1988 the National Housing Bank was set up as a subsidiary of the Reserve Bank of India to finance housing schemes (Sivam & Karuppannan, 2002). Presently, the Government of India has allowed 100% foreign direct investment (FDI) in the housing sector for funding various building projects. This has generated a momentum among private players in the housing sector. 4. Data and methodology This study considers a theoretical approach towards critical analysis of the land and housing policies in Mumbai. The paper analyses these policies chronologically and focuses on the persuasive top down approach of policy implementation. “Rationality denotes a style of behavior that is appropriate to the achievement of given goals within the limits imposed by given conditions and constraints” (Simon, 1972). Therefore, using the framework of bounded rationality authors develop a “cause-effect” model to identify the impact of ten major housing and land policies implemented since independence (Jones, 2002).
Fig. 4. Chronology of Housing Policies implemented in Mumbai. Source: Authors
According to Mayer, van Daalen, and Bots (2004), “Policy should come about epreferably- in neat phases, from preparation to execution, with support through research in each phase”. The study follows a close analysis of each phase of housing policy planning in Mumbai. The methodology is illustrated in Fig. 3. Ten policies related to housing and land development, in the post-independent era, are selected for this study. The policies are classified into four categories namely- (i) land and housing, (ii) related to clearance and eviction, (iii) up-gradation and redevelopment, and (iv) recent initiatives. Subsequently the effect of each policy is examined individually based on its year of implementation, objectives and its impact on the housing crisis and slum growth. Further, the policies and the respective impacts are analyzed chronologically, in sequential organization chart illustrating the individual cause and its corresponding effects. (see Fig. 3) The policies are taken as the causes and their effects are defined on the basis of their individual impact on the housing sector and slums in Mumbai. These effects define the persistence of slums in the city. The effects of other factors (e. g demographic), have been mentioned which affect both the causes and the effects individually as a well as collectively. One of the major objectives of this study is to identify the gap in policy making, indicated through the failures of several policies adopted since independence, on the housing poverty in Mumbai. This is the missing link in the planning process. Based on the gap identified the study provides an alternative approach towards inclusive planning. This study attempts to extend upon Choguill's (2007) “Three-phases of sustainable housing policies” in context of Mumbai by incorporating an additional step to realize the robustness of the housing policies in developing countries.
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
5. Housing policies in Mumbai As stated earlier, based on the approach of formulation, the policies are classified into four groups. The first group consists of the two major policies implemented by the Central government e the Rent Control Act (1947) and the Urban Land Ceiling Act (1976). The second group consists of the Slum Improvement and Clearance Act (1956), The Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act (1971) and the Maharashtra Vacant Land (Prohibition of Unauthorized Structure and Summary Eviction) Act (1975), all primarily motivated towards the removal of slums from urban areas. The third group has the policies, which were intended to the development of slum areas, and these are the Slum Upgradation Programme (1985), the Prime Minister's Grant Project (1985), Slum Redevelopment Scheme (1991) and the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme (1995). Finally, the last group has the schemes like the Rajiv Awas Yojna (2013) and Cluster Redevelopment Projects (2014), which are the recent initiatives in housing policies. Effects of these recent initiatives are yet to be traced. The chronological sequence of the policies is illustrated in Fig. 4. 5.1. Policies related to land and housing a. The Bombay Rent Control Act of 1947
Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective Impact
1947 State government Fix the housing rents at the 1940 levels Negative impact on investment pattern on rental housing Landlords lost interest for improvement and up-gradation of existing housing stocks Property taxes adversely affected
The earliest and the most influential policies related to housing in Mumbai was the Rent Control Act of 1947 (Government of Maharashtra, 1947). Pertaining to the increasing demand for housing and infrastructure by the military during the Second World War, Government introduced the law ensuring the interests of the tenants and fixed the rent at the 1940 levels. Though this was initially a temporary enactment, in due course of time, it became permanent. The Act proved to be very beneficial for the tenants, but went against the landlords and owners of the properties as the latter lost their interest to create newer stocks for housing or even invest in maintaining the existing stock. Thus, the quality of the tenements became highly compromised due to lack of maintenance and upgradation. “Supply continued to fall below demand and need, resulting in further crowding in the crumbling tenements and an expansion of squatter settlements” (Pugh, 1989). It came upon the government to undertake the maintenance of these buildings. A separate body was constituted and entrusted with the task of maintenance by imposing cess (a form of tax) on the buildings. As the rental stocks became restricted, the housing became unaffordable, especially for the urban poor. This gap can be taken as a driving force behind the flourishing of informal settlements like slums and squatters in the city. Moreover, the Rent Control Act also affected the property tax collection by the state. Though, in 1997, the Supreme Court directed to change the Rent Control Act, there was only 5% hike in the rents from 1998 onwards (Godbole, 1999). b. Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1976
Year of implementation: Implementing authority Objective:
Impact:
5
1976 Central government Restriction on ownership and possession of urban land Use excess land for housing urban poor Over manipulation of act ruined its motive Supply of land was negatively affected
The Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act came up in 1976 for 64 urban agglomerations across the country. The primary objective of this act was to put restrictions on ownership and possession of urban land beyond a set threshold, which in case of metro cities like Mumbai was 500 sq. m (5382 sq. feet) per owner (Bakore, 2007). This gave government the opportunity to create land banks from the excess land for preparing a healthy land market. In lieu of the excess land, compensation was to be provided. However, the nonstandardized low rates of compensation demotivated the landowners to declare their lands as surplus. Inefficient dissemination of compensation to landowners led to multiple public litigation cases against the State in the court of law. The systematic delays in the judiciary have led to pending of many of these cases even till date. Moreover, the excessive manipulation due to sloppy exemption clauses added up to the failure of the Act to serve its basic purpose. The supply of land was adversely affected which led to astronomical increase in the land prices, thus making the housing prices more unaffordable. 5.2. Policies related to clearance and eviction a. The Slum Area Improvement and Clearance Act, 1956
Year of implementation: Implementing authority Objective: Impact:
1956 State government Possible improvement and demolition of buildings and slum areas Slums on private land were negatively affected Lack of any resettlement plan for the evicted population
The Slum Area Improvement and Clearance Act of 1956 (Government of Maharashtra, 1956)identified the slum areas as places where the buildings a. Are in any respect unfit for human habitation; or b. Are by reasons of dilapidation, overcrowding, faulty arrangement and design of such buildings, narrowness or faulty arrangement of streets, lack of ventilation, light or sanitation facilities, or any combination of these factors, are detrimental to safety, health or morals. There were provisions for possible improvement and demolition of the buildings as well as that of clearance and redevelopment of the slum areas. The act did not mention about the resettlement plans of the evicted households. This was a major gap in the planning process as without any resettlement plan the easiest option open to the evicted households was to settle in other slum areas or create new slums. Hence, on one hand the Act ensured clearance of urban land; on the other hand it triggered the slum growth further.
6
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
b. The Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971
Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective: Impact:
1971 State government Possible improvement and demolition of buildings and slum areas Slums on private land were negatively affected Resettlement into informal areas triggered the slum growth further
This Act took a more humanitarian approach towards slum improvement undertaking the resettlement of the evicted households in case of building demolition or slum clearance. It recommended the improvement of slums in terms of drainage and water supply, sanitation, better roads, street lighting, public amenities, health and other important factors (Government of Maharashtra, 1971). Most of the resettlements were informal in nature and located in the peripheral areas of the cities. This related to the growth of slums in the outskirts of the city like Govandi Slum (with 95 percent of slum population) in M-East ward (see Fig. 1) (Deshmukh, 2013). However, improvement was focused on the slums on government land only while the private landowners continued to evict the slum areas without any plans for resettlement. The private landowners also approached the court of law against the notification of private land as slums. The Act was further amended in 2001 where it included the slum and pavement dwellers who had their names on the electoral roll on 1January 1995, for no eviction without rehabilitation (Burra, 2005). c. The Maharashtra Vacant Land (Prohibition of Unauthorized Structure and Summary Eviction) Act, 1975
Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective: Impact:
1975 State government Clear vacant lands from any kind of encroachment Wide scale eviction of slums and squatters Slums on private land more affected
According to this Act, “No person shall, on or after the appointment date, occupy any vacant land or continue to in occupation of any vacant land in urban area or erect any shelter or enclose or other structure on such land for the purpose of residence or otherwise without the express permission in writing of the Municipal Commissioner in a corporation area, of the Chief in a Municipal area and elsewhere, of the Collector, or except in accordance with any law for the time being in force in such urban area”(Government of Maharashtra, 1975). The Act also states that in cases of contravention the Competent Authority “….may by order requires such person to vacate the land ….and to remove all property there from and if such person fails to comply with the order …., he may be summarily evicted from such land ….” (Government of Maharashtra, 1975). This Act led to wide scale eviction of slums and squatters, which were identified as being encroachments. The Act does not mention anything about the relocation of the evicted households and hence like the above-mentioned Acts, we find a major gap in the planning process too. It should be noted that the slums or the squatters grow because they fulfill the basic need of housing for the urban poor, which the State fails to provide. Any large scale clearance and eviction process makes a large section of these people houseless. Lack of supporting resettlement policies make them desperate to take shelter in the
other slums or they become pavement dwellers. These processes seriously damage their livelihood as their occupations are largely driven by the selection of their housing location. Either they are located near to their workplaces or the slums themselves get established as an economic centre. In case of eviction, both the occupational structures get heavily affected. On an average a slum dweller family spends INR 30,000 to 50,000 in constructing their house, due to demolition (Das, 2003). Special mention can be made of the verdict given by the Supreme Court of Indian against the eviction of illegal settlements in the Olga Tellis vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation court case in 1985, where the Supreme court identified the relation between habitation and livelihood (Ramanathan, 2005). This can be regarded as the initiation of the in situ slum improvement schemes. 5.3. Policies related to upgradation and redevelopment a. Slum Upgradation Programme (SUP), 1985
Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective: Impact:
1985 State government Provide shelter opportunity for the marginalized section through bank loans Lack of dissemination of information to stakeholders Selective impact Stalled due to Political system change
The slum upgradation programme was introduced as part of the Bombay Urban Development Project, in collaboration with the World Bank. It was joined by another similar programme called the Low Income Group Shelter Programme. The basic motive of SUP was to provide renewable lease of land to the slum cooperative societies for a period of 30 years. It would provide loans to the slum dwellers at an interest rate of around 12% and also ensure provision of basic amenities on a cost recovery basis. The slums on the private lands and the central government lands were out of the jurisdiction of this programme. Hence the impact of the programme was not as widespread as expected. The State also issued identity passes to the head of the household to prove their eligibility in receiving the leasehold tenure. The impact of the programme was stalled due to switching of the political party at the State level. b. The Prime Minister's Grant Project, 1985 Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective: Impact:
1985 Central government Funding for slum improvement Master plan for Dharavi prepared Houses created for the slum dwellers Gaps in implementation Lack of information
In 1985 a Central grant of INR one billion was announced of which INR 600 million was used for the up-gradation and improvement of Dharavi1 (Barke, O' Hare, & Abbott, 1998). The funds were used to provide housing for the slum dwellers and also to improve conditions of the existing infrastructure. It recommended 30e35000 families to be accommodated within Dharavi
1 Dharavi is the largest slum in India. The annual economic output is estimated to be around 600 million US Dollars to more than one billion US Dollars.
