In this alliance SPARC acts as a supporting character to theother two. Their aim is to empower the poor so that the poor could develop forthemselves.
SPARC handles all the formal talks with the state, local authoritiesand donors and also prepares documentation. The relationship between SPARC andthe NSDFmahila Milan is bases on “the understanding that, as the urban poor themselvesgain skills and confidence in dealing with public institutions, they will takeover the work previously done by SPARC” assaid by the author. NSDF comprises of slum dwellers from different cities. There aremany federations of slum dwellers in Mumbai and they represent thousands ofslum dwellers hence their number is one of the reason why NSDF is so importantand is “taken seriously” as said by the author.
These federations comprise onlyof slum dwellers and are unregistered. Mahila milan is another organization whichwokrs for slums and issue of better housing conditions.Since the mid 80’s, the 3 organization i.
e. the Indian NGO. SPARC(society for the promotion of area resource centers) and two people’s organizations,the NSDF and Mahila Milan, have worked together to strengthen and demonstratethe abilities of urban poor to organize themselves and improve their housing andother basic utilities and services. The federating of the slum communities happenedbecause of the fact that work in lesser number of slums wouldn’t be taken seriouslyby the government and it provides a larger community to come together to coveytheir common problem together.The alliance’s engagement with slum upgrading The funding of 1million houses which the new government promised was irrational. However, theslum rehabilitation committee devised a way around it. This happened bygranting additional FSI.
The houses for the poor have to be built within housingschemes which was profitable to the developer. He has to cover the cost ofthese apartments in addition to the cost of slum dwellers. the current FSI was1.33 for Dharavi as I t is inside the city. Now any sanctioned FSI above 2.5could be taken as a transfer of development rights(TDR). TDR could be used foractual construction or could be sold in free market. But the construction was restrictedto the northern part of the city since the southern area is already congested.
2. Themechanism for financing slum redevelopment The developerwho has the responsibility of rehabilitation has to fund Rs.20000 to the centralfund which would help to cover monthly expenses and municipal taxes. The developerhas to profit enough so as to cover the costs of providing free apartments. Floorspace for commercial areas and restaurants were also given. The main strategy isthe in-situ slum redevelopment. Construction of over a million new apartmentswould strain the existing infrastructure system hence the developer was alsoexpected to pay Rs.840 per sq.
Foot for expansion of infrastructure.Railways, airportsauthority were encouraged to permit redevelopment on their land which wasn’t underoperation. The land-owning agency would be compensated either by agreeing to aprice or receiving alternate buildable area through transfer of developmentrights. A single coordinating authority was setup for slum rehabilitationworking with private developers, public bodies, NGOs and societies of slumdwellers which would be headed by a minister and as a senior bureaucrat as achief executive.· Benefits would be given to private land ownersif they participated.· The locations where upgradation was not possiblethey had the right to resettled at a new location.
· Pavement dweller would have the same rights asslum dwellers in context to rehabilitation.· Redevelopment of slums should be done in situ,which was possible in most of the cases. The public amenities were to be movedif their land was under the slum boundary.
The new Maharashtriangovernment in 1995 promised to provide free housing to 4 million slum dwellers inMumbai. A special committee’s assessment concluded that majority of the slum dwellersresided on the land which was under various central and state agencies. The needof basic amenities and public spaces was recognized as provided in the developmentplan of the city. There were few recommendations like:1.
Thenew institutional frameworkThe institutional and legalframework for slum upgrading in MumbaiThe cost of resettlement would notbe bearded by local authorities instead it would be funded by the state governmentand the railways. This time the government identified the project affected onthe basis of social and economic networks and ignoring the land required for theproject. If there was a hitch in the social or economic network of a personthen he would be entitled to resettlement. Strong community participation ledto led to the resettlement of about 20000 families. All this resulted in the amendmentof the Slum Areas Act in 2001. Those slum dwellers who had their names on theelectoral roll on 1 January 1995 would be protected and their houses couldn’tbe demolished without rehabilitation.
· Retaining the networks existing in the communityin the resettlement area. Integration of the host and the new residents.· Details of the resettlement program throughactive community participation· Minimizing the resettlement of slum populationsafter looking at all options, and implementing it in such a way that displacedperson would receive the compensation before the actual move. Full assistance atthe time of moving. special attention towards living standards, income earningcapacity.The policy objectives were:A task force of Maharashtrian government with the helpof government agencies as well as NGOs and public organizations was formed toformulate the basis of Mumbai urban transport resettlement and rehabilitationprogrammes.
