CHAPTER II

HOUSING PROBLEM IN INDIA

28

The magnitude of the housing problem is viewed not in the context of existing housing stock, but in terms of the role of housing in the national economy. Better housing is essential for a better economic and social future, and it not only raises the levels of standard of living and health of indi­viduals but also reduces the rate of mortality and morbidity. A healthy and commodious living acts as a stimulous to individuals for applying themselves with greater efficiency, energy and zeal to the tasks at hand and thereby help accelerate the pace of economic development. A house, to call one's ow^ can be consi­dered not only as one of the "consumer goods" but also as one of the "capital goods".

Housing fulfils one of the basic needs of human beings-shelter. A house is the place where one can take rest, sleep and cook food. A house can also be used partly as shop, work-place or a place for business of any kind. The economic importance of housing may be judged from the point of view of housing as an economic activity and with reference to its contribution to national income, national wealth, national employ­ment and its share in the revenue of central, state and local governments. The importance of housing also can

29

be gauged from its potentiality in inducing saving and capital formations, its profitability, its utility in checking population explosion and from its forward and backward linkage and their effects on the different sectors of the economy.

That housing is an inflationary sector is not a valid argument as to deprive housing of its deserving importance, (J.L.Hanson has observed "infla­tionary situations can arise either because of an undue stimulation of demand as a result of an increase in the volume of purchasing power or because of a

2curtailment of the production of consumer's goods". )

Now-a-days in India a lot of manpower and indigenous housing materials remain unutilised. By a well co-ordinated and well thought-out long-term plan we can have a break-through in housing constructions by making use of the man-power and indigenous materials- that is to say, by non-monetized investment activity.We can boost housing production without the danger of inflation.

1. K.V.Varghese : Housing Problem in India, (Economic and Social Aspects), Eurekh Publications, New Delhi, 1980, p.19.

2. J.L.Hanson, A Dictionary of Economics and Commerce, Macdonald and Evans Ltd., London, 1965, p.232.

30

Housing has great potentiality in the promo­tion of economic development. It is a good source of national income and a very important form of national wealth. It is a source of income to the Government and it can induce saving and real capital formation.It is also a profitable line of investment and hence it has added significance in the context of a developing economy. In the face of population explosion, and the tardy pace at which family planning programmes are being implemented, provision of adequate housing can help slow down population explosion. The programme of construction generates new incentives which actually promote the well-being through its biological and sociological influence, generates a propensity for saving in the form of real capital rather than monetary capital and thus help promote economic development at a far higher rate than other comparable Investments. There is a close correlations between good housing and health as well as welfare of man..

Investment in housing is synonymous with capital formation. Measurement of investment in housing is significant for several reasons. In the first place construction of housing structures is an economic activity and forms part of construction industry.

31

Secondly, the rate of interest in housing measures the flow of national resources directed towards constru­ction of house and is thus indicative of growth of housing in the country. Thirdly, it is important for estimating saving in the household sector of the economy as it is a significant segment of the house­hold saving in physical assets. Lastly, the assess­ment of housing investment and its impact on the economy helps towards evaluating economic feasibility of housing plans in the context of overall plans.

GROWTH OF INVESTMENT IN HOUSING :

Investment in housing has been compared with other fields of investment which are more remunerative and therefore, more attractive. In this process, the housing sector was given a low priority. It is how­ever, imperative to recognise that housing and building investment should not be viewed in isolation, as some­thing different from the strategy of the overall economic development. It was considered as an integral part of the planning process, affecting and being affected by development in other sections of the national economy.The Table 2.1 indicates the volume of investment made in housing during the successive Five Year Flans. It

INV

EST

ME

NT IN

HOU

SIN

G IN

IND

IA DU

RIN

G PLA

N fER

IOD

S AN

D TH

EIR

PROPO

RTI

ON

TO32

TO

TA

L INV

ESTM

ENT

“Inv

eslm

enl In

"Hou

sing”

“Hou

sing”

inve

simer

rEPl

an Total_

inve

stm

ent^

^te.