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
and 20,000 families to be relocated outside Dharavi (Mukhija, 2001). Transit camps were set up to temporarily relocate the households during the construction process. There were problems like shortage of transit settlements, delays in construction, lack of awareness among the beneficiaries, higher prices of the newly created housing stocks and manipulation of the beneficiary list by the outsiders. As such the housing stocks remained limited and the idea of affordable housing was not successful. c. Slum Redevelopment Scheme, 1991
Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective:
Impact:
1991 State government Private participation in slum development through incentives Increased FSI for the slums areas allowed vertical extension of built up Rehousing the eligible slum dwellers Lower incentives failed to interest the private developers
The liberalization of the Indian market in 1991-invited largescale foreign investment into the housing sector as well. The ruling party introduced a new scheme called the Slum Redevelopment project, inviting the private investors to take up the job of slum redevelopment. As an incentive the FSI of the slum areas were increased up to 2.5 from 1.33, which encouraged the construction of high-rise buildings. As per the scheme the private developers should carry out in situ redevelopment of the notified slum area by rehousing the slum dwellers into tenements measuring 180 sq. feet (16.72 sq. m) and the rest of the place was available for them to build and sell in open market. This is how the builders were compensated of their cost of construction and resettlement. However, the houses for the slum dwellers were not free, and they had to pay a certain part of the construction cost. Also there was an added criterion of eligibility, where the slum dweller had to establish his duration of stay in the existing from before that of 1985. This cut-off date made a large section of the slum population ineligible for getting rehousing facility and there was no alternative measures recommended for the ineligible section. Also the scheme failed to attract the interest of the private developers and all in all, the scheme was criticized for inefficiency (Rishbud, 2003). The success of the scheme depended on high property rates, to benefit large developers and builders who thus became instrumental in evacuating slums from prime lands of the city (Banerjee-Guha, 2002). Although, there is a general consensus among the researchers that Slum Redevelopment is a failure, empirical evidences to it are largely lacking. d. Slum Rehabilitation Scheme, 1995
Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective: Impact:
1995 State government Private participation in slum development through incentives Slum rehabilitation authority was formed More incentives for private developers, through TDRs
A modified version of the Slum Redevelopment Scheme (SRS) was brought up by the newly elected party in 1995. Following the recommendations of the Afzalpurkar Committee (1995), a separate
7
body called Slum Rehabilitation Authority was set up to exclusively look into the matters related to slum resettlement. Thereby three types of rehabilitations were recommended, viz. In Situ, Project Affected People (PAP) and Permanent Transit Tenement (PTT). The year of eligibility criterion was raised to 1995 and recently to 2000, and the scheme also includes the pavement dwellers. The size of the tenements has been increased to 225 sq feet (20.9 sq. m) to recently to 269 sq. feet (24.99 sq. m). The tenements were made totally free for the slum dwellers. The private developers were provided incentives in the form of free sale component of 7.5 sq. feet for every 10 sq. feet free rehabilitation construction. The sale ratio varied from 1:0.75 in the Inner City to 1:1 in the suburban areas. Since the FSI of the resettlement areas was fixed at 2.5, the additional area was made available in the form of generating Transferable Development Rights. The Slum rehabilitation Scheme is hence driven by the interest of the private developer and the strength of the real estate forces. The scheme of rehabilitation is more inclined towards the interests of the wealthy developers rather than the actual slum population. According to Patel (1996), it is mixture of “admirable and dubious”. The strong market forces favor active rehabilitation and vice versa. The impact also varies with the variation in the local property prices. The developers will be more interested in areas where the sale component can fetch higher prices. Though the SRS scheme seems to be very lucrative, the true statistics fail to establish it as a real success (Das, 2003; Nijman, 2008). Till April 2014, the total number of completed units is 157,402 and 86,069 units are under construction (Praja, 2014). 5.4. Recent initiatives a. Rajiv Awas Yojna, 2012e2022
Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective:
Expected impact:
2012 Central government Improve and provide housing, basic services and social amenities in the slums Reform the causes leading to creation of slums Expand institutional credit to the slums Create affordable housing stock Strengthen institutional and human resource e capacities Community empowerment Slum free India Improvement of all existing slums, notified or non-notified Solution to the affordable housing demand
The primary aim of the Rajiv Awas Yojna (RAY) is to provide financial assistance to the State and Local Governments to provide affordable housing for the urban poor. RAY provides a multi prolonged approach where the prime focus is on, (a) bringing existing slums within the formal system and enabling them to avail of the same level of basic amenities as the rest of the town; (b) redressing the failures of the formal system that lie behind the creation of slums; and (c) tackling the shortage of urban land that keep shelter out of the reach of the urban poor and force them to resort to extra-legal solutions in a bid to retain their sources of livelihood and employment. RAY scheme includes all existing slum areas, notified or non-notified, for development of basic services, health, education, social-security and affordable housing with rental stocks. Till January 2015, 162 projects have been approved in India covering 11towns and cities. However, no
8
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
stocks have been created under RAY in Mumbai or any other place in Maharashtra. RAY also provides for another scheme called the Rajiv Rinn Yojna to provide enhanced credit support to the EIGs and LIGs.
slums which cater the housing needs of such a huge population mass have also become indispensable for the city. The slums have continued to provide them shelter as well as economic selfsufficiency. Fig. 5 summarizes the demographic character discussed above.
b. Cluster Redevelopment, 2014 8. Discussion Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective: Expected impact:
2014 State government Urban renewal of the old buildings Creation of new economic hot spots Rejuvenation of the old maladroit areas of the city
One of the most recent schemes introduced in Mumbai is that of cluster redevelopment where the old and dilapidated and cessed buildings of more than 40 years old and having a minimum area of 4000 sq. m. as well as slum areas would be redeveloped. The FSI of the Urban Renewable Clusters would be increased to 4 and the redevelopment can be carried out by Government bodies (like MHADA,2 MCGM3), local comminutes or private developers. The project has been initiated with the redevelopment of Bhendi Bazar area in South Mumbai with an area of 16acres (1 acre ¼ 4047 sq. m.). The Bhendi Bazaar project aims towards transformation of the old densely packed urban market area to a modern neighborhood through the construction of around 250 skyscrapers for around 3200 households. The project entails the improvement of existing living conditions through the provision of better housing and modern urban amenities to around 20,000 people living here (SBUT, 2014). 6. Summary of the policies The chronology of the policies and the impacts have been summarized in Fig. 5. 7. Visible impact of the policies The above figure shows that various policies have been implemented from time to time to solve the housing crisis in Mumbai. However, none of them have been truly fruitful in delivering any comprehensive solution. Rather these policies in turn themselves provided the undercurrents for the further crisis and slum growth in the city. As discussed earlier, the factor of migration is inextricably related with housing crisis in the city. A large portion of this immigrant population is composed of unskilled laborers who migrate in search of higher pays and better living and end up being added to the urban poor class. The trend of migration to the city shows that till 1980, total migration to the city exceeded the natural increase. It means that migration was the major contributor to the growth of city's population. However, after 1980 the migration trend fell below the natural increase of the population. This phenomenon can be interpreted as the then migrants are now adding to the city population through natural increase. In other words, it is now the second or third generation of the migrants living in the cities. This is also true about the following generation of the urban poor class, who live in the slums. Hence, they are no longer are migrant population living in the slums areas, but have been absorbed by the city. As such the
2 3
MHADA e Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority. MCGM e Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai.