The world bank decides that without resettlement andrehabilitation no project site could be cleared. Many thousands of people havehad to be moved away from alongside railway tracks as they were restricting thespeeds of the railway, hence this policy would affect the Mumbai urbantransport project. 4. Changesin the resettlement polices of the world bank and the government of Maharashtra The municipal commissioner along with histeam would approve each project but the program didn’t take off well.
In the early 90’s the state government cameup with new slum redevelopment scheme. It stated that those who would redevelopthe slums would be given extra building space as an incentive. The extrabuilding space could be used to cross subsidize the accommodation for slumdwellers.The second program was low income groupshelter program. Affordable housing for the poor through cross subsidizing fromthe profits of plots sold to upper income groups. The program wasself-financing. The EWS and LIG would be able to build their own housesaccording to the standard design. More than 80000 low income families benefitedfrom the program.
Loans were given to construct houses which could be repaidover 20 years.In the 80’s there were 2 programmes in theworld Bank funded Bombay urban Development project. The first one is slumupgrading program, consisted of renewable land leases to slum cooperativesocieties for up to 30 years with civic amenities on a cost recovery basis andloans to support upgrading of houses. The changes were insignificant. Highdensities limited the scope for reconfiguration and improvement. Implementationof this program was done only on state government agencies.In the 70’s for various moral reasons andpracticality slums began to be viewed as “housing solutions” as referred by theauthor.
Policies for upgradation and need for resettlement was acknowledged. Acensus of slums on public land was conducted in 1976 and unique identificationcards called “photopasses” by the author were issued to the residents if theywere found eligible. The basic infrastructure like swage and water was providedby the engineering departments of various public agencies to those who hadID’s. But the central government agencies didn’t allow this upgradation ontheir land.
Whereas in urban areas there is no law tosafeguard the rights of those who are displaced by public projects in urbanareas. The policy however evolved through public pressure. The best-casescenario is that those who were displaced were to be offered small plots in thesuburbs away from the city, usually where even the basic facilities andinfrastructure was also not provided. Municipal officers in a way decided thefuture of those who have been displaced as there was no local representationfrom those communities and were forcibly removed. Majority of the residentsreturned to their old locations through kinship ties.
servants etc. was ignored. The author thendraws a contrast between urban and rural resettlement policies.
In rural areasthe new land is provided within the radius of new irrigation projects and withsite with being provided with basic amenities, housing plots, loans, subsidiesand reserved jobs in government services. Also, a provision for compulsoryrepresentation of project affected communities. nuisance. Theircontribution to the economy as industrial workers, construction labor, domesticprotect their land.
Mostof the “educated” civilians and professionals considered slums to be asimilar conditions onanother location. The central and state agencies were under equipped toeither settle to the samelocation after some time or move to another location only to create occupied by the urbanpoor. It was already that this policy wouldn’t work because people wouldgovernment of Maharashtraand BMC decided to demolish slums and clear the land which wasslums which lacks basicutilities like water, sanitation and electricity. In the early 60’s theDespite being thecommercial capital of the country, Mumbai’s majority population resides in3. Evolution of slum Policy in Mumbai In few cases some agencies like Airport Authority ofIndia and Indian navy are bearing the costs of slum upgradation or resettlementonly to settle with state or central government for the land they require formore efficient functioning, for various reasons. development policy which is still under discussion andhasn’t been finalized yet. It talks about the features such as granting theland tenure to the slum dwellers wherever feasible and also where this is notpossible resettlement should be looked at as an alternative.
Other centralgovernment agencies don’t agree to this, which house many informal settlementson their land such as railways,defence etc. these agencies are also against providing any basicamenities on their land to the dwellers. Also, it is politically incorrect forthe state government even for the central government to demolish the homes ofso many people living on their land.Central ministry of urban development and povertyalleviation has drafted a national slum2. DraftNational sum policy More than three fourth of India’s population lived invillages at the time of independence. Rural poverty and famine in early 1960’sled to the focus of planners on the same.
Hence urban problems were neglected.Now the priorities have changed. Investing in urban development and housing forurban poor and resulted as an invitation to fresh migration.
Centre still is the largest single owner of urban landin India.The author firstly talks about the jurisdiction underwhom slum upgrading lies. He discusses that the with regards to slums and urbandevelopment, central government doesn’t have much say. The state government isthe main power that is responsible for slum upgrading and its up to the stategovernment how they tackle this problem, what laws, policies and schemes theyform for slum upgrading, except with regard to land owned by central governmentagencies.
Hence the author explains that the central government could notreally influence the urban development or slum upgradation due to the powervested in the state government by the constitution of India.1. Centre and the StatesBackground of Slum Upgrading