cror

es}^

_____to

t\Pin

ve3t

men

t°*

Publ

ic Private

Tota

l Private Pu

blic

Total1

2 3

4 5

6 78

9 10

Firs

t 1,

560

1,96

0 3,

360

250

900

1,15

0 16

46

34

Seco

nd

3,65

0 3,

100

6,75

0 30

0 1,

000

1,30

0 8

32

19

Thir

d 6,

300

4,10

0 10

,400

42

5 1,

125

1,55

0 7

27

15

Four

th

15,9

02

8,98

0 24

,882

62

5 2,

175

2,80

0 4

24

12

Fifth

39

,322

27

,050

66

,372

79

6 3,

640

4,43

6 2

13

9

Sixt

h 84

,000

74

,710

1,5

8,71

0 1,

491

1,80

0 19

,491

2

2 12

Seve

nths

,80,

000 1

,50,

000 3

,20,

000

2,45

8 29

,000

31

,458

2

19

10

Sour

ce : F

irst

to Se

vent

h Pla

n

33

can be noted that the quantum of housing investment has been increasing in every plan period. Of the total plan investment, the percentage share of housing investment has been declining. This, perhaps, is one of the causes of the worsening situation of the housing stock in the country, undoubtedly, with the increase of investment on housing plan after plan. Investment made in housing has been increasing owing to the rapid growth of population. Moreover, in terms of percentages, the proportion of investment on housing in the total plan investment came down from 3b per cent in the First Plan to 19 per cent in the Second Elan and 15 per cent in the Third Elan and 10 per cent in Seventh Han. Thus, it can be seen that our planning process has not given adequate priority for housing sector. Housing should be accorded a reasonable priority in the strategy of allocating developmental outlays.

SHARE OF HOUSING IN NATIONAL INCOME :

Housing is an important unit of development both in economic and welfare terms. It constitutes 15 per cent to 20 per cent of household expenditure.For all but the wealthy, it is usually the major goal of family saving efforts. Investment in Housing

34

represents upto 20 per cent to 30 per cent of fixed capital formation in countries with vigorous housing programmes, and it is increasingly recognised as a profitable Investment item, yielding a flow of income* For some of the self-employed, housing is also the place of work. Housing can make use of resources like labour, material and financial resources at low cost* The well planned housing raises national productivity, economise on space and minimise the cost of infrastru­cture .** Public expenditure on housing usually consti­

tutes a small fraction of total public expenditure at the national level. The expenditure on water supply, transport and on other related items in cities, the overall public involvement is larger. The investment in housing tends to rise faster than GDP growth at low income levels. Proper allocation of investment in residential construction, in relation to total invest­ment, helps to provide some of the important elements of economic and social welfare. The significant con­tribution to national Income by housing is shown in the Table 2*2.

Housing makes significant contribution to national income. The contribution of housing to Gross

3. Francis Cherunilam s Housing for Millions, Yojana, October 1-15, Vol.30, No.18, 1986, p.15.

35

38.3

416

.72

14.8

3

8.21

11

,534

7,18

6

13.2

3 14

.56

4,16

3 6,

641

31,4

76

45,6

07

52,3

89

14.8

7 1,20,

362

4.29

4,89

3.22

3.07

3.45

3,92

2 5,

279

6,09

5 15

.46

14,4

40

1,13

,846

1,71,

713 1,8

9,41

7 10

.31

3,41

,278

1. G

ross

Dom

estic

Prod

uct 36

,452

(G

DP)

at fa

ctor

cost

(%• in

cror

es)

2.

Inco

me fr

om Ho

usin

g 1,

357

(Its

. in cr

ores

)3.

In

com

e from

Hous

ing a

s 3.72 a p

erce

ntag

e of G

DP

4. G

ross

Dom

estic

Capi

tal 7,17

7 fo

rmat

ion (

Rs.i

n cro

res)

5. G

ross

capi

tal fo

rmat

ion 968

in H

ousi

ng (R

s.in c

rore

s)6.