The paper relates the slums and their growth in the light of the various policies that have been adapted in Mumbai till date. From the initiation of the housing policies in Mumbai, there have been gaps left which have played their roles to aggravate the housing problem rather than solving it. Fig. 4 summarizes the causes and effects of the policies as they were implemented chronologically till date. It tries to provide a holistic view of the housing policies in the Mumbai. The gaps left in each stage led to the initiation of a new policy to deal with the housing crisis, but none of them provided any integrated solution. The phenomenon of migration has continued to add to the population of the city. The basic aspiration of migrating to city like Mumbai is to live a better life and it initiates from having a good shelter. However, the inability of the city to create adequate shelter opportunities for its people hampers with the urban growth process. The housing industry, nowadays, targets mainly the higher incomes groups with luxury villas and apartments. “Some of Mumbai's most ultra-luxurious towers (with swimming pools in apartments) have come up on slum lands even as slum families are rehabilitated and pushed in a small corner of the plot in dinghy buildings” (Bharucha, 2014). Though the SRS has created accommodations for the urban poor, much more still needs to be done. Another important issue to be noted here is that none of the policies devised so far mentioned any kind of participation from the real stakeholders (i.e. the slum dwellers). These policies were more based on the discretion of the State and the other associated bodies who decided upon the matters of clearance and improvement. Later, the matter was handed to the private developers who took the task of redevelopment and rehabilitation. As such the interest of the real stakeholders becomes highly eclipsed and the housing problem remains unsolved. Though some community driven rehabilitation projects have been undertaken by NGOs and housing cooperatives, where special mention can be made of The Society for Promotion of Area Research Centres popularly known as SPARC. “Since 1996 SPARC has been working in partnership with two community based organizations The National Slum Dwellers Federation (NSDF) and Mahila Milan and together they are known as the Alliance” (Jagdale, 2014). The various policy approaches towards housing crisis and slum growth has been summarized in Fig. 6, which proposes increased community participation as an inclusivity component to the existing policies (Fig. 7). Therefore, the need is to devise a policy framework which is both inclusive and participatory. “Developments in methods of policy analysis as well as developments in policy practice show a shift from a unicentral, analytical, scientific approach to a more multicentral, interactive stakeholder approach” (Geurts & Joldersma, 2001). “Community Participation” has been a critical element in devising solutions to major urban issues related to community development (Agbola, 1994), water management(Akbar, Minnery, van Horen, & Smith, 2007; Kyessi, 2005), provision of infrastructure (Ibem, 2009) as well as other development processes (Abbott, 2013). The definition of participation are numerous and varied throughout literature. Oakley (1991) defined participation as “an active and dynamic form which enables people to play an increasing role in development activities”. According to him, “participation encourages efficiency, self-reliance and coverage,
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
9
Fig. 5. Cause and effect diagram showing impact of housing policies.
which in turn foster development”. Arnstein (1969) and Choguill (1996) suggested a hierarchical ladder of participation which develops a base for user participation in development. There are numerous evidences of successful outcomes of community participation in developing countries e.g. Baan Mankong in Thailand (Archer, 2012; Boonyabancha, 2005), Durban in South Africa (Patel, 2013), Kitale in Kenya (Majale, 2008), and Hyderabad and Visakhapatanam in India (Asthana, 1994; Rakodi, 1989). The slums, in spite of being haphazard and filthy, have continued to serve the purpose of housing for a large section of
population in Mumbai. Housing for the poor is not only about shelter, but it also affects their economic patterns. Often the rehabilitation schemes have been criticized for disturbing the economic self-sufficiency of the slums; and the better living conditions have been seen as being juxtaposed as added burdens on the rehabilitated population. The top down approach needs to be replaced with bottom up approach where the slum dwellers have the major role in planning their resettlement with the developers and come out with a beneficial approach for both of them. The alternative approach is illustrated in Fig. 8.
10
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
Fig. 6. Demography and housing policies in Mumbai. Source: Author's compilation
9. Conclusion
Fig. 7. Approaches towards housing policy making. Source: Authors' compilation
Fig. 8. Alternative approach in housing policy. Source: Authors' compilation
Housing crisis and slum growth have continued to be major concern areas of developing cities like Mumbai. They have emerged as side effects of the urbanization process and have generated associated problems as well. There have been various policies implemented to solve the situation, initiating from the Bombay Rent Control Act of 1947 till the Cluster Development 2014, but the problem still persist. The switching from one scheme to another has often been questioned. The top-down approach of policy implementation has created a vacuum where the interest of improvement is getting lost. Often the policies reflect the political scenario rather than the real interest of the stakeholders (i.e. the slum dwellers). There are also incidents of the direct stakeholders getting eclipsed behind the interests of the other stakeholders, in this case the private developers. The lack of participation of the direct stakeholders has also kept the policy makers aloof of the actual requirements of the slum dwellers. Though there have been incidents of community participation through the involvement of NGOs, the direct participation is still nascent. Promoting participatory approach can internalize the needs of direct stakeholders and will make the planning more inclusive.
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
Acknowledgement The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewer for the valuable comments and suggestions to improve the quality of the paper. This study is a part of the project titled “Effects of Real Estate Undercurrents on Urban Forms and Its Emergence as Growth Machine in Indian Cities-Study Area Mumbai” funded by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, Plan Grant. References Abbott, J. (2013). Sharing the city: Community participation in urban management. Routledge. Agbola, T. (1994). NGOs and community development in urban areas: a Nigerian case study. Cities, 11(1), 59e67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0264-2751(94)900493. Akbar, H. M. D., Minnery, J. R., van Horen, B., & Smith, P. (2007). Community water supply for the urban poor in developing countries: the case of Dhaka, Bangladesh. Habitat International, 31(1), 24e35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.habitatint.2006.03.001. Anand, N., & Rademacher, A. (2011). Housing in the urban Age: inequality and aspiration in Mumbai. Antipode, 43(5), 1748e1772. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1467-8330.2011.00887.x. Archer, D. (2012). Baan Mankong participatory slum upgrading in Bangkok, Thailand: community perceptions of outcomes and security of tenure. Habitat International, 36(1), 178e184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2011.08.006. Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216e224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 01944366908977225. Asthana, S. (1994). Integrated slum improvement in Visakhapatnam, India: problems and prospects. Habitat International, 18(1), 57e70. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/0197-3975(94)90039-6. Bakore, M. (2007). Urban land ceiling act: Appeal to repeal. Centre for Civil Society. Banerjee-Guha, S. (2002). Shifting cities: urban restructuring in Mumbai. Economic and Political Weekly, 121e128. Barke, M., O' Hare, G., & Abbott, D. (1998). A review of slum housing policies in Mumbai. Cities, 15(4), 269e283. Baud, I. S. A., Pfeffer, K., Sridharan, N., & Nainan, N. (2009). Matching deprivation mapping to urban governance in three Indian mega-cities. Habitat International, 33(4), 365e377. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2008.10.024. Bharucha, N. (August 10, 2014). Mumbai's slum rehabilitation scheme: slum dwellers short changed by politician-builder nexus. The Times of India. Boonyabancha, S. (2005). Baan Mankong: going to scale with “slum” and squatter upgrading in Thailand. Environment and Urbanization, 17(1), 21e46. Bredenoord, J., & van Lindert, P. (2010). Pro-poor housing policies: rethinking the potential of assisted self-help housing. Habitat International, 34(3), 278e287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2009.12.001. Burra, S. (2005). Towards a pro-poor framework for slum upgrading in Mumbai, India. Environment and Urbanization, 17(1), 67e88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 095624780501700106. Choguill, C. L. (1993). Housing policy trends in Bangladesh: Meeting the needs of a low-income population. Cities, 10(4), 326e336. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/02642751(93)90004-3. Choguill, M. B. G. (1996). A ladder of community participation for underdeveloped countries. Habitat International, 20(3), 431e444. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/01973975(96)00020-3. Choguill, C. L. (2007). The search for policies to support sustainable housing. Habitat International, 31(1), 143e149. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2006.12.001. Das, P. K. (2003). Slums: the continuing struggle for housing. In S. Patel, & J. Masselos (Eds.), Bombay to Mumbai. Oxford University Press. Deshmukh, M. S. (2013). Conditions of slum population of major sub-urban wards of Mumbai in Maharashtra. Geurts, J. L. A., & Joldersma, C. (2001). Methodology for participatory policy analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 128(2), 300e310. Godbole, M. (1999). Outdated rent laws and investment in housing. Economic and Political Weekly, 34(7), 387e390. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4407646. Government of Maharashtra. (1947). The Bombay rents, hotels and lodging house rent control act, 1947 (Bombay). Government of Maharashtra. (1956). The slum areas (Improvement and clearance) act, 1956. Government of Maharashtra. (1971). The Maharashtra slum areas (Improvement and redevelopment) act, 1971 (Bombay). Government of Maharashtra. (1975). The Maharashtra vacant lands (Prohibition of unauthorized occupation and summary eviction ) act, 1975 (Bombay). Ibem, E. O. (2009). Community-led infrastructure provision in low-income urban communities in developing countries: a study on Ohafia, Nigeria. Cities, 26(3), 125e132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2009.02.001. Jagdale, R. H. (2014). An overview of slum rehabilitation schemes in Mumbai, India (Master of Science in Engineering). The University of Texas Austin. Retrieved from: http://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/bitstream/handle/2152/26620/
11
JAGDALE-MASTERSREPORT-2014.pdf?sequence¼1. Jones, B. D. (2002). Bounded rationality and public policy: herbert A. Simon and the decisional foundation of collective choice. Policy Sciences, 35(3), 269e284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1021341309418. Karandikar, P. N. (2010). Chawls: Analysis of a middle class housing type in Mumbai, India. Iowa State University (Paper 11777). Kit, O., Lüdeke, M., & Reckien, D. (2012). Texture-based identification of urban slums in Hyderabad, India using remote sensing data. Applied Geography, 32(2), 660e667. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.07.016. Kohli, D., Sliuzas, R., Kerle, N., & Stein, A. (2012). An ontology of slums for imagebased classification. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 36(2), 154e163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2011.11.001. Kyessi, A. G. (2005). Community-based urban water management in fringe neighbourhoods: the case of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Habitat International, 29(1), 1e25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0197-3975(03)00059-6. Majale, M. (2008). Employment creation through participatory urban planning and slum upgrading: the case of Kitale, Kenya. Habitat International, 32(2), 270e282. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2007.08.005. Mayer, I. S., van Daalen, C. E., & Bots, P. W. G. (2004). Perspectives on policy analyses: a framework for understanding and design. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 4(2), 169e191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/ IJTPM.2004.004819. Mukhija, V. (2001). Enabling slum redevelopment in Mumbai: policy Paradox in practice. Housing Studies, 16(6), 791e806. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 02673030120090548. Mukhija, V. (2004). The contradictions in enabling private developers of affordable housing: a cautionary case from Ahmedabad, India. Urban Studies, 41(11), 2231e2244. Nijman, J. (2008). Against the odds: slum rehabilitation in neoliberal Mumbai. Cities, 25(2), 73e85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2008.01.003. Oakley, P. (1991). The concept of participation in development. Landscape and Urban Planning, 20(1e3), 115e122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(91)90100-Z. Pacione, M. (2006). Mumbai. Cities, 23(3), 229e238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.cities.2005.11.003. Patel, S. B. (1996). Slum rehabilitation in Mumbai: possible if done Differently. Economic and Political Weekly, 31(18), 1047e1050. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/ 4404081. Patel, K. (2013). A successful slum upgrade in Durban: a case of formal change and informal continuity. Habitat International, 40(0), 211e217. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.05.005. Patel, Koizumi, N., & Crooks, A. (2014). Measuring slum severity in Mumbai and Kolkata: a household-based approach. Habitat International, 41(0), 300e306. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.09.002. Praja Foundation. (2014). Report on the state of affordable housing in Mumbai. Praja Foundation. Pugh, C. (1989). The World Bank and urban shelter in Bombay. Habitat International, 13(3), 23e49. Raiser, S. (2005). Emerging patterns of the global city Region: Spatial changes in ~o Paulo. Osteuropa-Inst. Johannesburg, Mumbai-Bombay, Shanghai and Sa Rakodi, C. (1989). Self-help housing: the debate and examples: upgrading in Lusaka, Zambia and Hyderabad, India. Habitat International, 13(4), 5e18. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/0197-3975(89)90034-9. Ramanathan, U. (2005). Demolition Drive. Rishbud, N. (2003). The case of Mumbai, India. In Understanding slums: case studies for the global report on human settlements. London: UN- Habitat. Roy, D., Lees, M. H., Palavalli, B., Pfeffer, K., & Sloot, M. A. P. (2014). The emergence of slums: a contemporary view on simulation models. Environmental Modelling & Software, 59(0), 76e90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.05.004. SBUT. (2014). Saifee Burhani Upliftment project. from http://www.sbut.com/glimpse. html. Simon, H. A. (1972). Theories of bounded rationality. Decision and organization, 1(1), 161e176. Sivam, A., & Karuppannan, S. (2002). Role of state and market in housing delivery for low-income groups in India. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 17(1), 69e88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1014831817503. Stecko, S., & Barber, N. (2007). Exposing Vulnerabilities:Monsoon Floods in Mumbai, India: Case study prepared for Revisiting Urban Planning:Global Report on Human Settlements 2007. United Nations. Available at: http://www.unhabitat.org/grhs/ 2007. € ck, H., & Kraff, N. J. (2014). The physical face of slums: a structural comTaubenbo parison of slums in Mumbai, India, based on remotely sensed data. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 29(1), 15e38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10901-013-9333-x. UNHSP. (2003). The Challenge of slums. global report on human settlement 2003. UNHabitat. UNSP. (1996). An urbanizing world, global report on human settlements. Oxford Publishers. Watson, V. (2009). ‘The planned city sweeps the poor away…’: urban planning and 21st century urbanisation. Progress in Planning, 72(3), 151e193. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2009.06.002. Whitehead, J. (2008). Rent gaps, revanchism and regimes of accumulation in Mumbai. Anthropologica, 269e282.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Habitat International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/habitatint
Mumbai slums since independence: Evaluating the policy outcomes Ronita Bardhan a, Sayantani Sarkar a, Arnab Jana a, *, Nagendra R. Velaga b a b
Centre for Urban Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai 400076, India Civil Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai 400076, India
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 8 May 2015 Received in revised form 24 June 2015 Accepted 16 July 2015 Available online xxx
The urbanization process in Mumbai is closely integrated with housing crisis and informality in settlement growth. Slums have emerged as a significant settlement form, catering to the housing demand of a large section of the population of Mumbai, primarily for the urban poor. Statistics show that nearly half of the Mumbai population lives in slum areas which in turn spatially occupy a very small portion of the city. Since 1947 (i.e., after independence), a range of policies related to housing and slums have been implemented at various points of time in the city planning framework. However, the housing crisis situation has worsened over time and resulted in further slum growth. In the past, research has concentrated on spatio-temporal identification and spread of slums. However, the policy impacts on reduction of slums is relatively a less touched area, especially in developing cities like Mumbai. In this study, authors argue that the housing and land policies implemented in Mumbai to solve the problem of slums have actually provided the momentum to the undercurrents that fuel further proliferation of informality. The paper analyses these policies chronologically and focuses on the persuasive top down approach of policy implementation. Using the framework of bounded rationality, authors develop a “cause-effect” model to identify the impact of ten major housing and land policies implemented since independence. Further, a gap coherence analysis revealed the lack of participation of direct stakeholders (i.e., the slum dwellers). The study proposes participatory approach as an alternative to the current policy frameworks. Internalizing the strengths of the actual users in the policy framework may unlock the opportunities for the success of the policies. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Slums Undercurrent Policy Participation
1. Introduction The inability of the federated “State” to meet the growing housing demand for population has emerged as a major crisis in Indian metro cities such as Mumbai. In spite of various policy based efforts to reduce the housing demand gap, the dilemma still persists. Mumbai has been the financial capital of India as well as the largest urban agglomeration of the country. The city has attracted a large population from different parts of the country both informal and informal sectors. During 1960s the industrialization phase of Mumbai had been coupled with huge immigration of low skilled labor force in to the city. These workers were predominantly poor and the only choice of affordable shelter available to them was the slums. A glaring evidence of this failure has been the mushrooming of informal settlement, commonly known as slums, in Mumbai.
* Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (R. Bardhan), sayantani64@gmail. com (S. Sarkar), [email protected] (A. Jana), [email protected] (N.R. Velaga). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.07.009 0197-3975/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Slums have been an integral part of urbanization process of Mumbai and are invoked as an iconic example in the twenty-first century (Anand & Rademacher, 2011). Census of India defines slums as “residential areas where dwellings are unfit for human habitation by reasons of dilapidation, overcrowding, faulty arrangements and design of such buildings, narrowness or faulty arrangement of street, lack of ventilation, light, or sanitation facilities or any combination of these factors which are detrimental to the safety and health”. The slums are further classified into three heads (as per Census of India): (1) notified slums, (2) recognized slums and (3) identified slums. a. Notified slums-All notified areas in a town or city notified as ‘Slum’ by State, Union Territory (UT) Administration or Local Government under any Act including a ‘Slum Act’. b. Recognized slums-All areas recognized as ‘Slum’ by State, UT Administration or Local Government, Housing and Slum Boards, which may have not been formally notified as slum under any act.
2
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
c. Identified slums e A compact area of at least 300 populations or about 60e70 households of poorly built congested tenements, in unhygienic environment usually with inadequate infrastructure and lacking in proper sanitary and drinking water facilities. These slums accommodate the urban poor who also seek accommodation in “chawls”(explained in subsequent section) or live as pavement dwellers. Though the living conditions of both the “chawls” and the pavement dwellers are similar to that of the slums, but by definition these cannot be considered as same. Thus, it becomes self-explanatory that the slums cannot be considered as a livable habitat. A general tendency of a “planned city” has been to exclude the poor (i.e. major urban planning policies tend towards removal of informality from the urban space for efficient planning (Watson, 2009)). Slums are generally looked upon as seedbeds for crime and are considered mandatory to be evicted to make the cities livable and safe (UNSP, 1996). Such measures have also been witnessed in most of the initial planning policies of Mumbai. Efforts to remove vulnerability from urban spaces have often translated to displacement of these slums if not their complete eradication (Stecko & Barber, 2007). As Mumbai moves toward becoming a global city, providing shelter will remain a major challenge. As per Census 2001, more than half of the city's population lived in the slums; it has seen a marginal decrease to 41.9% in the last decade. The distribution of slum population in different wards of Mumbai shows that majority of the wards have more than 50% of the population living in slums (see Fig 1). The stacked chart in Fig. 1 shows the proportion of slum population to the total population of the wards. Such distribution does not follow any regular pattern and is highly dispersed in the form of slum pockets throughout the city. In other words, in every part of the city there is some kind of slum development. The provision of shelter has been considered to be the responsibility of the Government. The Indian Constitution also provides land, housing, urban development and provision of civic infrastructure as State subjects, and are under direct jurisdiction of State Government. As far as the question of affordability is concerned, the higher income groups have plethora of choices. With the housing loans provided by the banks and the financial institutes, it caters to the middle income households' housing demands. However, housing emerges as a problem for the lower income groups (LIG) and the economically weaker section (EWS), which constitute the urban poor class. According to Choguill (1993), though historically housing has been regarded as a non-productive investment and an individual responsibility, provision of housing for the poor has been taken up to be the responsibility of the State. As stated earlier, there have been many policies formulated and implemented in the last six decades to solve this problem, but the attainment of success can hardly be claimed. The crisis still persists; and in many cases has accelerated after the policy implementation. The present study highlights the impact of various policy initiatives on the housing issues, especially that of slums, in Mumbai. Existing research on Indian slums mostly focus on spatiotemporal identification and its spatial spread; however, understanding the policy impacts on reduction of slums is relatively less studied. This is especially true for developing cities like Mumbai (Bakore, 2007). In a study by Kit, Lüdeke, and Reckien (2012), they attempted identification of slum areas in Hyderabad (one of the metropolitan cities in India) using “lacunarity” based pattern € ck and Kraff (2014) studied the recognition. Similarly, Taubenbo slums from morphological point of view and identified the physical features of slums in Mumbai. Kohli, Sliuzas, Kerle, and Stein (2012) tried to amalgamate the general indicators of settlement types at three spatial levels namely environment, settlement and objects.
Fig. 1. Ward wise distribution of Slum population (in percentage). Note: Alphabets within the polygons depict respective ward name. Source: Adapted from Census of India 2011.
The indicators considered location and neighborhood characteristics for environment; shape and density of the settlement; and access network and building characteristic for object spatial level. Baud, Pfeffer, Sridharan, and Nainan (2009) identified hot spots of poverty clustering in different degrees besides the slum area, in Indian metropolitan cities like Mumbai, Delhi and Chennai. Patel, Koizumi, and Crooks (2014) estimated the total number of slum households in Mumbai and Kolkata based on a new criterion Slum Severity Index and found that there is an existing gap between identification of slums by the Census of India and United Nation (UN) Habitat in Mumbai and Kolkata. They concluded that the Census categories might not be fruitful for urban planning and policymaking. Roy, Lees, Palavalli, Pfeffer, and Sloot (2014) devised a new technique called slumulation to model the informal growth
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
pattern based on factors like local politics, local topology, street pattern and role of informal economy. The basic question, which needs to be answered here, is that why has a city like Mumbai continued to have slums in spite of multiple policy initiatives and considerable investments from the government. The paper continues as follows: In the first section, authors discuss about the nature and character of slums in Mumbai. The next section illustrates the historical growth of Mumbai and the relevant literature related to the issues of housing, affordability and slums at global and national levels. Section 3 elaborates on the various policies of housing and slums in Mumbai, chronologically. In section 4, authors further analyze the policies to find the missing link in the planning process and provide suggestive measures for further planning and it is followed by concluding remarks. 2. Mumbai's growth and initiation of informal settlement Mumbai grew from a cluster of seven islands to a port. It is only after the growth of the cotton textile industry in 19th century that it began to evolve as an economic node. “The major force underlying Bombay's population growth in the 19th century was industrialization and in particular the employment demands of the cotton textile industry” (Pacione, 2006). As cotton textile industry needed huge supply of labor, which led to migration towards the growing industrial region. “The majority of the work force was made up of migrants from outlying districts of Maharashtra including Satara, Sangli, Kolhapur and the Konkan coast, with a smaller number migrating from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar” (Whitehead, 2008). The economy was further augmented by the discovery of petroleum in 1970s along its coast, which led to the growth of petro-chemical industries. However, over immigration stressed the existing housing stocks. Initially, the migration was only male centric and the housing pattern was designed as such. The one-room tenements called “chawls” solely serve the purpose of single dwelling. But, later when the entire families migrated to the city, the pressure increased and the living conditions worsened. There exists a fine line between the living conditions of “chawls” and slums in Mumbai. “Chawls are buildings with one or two room units of not more than two hundred square feet attached by a common corridor with shared toilets on each floor” (Karandikar, 2010). The “chawls” were initially built to rent out to the industrial/mill workers which later degenerated into slum like conditions. Besides the “chawls” and slums, a third category of informality that exists in the city is the growing number of “pavement dwellers”. As such Mumbai can be taken as an example of a dual city (Raiser, 2005), where the slums and squatters along with the skyscrapers are the two mutually dependent sides of globalization. 3. Housing policies in India: a background Slums can be regarded as the result of the policies and plans with failed motives. “In general, slums are the products of failed policies, bad governance, corruption, inappropriate regulations, dysfunctional land markets, unresponsive financial systems and a fundamental lack of political will” (UNHSP, 2003). The UN has identified five indicators of deprivation related to housing viz, lack
Fig. 2. Phases of housing policies. Source: Authors' interpretation based on Choguill (2007).
3
of durable housing, sufficient living space, access to improved drinking water, access to improved sanitation and secured tenure. The provision of housing for the urban poor has emerged as a principal challenge of the Governments in the rapidly urbanizing (developing) nations. They are faced with the twofold responsibility of (1) improving the quality of housing in the existing slum and squatter settlements and (2) providing land and housing to those without shelter (Bredenoord & van Lindert, 2010). With the emergence of the neo e liberal approaches and the overwhelming dominance of the market led forces, the housing sector has come under the gamut of the private investors. According to Choguill (1993), “Government policies directed at actually providing housing were in turn inappropriate to stimulate private sector efforts which might have alleviated the seriousness of housing shortage”. Choguill (2007) has again classified the housing policies into three phases. The first phase dealt with construction of more public housings. During the second phase the emphasis shifted to selfhelp and finally in the third phase adopted enablement strategy. It is summarized in Fig. 2. The triangles in the above diagram symbolize the gaps in the schemes implemented. The gap in the first phase refers to the houses built that did not reach the poor and their needs remained unfulfilled. In the second phase, though the emphasis was on generating housing through self-help, it proved to be a very expensive endeavor. Finally, according to Choguill (2007), the emphasis was shifted to enablement approach, where individual nations could develop policies to solve their indigenous problems and that the effort will be on removing the bottleneck so that the housing schemes can be smoothly implemented. Ironically, though the national housing policy of India identifies shelter as a basic human need, there had been no comprehensive plan for housing till 1988 in the country (The first National Housing Scheme was introduced in 1988). Initially all the policies had an ad hoc piecemeal population base, targeted to selected sections of the society only. In the First Five Years Plan, the government focused in providing housing for the LIGs, with schemes like Housing Scheme for Industrial Workers (1952), Housing for Low Income Group (1954) and Housing Scheme for Plantation Workers (1952). With the Second Five Year Plan the focus shifted to slums, their improvement and resettlement. Until the fifth plan period from 1974 to 79, the emphasis was only on certain weaker sections of the society. From the Sixth plan period onwards, the community development programmes were promoted with active role of the non-profit organizations. After liberalization of Indian Economy in the nineties, (i.e., from the Eighth plan onwards) the market forces gained more importance and the role of the State was transformed from a provider to that of an enabler (Mukhija, 2004). Though the housing needs were truly given recognition after 40 years of independence, the requirements of the LIGs and the EWSs were hardly met. The National Housing Policy of 1988 was more inclined towards the housing provisions for the higher and the middleincome section. In 1994 this Housing policy was revised with the aim to provide affordable housing for all in the country and strengthen the enabling strategies (Sivam & Karuppannan, 2002). Both public and private sector provide housing in India
4
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
Fig. 3. Methodology.
contributing 16 and 84% respectively. The private sector is active in both the formal and informal categories of housing. The formal housing stocks are unaffordable for the economically weaker section and hence they are provided with the informal housing stocks in the form of slums. The inability of the Government to see housing as a major economic sector has resulted in the absence of any financial structure until 1970. The Housing and Urban Development Corporation (HUDCO) was created in 1970 for providing financial assistance to the LIGs for augmenting the housing stock. Other important contributors to housing finance are Housing Development and Financial Corporation and Life Insurance Company. In 1988 the National Housing Bank was set up as a subsidiary of the Reserve Bank of India to finance housing schemes (Sivam & Karuppannan, 2002). Presently, the Government of India has allowed 100% foreign direct investment (FDI) in the housing sector for funding various building projects. This has generated a momentum among private players in the housing sector. 4. Data and methodology This study considers a theoretical approach towards critical analysis of the land and housing policies in Mumbai. The paper analyses these policies chronologically and focuses on the persuasive top down approach of policy implementation. “Rationality denotes a style of behavior that is appropriate to the achievement of given goals within the limits imposed by given conditions and constraints” (Simon, 1972). Therefore, using the framework of bounded rationality authors develop a “cause-effect” model to identify the impact of ten major housing and land policies implemented since independence (Jones, 2002).
Fig. 4. Chronology of Housing Policies implemented in Mumbai. Source: Authors
According to Mayer, van Daalen, and Bots (2004), “Policy should come about epreferably- in neat phases, from preparation to execution, with support through research in each phase”. The study follows a close analysis of each phase of housing policy planning in Mumbai. The methodology is illustrated in Fig. 3. Ten policies related to housing and land development, in the post-independent era, are selected for this study. The policies are classified into four categories namely- (i) land and housing, (ii) related to clearance and eviction, (iii) up-gradation and redevelopment, and (iv) recent initiatives. Subsequently the effect of each policy is examined individually based on its year of implementation, objectives and its impact on the housing crisis and slum growth. Further, the policies and the respective impacts are analyzed chronologically, in sequential organization chart illustrating the individual cause and its corresponding effects. (see Fig. 3) The policies are taken as the causes and their effects are defined on the basis of their individual impact on the housing sector and slums in Mumbai. These effects define the persistence of slums in the city. The effects of other factors (e. g demographic), have been mentioned which affect both the causes and the effects individually as a well as collectively. One of the major objectives of this study is to identify the gap in policy making, indicated through the failures of several policies adopted since independence, on the housing poverty in Mumbai. This is the missing link in the planning process. Based on the gap identified the study provides an alternative approach towards inclusive planning. This study attempts to extend upon Choguill's (2007) “Three-phases of sustainable housing policies” in context of Mumbai by incorporating an additional step to realize the robustness of the housing policies in developing countries.
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
5. Housing policies in Mumbai As stated earlier, based on the approach of formulation, the policies are classified into four groups. The first group consists of the two major policies implemented by the Central government e the Rent Control Act (1947) and the Urban Land Ceiling Act (1976). The second group consists of the Slum Improvement and Clearance Act (1956), The Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act (1971) and the Maharashtra Vacant Land (Prohibition of Unauthorized Structure and Summary Eviction) Act (1975), all primarily motivated towards the removal of slums from urban areas. The third group has the policies, which were intended to the development of slum areas, and these are the Slum Upgradation Programme (1985), the Prime Minister's Grant Project (1985), Slum Redevelopment Scheme (1991) and the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme (1995). Finally, the last group has the schemes like the Rajiv Awas Yojna (2013) and Cluster Redevelopment Projects (2014), which are the recent initiatives in housing policies. Effects of these recent initiatives are yet to be traced. The chronological sequence of the policies is illustrated in Fig. 4. 5.1. Policies related to land and housing a. The Bombay Rent Control Act of 1947
Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective Impact
1947 State government Fix the housing rents at the 1940 levels Negative impact on investment pattern on rental housing Landlords lost interest for improvement and up-gradation of existing housing stocks Property taxes adversely affected
The earliest and the most influential policies related to housing in Mumbai was the Rent Control Act of 1947 (Government of Maharashtra, 1947). Pertaining to the increasing demand for housing and infrastructure by the military during the Second World War, Government introduced the law ensuring the interests of the tenants and fixed the rent at the 1940 levels. Though this was initially a temporary enactment, in due course of time, it became permanent. The Act proved to be very beneficial for the tenants, but went against the landlords and owners of the properties as the latter lost their interest to create newer stocks for housing or even invest in maintaining the existing stock. Thus, the quality of the tenements became highly compromised due to lack of maintenance and upgradation. “Supply continued to fall below demand and need, resulting in further crowding in the crumbling tenements and an expansion of squatter settlements” (Pugh, 1989). It came upon the government to undertake the maintenance of these buildings. A separate body was constituted and entrusted with the task of maintenance by imposing cess (a form of tax) on the buildings. As the rental stocks became restricted, the housing became unaffordable, especially for the urban poor. This gap can be taken as a driving force behind the flourishing of informal settlements like slums and squatters in the city. Moreover, the Rent Control Act also affected the property tax collection by the state. Though, in 1997, the Supreme Court directed to change the Rent Control Act, there was only 5% hike in the rents from 1998 onwards (Godbole, 1999). b. Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1976
Year of implementation: Implementing authority Objective:
Impact:
5
1976 Central government Restriction on ownership and possession of urban land Use excess land for housing urban poor Over manipulation of act ruined its motive Supply of land was negatively affected
The Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act came up in 1976 for 64 urban agglomerations across the country. The primary objective of this act was to put restrictions on ownership and possession of urban land beyond a set threshold, which in case of metro cities like Mumbai was 500 sq. m (5382 sq. feet) per owner (Bakore, 2007). This gave government the opportunity to create land banks from the excess land for preparing a healthy land market. In lieu of the excess land, compensation was to be provided. However, the nonstandardized low rates of compensation demotivated the landowners to declare their lands as surplus. Inefficient dissemination of compensation to landowners led to multiple public litigation cases against the State in the court of law. The systematic delays in the judiciary have led to pending of many of these cases even till date. Moreover, the excessive manipulation due to sloppy exemption clauses added up to the failure of the Act to serve its basic purpose. The supply of land was adversely affected which led to astronomical increase in the land prices, thus making the housing prices more unaffordable. 5.2. Policies related to clearance and eviction a. The Slum Area Improvement and Clearance Act, 1956
Year of implementation: Implementing authority Objective: Impact:
1956 State government Possible improvement and demolition of buildings and slum areas Slums on private land were negatively affected Lack of any resettlement plan for the evicted population
The Slum Area Improvement and Clearance Act of 1956 (Government of Maharashtra, 1956)identified the slum areas as places where the buildings a. Are in any respect unfit for human habitation; or b. Are by reasons of dilapidation, overcrowding, faulty arrangement and design of such buildings, narrowness or faulty arrangement of streets, lack of ventilation, light or sanitation facilities, or any combination of these factors, are detrimental to safety, health or morals. There were provisions for possible improvement and demolition of the buildings as well as that of clearance and redevelopment of the slum areas. The act did not mention about the resettlement plans of the evicted households. This was a major gap in the planning process as without any resettlement plan the easiest option open to the evicted households was to settle in other slum areas or create new slums. Hence, on one hand the Act ensured clearance of urban land; on the other hand it triggered the slum growth further.
6
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
b. The Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971
Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective: Impact:
1971 State government Possible improvement and demolition of buildings and slum areas Slums on private land were negatively affected Resettlement into informal areas triggered the slum growth further
This Act took a more humanitarian approach towards slum improvement undertaking the resettlement of the evicted households in case of building demolition or slum clearance. It recommended the improvement of slums in terms of drainage and water supply, sanitation, better roads, street lighting, public amenities, health and other important factors (Government of Maharashtra, 1971). Most of the resettlements were informal in nature and located in the peripheral areas of the cities. This related to the growth of slums in the outskirts of the city like Govandi Slum (with 95 percent of slum population) in M-East ward (see Fig. 1) (Deshmukh, 2013). However, improvement was focused on the slums on government land only while the private landowners continued to evict the slum areas without any plans for resettlement. The private landowners also approached the court of law against the notification of private land as slums. The Act was further amended in 2001 where it included the slum and pavement dwellers who had their names on the electoral roll on 1January 1995, for no eviction without rehabilitation (Burra, 2005). c. The Maharashtra Vacant Land (Prohibition of Unauthorized Structure and Summary Eviction) Act, 1975
Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective: Impact:
1975 State government Clear vacant lands from any kind of encroachment Wide scale eviction of slums and squatters Slums on private land more affected
According to this Act, “No person shall, on or after the appointment date, occupy any vacant land or continue to in occupation of any vacant land in urban area or erect any shelter or enclose or other structure on such land for the purpose of residence or otherwise without the express permission in writing of the Municipal Commissioner in a corporation area, of the Chief in a Municipal area and elsewhere, of the Collector, or except in accordance with any law for the time being in force in such urban area”(Government of Maharashtra, 1975). The Act also states that in cases of contravention the Competent Authority “….may by order requires such person to vacate the land ….and to remove all property there from and if such person fails to comply with the order …., he may be summarily evicted from such land ….” (Government of Maharashtra, 1975). This Act led to wide scale eviction of slums and squatters, which were identified as being encroachments. The Act does not mention anything about the relocation of the evicted households and hence like the above-mentioned Acts, we find a major gap in the planning process too. It should be noted that the slums or the squatters grow because they fulfill the basic need of housing for the urban poor, which the State fails to provide. Any large scale clearance and eviction process makes a large section of these people houseless. Lack of supporting resettlement policies make them desperate to take shelter in the
other slums or they become pavement dwellers. These processes seriously damage their livelihood as their occupations are largely driven by the selection of their housing location. Either they are located near to their workplaces or the slums themselves get established as an economic centre. In case of eviction, both the occupational structures get heavily affected. On an average a slum dweller family spends INR 30,000 to 50,000 in constructing their house, due to demolition (Das, 2003). Special mention can be made of the verdict given by the Supreme Court of Indian against the eviction of illegal settlements in the Olga Tellis vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation court case in 1985, where the Supreme court identified the relation between habitation and livelihood (Ramanathan, 2005). This can be regarded as the initiation of the in situ slum improvement schemes. 5.3. Policies related to upgradation and redevelopment a. Slum Upgradation Programme (SUP), 1985
Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective: Impact:
1985 State government Provide shelter opportunity for the marginalized section through bank loans Lack of dissemination of information to stakeholders Selective impact Stalled due to Political system change
The slum upgradation programme was introduced as part of the Bombay Urban Development Project, in collaboration with the World Bank. It was joined by another similar programme called the Low Income Group Shelter Programme. The basic motive of SUP was to provide renewable lease of land to the slum cooperative societies for a period of 30 years. It would provide loans to the slum dwellers at an interest rate of around 12% and also ensure provision of basic amenities on a cost recovery basis. The slums on the private lands and the central government lands were out of the jurisdiction of this programme. Hence the impact of the programme was not as widespread as expected. The State also issued identity passes to the head of the household to prove their eligibility in receiving the leasehold tenure. The impact of the programme was stalled due to switching of the political party at the State level. b. The Prime Minister's Grant Project, 1985 Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective: Impact:
1985 Central government Funding for slum improvement Master plan for Dharavi prepared Houses created for the slum dwellers Gaps in implementation Lack of information
In 1985 a Central grant of INR one billion was announced of which INR 600 million was used for the up-gradation and improvement of Dharavi1 (Barke, O' Hare, & Abbott, 1998). The funds were used to provide housing for the slum dwellers and also to improve conditions of the existing infrastructure. It recommended 30e35000 families to be accommodated within Dharavi
1 Dharavi is the largest slum in India. The annual economic output is estimated to be around 600 million US Dollars to more than one billion US Dollars.
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
and 20,000 families to be relocated outside Dharavi (Mukhija, 2001). Transit camps were set up to temporarily relocate the households during the construction process. There were problems like shortage of transit settlements, delays in construction, lack of awareness among the beneficiaries, higher prices of the newly created housing stocks and manipulation of the beneficiary list by the outsiders. As such the housing stocks remained limited and the idea of affordable housing was not successful. c. Slum Redevelopment Scheme, 1991
Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective:
Impact:
1991 State government Private participation in slum development through incentives Increased FSI for the slums areas allowed vertical extension of built up Rehousing the eligible slum dwellers Lower incentives failed to interest the private developers
The liberalization of the Indian market in 1991-invited largescale foreign investment into the housing sector as well. The ruling party introduced a new scheme called the Slum Redevelopment project, inviting the private investors to take up the job of slum redevelopment. As an incentive the FSI of the slum areas were increased up to 2.5 from 1.33, which encouraged the construction of high-rise buildings. As per the scheme the private developers should carry out in situ redevelopment of the notified slum area by rehousing the slum dwellers into tenements measuring 180 sq. feet (16.72 sq. m) and the rest of the place was available for them to build and sell in open market. This is how the builders were compensated of their cost of construction and resettlement. However, the houses for the slum dwellers were not free, and they had to pay a certain part of the construction cost. Also there was an added criterion of eligibility, where the slum dweller had to establish his duration of stay in the existing from before that of 1985. This cut-off date made a large section of the slum population ineligible for getting rehousing facility and there was no alternative measures recommended for the ineligible section. Also the scheme failed to attract the interest of the private developers and all in all, the scheme was criticized for inefficiency (Rishbud, 2003). The success of the scheme depended on high property rates, to benefit large developers and builders who thus became instrumental in evacuating slums from prime lands of the city (Banerjee-Guha, 2002). Although, there is a general consensus among the researchers that Slum Redevelopment is a failure, empirical evidences to it are largely lacking. d. Slum Rehabilitation Scheme, 1995
Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective: Impact:
1995 State government Private participation in slum development through incentives Slum rehabilitation authority was formed More incentives for private developers, through TDRs
A modified version of the Slum Redevelopment Scheme (SRS) was brought up by the newly elected party in 1995. Following the recommendations of the Afzalpurkar Committee (1995), a separate
7
body called Slum Rehabilitation Authority was set up to exclusively look into the matters related to slum resettlement. Thereby three types of rehabilitations were recommended, viz. In Situ, Project Affected People (PAP) and Permanent Transit Tenement (PTT). The year of eligibility criterion was raised to 1995 and recently to 2000, and the scheme also includes the pavement dwellers. The size of the tenements has been increased to 225 sq feet (20.9 sq. m) to recently to 269 sq. feet (24.99 sq. m). The tenements were made totally free for the slum dwellers. The private developers were provided incentives in the form of free sale component of 7.5 sq. feet for every 10 sq. feet free rehabilitation construction. The sale ratio varied from 1:0.75 in the Inner City to 1:1 in the suburban areas. Since the FSI of the resettlement areas was fixed at 2.5, the additional area was made available in the form of generating Transferable Development Rights. The Slum rehabilitation Scheme is hence driven by the interest of the private developer and the strength of the real estate forces. The scheme of rehabilitation is more inclined towards the interests of the wealthy developers rather than the actual slum population. According to Patel (1996), it is mixture of “admirable and dubious”. The strong market forces favor active rehabilitation and vice versa. The impact also varies with the variation in the local property prices. The developers will be more interested in areas where the sale component can fetch higher prices. Though the SRS scheme seems to be very lucrative, the true statistics fail to establish it as a real success (Das, 2003; Nijman, 2008). Till April 2014, the total number of completed units is 157,402 and 86,069 units are under construction (Praja, 2014). 5.4. Recent initiatives a. Rajiv Awas Yojna, 2012e2022
Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective:
Expected impact:
2012 Central government Improve and provide housing, basic services and social amenities in the slums Reform the causes leading to creation of slums Expand institutional credit to the slums Create affordable housing stock Strengthen institutional and human resource e capacities Community empowerment Slum free India Improvement of all existing slums, notified or non-notified Solution to the affordable housing demand
The primary aim of the Rajiv Awas Yojna (RAY) is to provide financial assistance to the State and Local Governments to provide affordable housing for the urban poor. RAY provides a multi prolonged approach where the prime focus is on, (a) bringing existing slums within the formal system and enabling them to avail of the same level of basic amenities as the rest of the town; (b) redressing the failures of the formal system that lie behind the creation of slums; and (c) tackling the shortage of urban land that keep shelter out of the reach of the urban poor and force them to resort to extra-legal solutions in a bid to retain their sources of livelihood and employment. RAY scheme includes all existing slum areas, notified or non-notified, for development of basic services, health, education, social-security and affordable housing with rental stocks. Till January 2015, 162 projects have been approved in India covering 11towns and cities. However, no
8
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
stocks have been created under RAY in Mumbai or any other place in Maharashtra. RAY also provides for another scheme called the Rajiv Rinn Yojna to provide enhanced credit support to the EIGs and LIGs.
slums which cater the housing needs of such a huge population mass have also become indispensable for the city. The slums have continued to provide them shelter as well as economic selfsufficiency. Fig. 5 summarizes the demographic character discussed above.
b. Cluster Redevelopment, 2014 8. Discussion Year of implementation Implementing authority Objective: Expected impact:
2014 State government Urban renewal of the old buildings Creation of new economic hot spots Rejuvenation of the old maladroit areas of the city
One of the most recent schemes introduced in Mumbai is that of cluster redevelopment where the old and dilapidated and cessed buildings of more than 40 years old and having a minimum area of 4000 sq. m. as well as slum areas would be redeveloped. The FSI of the Urban Renewable Clusters would be increased to 4 and the redevelopment can be carried out by Government bodies (like MHADA,2 MCGM3), local comminutes or private developers. The project has been initiated with the redevelopment of Bhendi Bazar area in South Mumbai with an area of 16acres (1 acre ¼ 4047 sq. m.). The Bhendi Bazaar project aims towards transformation of the old densely packed urban market area to a modern neighborhood through the construction of around 250 skyscrapers for around 3200 households. The project entails the improvement of existing living conditions through the provision of better housing and modern urban amenities to around 20,000 people living here (SBUT, 2014). 6. Summary of the policies The chronology of the policies and the impacts have been summarized in Fig. 5. 7. Visible impact of the policies The above figure shows that various policies have been implemented from time to time to solve the housing crisis in Mumbai. However, none of them have been truly fruitful in delivering any comprehensive solution. Rather these policies in turn themselves provided the undercurrents for the further crisis and slum growth in the city. As discussed earlier, the factor of migration is inextricably related with housing crisis in the city. A large portion of this immigrant population is composed of unskilled laborers who migrate in search of higher pays and better living and end up being added to the urban poor class. The trend of migration to the city shows that till 1980, total migration to the city exceeded the natural increase. It means that migration was the major contributor to the growth of city's population. However, after 1980 the migration trend fell below the natural increase of the population. This phenomenon can be interpreted as the then migrants are now adding to the city population through natural increase. In other words, it is now the second or third generation of the migrants living in the cities. This is also true about the following generation of the urban poor class, who live in the slums. Hence, they are no longer are migrant population living in the slums areas, but have been absorbed by the city. As such the
2 3
MHADA e Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority. MCGM e Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai.
The paper relates the slums and their growth in the light of the various policies that have been adapted in Mumbai till date. From the initiation of the housing policies in Mumbai, there have been gaps left which have played their roles to aggravate the housing problem rather than solving it. Fig. 4 summarizes the causes and effects of the policies as they were implemented chronologically till date. It tries to provide a holistic view of the housing policies in the Mumbai. The gaps left in each stage led to the initiation of a new policy to deal with the housing crisis, but none of them provided any integrated solution. The phenomenon of migration has continued to add to the population of the city. The basic aspiration of migrating to city like Mumbai is to live a better life and it initiates from having a good shelter. However, the inability of the city to create adequate shelter opportunities for its people hampers with the urban growth process. The housing industry, nowadays, targets mainly the higher incomes groups with luxury villas and apartments. “Some of Mumbai's most ultra-luxurious towers (with swimming pools in apartments) have come up on slum lands even as slum families are rehabilitated and pushed in a small corner of the plot in dinghy buildings” (Bharucha, 2014). Though the SRS has created accommodations for the urban poor, much more still needs to be done. Another important issue to be noted here is that none of the policies devised so far mentioned any kind of participation from the real stakeholders (i.e. the slum dwellers). These policies were more based on the discretion of the State and the other associated bodies who decided upon the matters of clearance and improvement. Later, the matter was handed to the private developers who took the task of redevelopment and rehabilitation. As such the interest of the real stakeholders becomes highly eclipsed and the housing problem remains unsolved. Though some community driven rehabilitation projects have been undertaken by NGOs and housing cooperatives, where special mention can be made of The Society for Promotion of Area Research Centres popularly known as SPARC. “Since 1996 SPARC has been working in partnership with two community based organizations The National Slum Dwellers Federation (NSDF) and Mahila Milan and together they are known as the Alliance” (Jagdale, 2014). The various policy approaches towards housing crisis and slum growth has been summarized in Fig. 6, which proposes increased community participation as an inclusivity component to the existing policies (Fig. 7). Therefore, the need is to devise a policy framework which is both inclusive and participatory. “Developments in methods of policy analysis as well as developments in policy practice show a shift from a unicentral, analytical, scientific approach to a more multicentral, interactive stakeholder approach” (Geurts & Joldersma, 2001). “Community Participation” has been a critical element in devising solutions to major urban issues related to community development (Agbola, 1994), water management(Akbar, Minnery, van Horen, & Smith, 2007; Kyessi, 2005), provision of infrastructure (Ibem, 2009) as well as other development processes (Abbott, 2013). The definition of participation are numerous and varied throughout literature. Oakley (1991) defined participation as “an active and dynamic form which enables people to play an increasing role in development activities”. According to him, “participation encourages efficiency, self-reliance and coverage,
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
9
Fig. 5. Cause and effect diagram showing impact of housing policies.
which in turn foster development”. Arnstein (1969) and Choguill (1996) suggested a hierarchical ladder of participation which develops a base for user participation in development. There are numerous evidences of successful outcomes of community participation in developing countries e.g. Baan Mankong in Thailand (Archer, 2012; Boonyabancha, 2005), Durban in South Africa (Patel, 2013), Kitale in Kenya (Majale, 2008), and Hyderabad and Visakhapatanam in India (Asthana, 1994; Rakodi, 1989). The slums, in spite of being haphazard and filthy, have continued to serve the purpose of housing for a large section of
population in Mumbai. Housing for the poor is not only about shelter, but it also affects their economic patterns. Often the rehabilitation schemes have been criticized for disturbing the economic self-sufficiency of the slums; and the better living conditions have been seen as being juxtaposed as added burdens on the rehabilitated population. The top down approach needs to be replaced with bottom up approach where the slum dwellers have the major role in planning their resettlement with the developers and come out with a beneficial approach for both of them. The alternative approach is illustrated in Fig. 8.
10
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
Fig. 6. Demography and housing policies in Mumbai. Source: Author's compilation
9. Conclusion
Fig. 7. Approaches towards housing policy making. Source: Authors' compilation
Fig. 8. Alternative approach in housing policy. Source: Authors' compilation
Housing crisis and slum growth have continued to be major concern areas of developing cities like Mumbai. They have emerged as side effects of the urbanization process and have generated associated problems as well. There have been various policies implemented to solve the situation, initiating from the Bombay Rent Control Act of 1947 till the Cluster Development 2014, but the problem still persist. The switching from one scheme to another has often been questioned. The top-down approach of policy implementation has created a vacuum where the interest of improvement is getting lost. Often the policies reflect the political scenario rather than the real interest of the stakeholders (i.e. the slum dwellers). There are also incidents of the direct stakeholders getting eclipsed behind the interests of the other stakeholders, in this case the private developers. The lack of participation of the direct stakeholders has also kept the policy makers aloof of the actual requirements of the slum dwellers. Though there have been incidents of community participation through the involvement of NGOs, the direct participation is still nascent. Promoting participatory approach can internalize the needs of direct stakeholders and will make the planning more inclusive.
R. Bardhan et al. / Habitat International 50 (2015) 1e11
Acknowledgement The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewer for the valuable comments and suggestions to improve the quality of the paper. This study is a part of the project titled “Effects of Real Estate Undercurrents on Urban Forms and Its Emergence as Growth Machine in Indian Cities-Study Area Mumbai” funded by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, Plan Grant. References Abbott, J. (2013). Sharing the city: Community participation in urban management. Routledge. Agbola, T. (1994). NGOs and community development in urban areas: a Nigerian case study. Cities, 11(1), 59e67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0264-2751(94)900493. Akbar, H. M. D., Minnery, J. R., van Horen, B., & Smith, P. (2007). Community water supply for the urban poor in developing countries: the case of Dhaka, Bangladesh. Habitat International, 31(1), 24e35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.habitatint.2006.03.001. Anand, N., & Rademacher, A. (2011). Housing in the urban Age: inequality and aspiration in Mumbai. Antipode, 43(5), 1748e1772. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1467-8330.2011.00887.x. Archer, D. (2012). Baan Mankong participatory slum upgrading in Bangkok, Thailand: community perceptions of outcomes and security of tenure. Habitat International, 36(1), 178e184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2011.08.006. Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216e224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 01944366908977225. Asthana, S. (1994). Integrated slum improvement in Visakhapatnam, India: problems and prospects. Habitat International, 18(1), 57e70. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/0197-3975(94)90039-6. Bakore, M. (2007). Urban land ceiling act: Appeal to repeal. Centre for Civil Society. Banerjee-Guha, S. (2002). Shifting cities: urban restructuring in Mumbai. Economic and Political Weekly, 121e128. Barke, M., O' Hare, G., & Abbott, D. (1998). A review of slum housing policies in Mumbai. Cities, 15(4), 269e283. Baud, I. S. A., Pfeffer, K., Sridharan, N., & Nainan, N. (2009). Matching deprivation mapping to urban governance in three Indian mega-cities. Habitat International, 33(4), 365e377. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2008.10.024. Bharucha, N. (August 10, 2014). Mumbai's slum rehabilitation scheme: slum dwellers short changed by politician-builder nexus. The Times of India. Boonyabancha, S. (2005). Baan Mankong: going to scale with “slum” and squatter upgrading in Thailand. Environment and Urbanization, 17(1), 21e46. Bredenoord, J., & van Lindert, P. (2010). Pro-poor housing policies: rethinking the potential of assisted self-help housing. Habitat International, 34(3), 278e287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2009.12.001. Burra, S. (2005). Towards a pro-poor framework for slum upgrading in Mumbai, India. Environment and Urbanization, 17(1), 67e88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 095624780501700106. Choguill, C. L. (1993). Housing policy trends in Bangladesh: Meeting the needs of a low-income population. Cities, 10(4), 326e336. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/02642751(93)90004-3. Choguill, M. B. G. (1996). A ladder of community participation for underdeveloped countries. Habitat International, 20(3), 431e444. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/01973975(96)00020-3. Choguill, C. L. (2007). The search for policies to support sustainable housing. Habitat International, 31(1), 143e149. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2006.12.001. Das, P. K. (2003). Slums: the continuing struggle for housing. In S. Patel, & J. Masselos (Eds.), Bombay to Mumbai. Oxford University Press. Deshmukh, M. S. (2013). Conditions of slum population of major sub-urban wards of Mumbai in Maharashtra. Geurts, J. L. A., & Joldersma, C. (2001). Methodology for participatory policy analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 128(2), 300e310. Godbole, M. (1999). Outdated rent laws and investment in housing. Economic and Political Weekly, 34(7), 387e390. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4407646. Government of Maharashtra. (1947). The Bombay rents, hotels and lodging house rent control act, 1947 (Bombay). Government of Maharashtra. (1956). The slum areas (Improvement and clearance) act, 1956. Government of Maharashtra. (1971). The Maharashtra slum areas (Improvement and redevelopment) act, 1971 (Bombay). Government of Maharashtra. (1975). The Maharashtra vacant lands (Prohibition of unauthorized occupation and summary eviction ) act, 1975 (Bombay). Ibem, E. O. (2009). Community-led infrastructure provision in low-income urban communities in developing countries: a study on Ohafia, Nigeria. Cities, 26(3), 125e132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2009.02.001. Jagdale, R. H. (2014). An overview of slum rehabilitation schemes in Mumbai, India (Master of Science in Engineering). The University of Texas Austin. Retrieved from: http://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/bitstream/handle/2152/26620/
11
JAGDALE-MASTERSREPORT-2014.pdf?sequence¼1. Jones, B. D. (2002). Bounded rationality and public policy: herbert A. Simon and the decisional foundation of collective choice. Policy Sciences, 35(3), 269e284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1021341309418. Karandikar, P. N. (2010). Chawls: Analysis of a middle class housing type in Mumbai, India. Iowa State University (Paper 11777). Kit, O., Lüdeke, M., & Reckien, D. (2012). Texture-based identification of urban slums in Hyderabad, India using remote sensing data. Applied Geography, 32(2), 660e667. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.07.016. Kohli, D., Sliuzas, R., Kerle, N., & Stein, A. (2012). An ontology of slums for imagebased classification. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 36(2), 154e163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2011.11.001. Kyessi, A. G. (2005). Community-based urban water management in fringe neighbourhoods: the case of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Habitat International, 29(1), 1e25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0197-3975(03)00059-6. Majale, M. (2008). Employment creation through participatory urban planning and slum upgrading: the case of Kitale, Kenya. Habitat International, 32(2), 270e282. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2007.08.005. Mayer, I. S., van Daalen, C. E., & Bots, P. W. G. (2004). Perspectives on policy analyses: a framework for understanding and design. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 4(2), 169e191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/ IJTPM.2004.004819. Mukhija, V. (2001). Enabling slum redevelopment in Mumbai: policy Paradox in practice. Housing Studies, 16(6), 791e806. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 02673030120090548. Mukhija, V. (2004). The contradictions in enabling private developers of affordable housing: a cautionary case from Ahmedabad, India. Urban Studies, 41(11), 2231e2244. Nijman, J. (2008). Against the odds: slum rehabilitation in neoliberal Mumbai. Cities, 25(2), 73e85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2008.01.003. Oakley, P. (1991). The concept of participation in development. Landscape and Urban Planning, 20(1e3), 115e122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(91)90100-Z. Pacione, M. (2006). Mumbai. Cities, 23(3), 229e238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.cities.2005.11.003. Patel, S. B. (1996). Slum rehabilitation in Mumbai: possible if done Differently. Economic and Political Weekly, 31(18), 1047e1050. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/ 4404081. Patel, K. (2013). A successful slum upgrade in Durban: a case of formal change and informal continuity. Habitat International, 40(0), 211e217. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.05.005. Patel, Koizumi, N., & Crooks, A. (2014). Measuring slum severity in Mumbai and Kolkata: a household-based approach. Habitat International, 41(0), 300e306. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.09.002. Praja Foundation. (2014). Report on the state of affordable housing in Mumbai. Praja Foundation. Pugh, C. (1989). The World Bank and urban shelter in Bombay. Habitat International, 13(3), 23e49. Raiser, S. (2005). Emerging patterns of the global city Region: Spatial changes in ~o Paulo. Osteuropa-Inst. Johannesburg, Mumbai-Bombay, Shanghai and Sa Rakodi, C. (1989). Self-help housing: the debate and examples: upgrading in Lusaka, Zambia and Hyderabad, India. Habitat International, 13(4), 5e18. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/0197-3975(89)90034-9. Ramanathan, U. (2005). Demolition Drive. Rishbud, N. (2003). The case of Mumbai, India. In Understanding slums: case studies for the global report on human settlements. London: UN- Habitat. Roy, D., Lees, M. H., Palavalli, B., Pfeffer, K., & Sloot, M. A. P. (2014). The emergence of slums: a contemporary view on simulation models. Environmental Modelling & Software, 59(0), 76e90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.05.004. SBUT. (2014). Saifee Burhani Upliftment project. from http://www.sbut.com/glimpse. html. Simon, H. A. (1972). Theories of bounded rationality. Decision and organization, 1(1), 161e176. Sivam, A., & Karuppannan, S. (2002). Role of state and market in housing delivery for low-income groups in India. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 17(1), 69e88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1014831817503. Stecko, S., & Barber, N. (2007). Exposing Vulnerabilities:Monsoon Floods in Mumbai, India: Case study prepared for Revisiting Urban Planning:Global Report on Human Settlements 2007. United Nations. Available at: http://www.unhabitat.org/grhs/ 2007. € ck, H., & Kraff, N. J. (2014). The physical face of slums: a structural comTaubenbo parison of slums in Mumbai, India, based on remotely sensed data. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 29(1), 15e38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10901-013-9333-x. UNHSP. (2003). The Challenge of slums. global report on human settlement 2003. UNHabitat. UNSP. (1996). An urbanizing world, global report on human settlements. Oxford Publishers. Watson, V. (2009). ‘The planned city sweeps the poor away…’: urban planning and 21st century urbanisation. Progress in Planning, 72(3), 151e193. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2009.06.002. Whitehead, J. (2008). Rent gaps, revanchism and regimes of accumulation in Mumbai. Anthropologica, 269e282.