G.C

.F. in

Hou

sing

as

13.4

9pe

rcen

tage

GDC

F

III

1970

-71

1980

-81

1983

-84

1984

-85 (i

9§3_

84 19

90-9

1to 19

84-8

5)

^At cu

rren

t gric

es}

Gro

wth

TAB

LE 2.

2SH

AR

E OF H

OU

SIN

G IN

NATI

ON

AL IN

CO

ME

Sour

ce : C

entra

l Sta

tistic

al O

rgan

isat

ion,

Natio

nal A

ccou

nts S

tatis

tics

1984

-85.

36

Domestic Product (GDP) at factor cost increased from fe.1,357 crorea in 1970-71 to Rs.3»922 crores in 1980-81

and to Rs. 6,095 crores in 1984-85. Although large majority of the population and dwelling units are in rural areas, urban housing has been making a larger contribution than rural housing to the national income since mid 1970*s. Further, the urban sector has been the major beneficiary of the public sector housing programme. Data available for a number of years shows that the income from housing accounts for around 3.5

per cent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of India.

CAPITAL FORMATION IN HOUSING :

Another important aspect of housing is its share in the capital formation. As shown in the Table 2*3, the gross capital formation in housing (i.e,, residential buildings only) at current prices was of the order of fe.968 crores in 1970-71, fc.4,163

crores in 1980-81 and Rs.7,186 crores in 1984-85.These accounted for 13.49 per cent, 14.4 per cent and 16.72 per cent of the gross domestic capital formation in these years.

In 1980-81, construction accounted for over 40 per cent of the gross domestic capital formations.

37

TABLE 2.3

CAPITAL FORMATION IN HOUSING

SI.No. Year

Gross capital formation G.C.F. (Rs. in crores)

G.C.F.as a per­centage to total Gross Domestic capital formation

1 2 3 4

1. 1970-71 826 11.2

2. 1976-77 2,354 13.3

3. 1977-78 2,529 13.6

4. 1978-79 2,849 12.4

5. 1979-80 3,453 13.2

6. 1980-81 4,087 13.0

7. 1981-82 5,093 14.1

8. 1982-83 6,176 15.5

9. 1983-84 7,489 15.8

10. 1984-85 8,661 16.1

11. 1990-91 17,918 18.0

Source s Significance of Housing and Human settle­ments, N.B.O. New Delhi, 1988, p.2.

38

In some of the previous years, this ratio was more than 50 per cent. Housing property forms an important share of the total property of the households in India in general. According to the study of "Household Income and its dispositions'* by the National Council of Applied Economics Research in 1975, housing property accounts for about 28 per cent of total wealth of the households. In this respect significant variation between the urban households and rural households is notified while in respect of urban households this share is about 64 per cent and it is less than 24 per cent in respect of rural households. Another important factor to be noted is that in the urban sector the share of household property in the total wealth of the household is comparatively higher for lower income groups and lower for higher income groups.

Fixed investment in housing generates the flow of current Income and also raises the capacity to produce goods and services. Code and Hoover, in their "India's urban future" have rightly observed : "There is growing acceptance of the fact that expenditure on housing construction satisfied a fundamental human need and is an infrastructure for investment in human resources and is as significant as the investment in transport, irrigation etc,, also that without it economic development

39

Is not possible”• Proper allocation of investment in

residential construction in relation to total invest­

ment helps to provide some of the important elements

of economic and social welfare.

EMPLOYMENT POTENTIAL IN HOUSING :

House construction generates a good amount

of on-site and off-site employment. In villages there

is much idle manpower available particularly during

non-agricultural season. The situation could be gain­

fully exploited in house building activity, especially

by adopting technologies with greater employment

generation potential. ‘Self-help* methods could also

be adopted in construction by choosing technologies

ameniable to simpler methods. It would create a

sense of involvement in the minds of the beneficiaries

who construct their own houses with self-help either

individually or collectively.

One of the important contributions of housing

is the generation of employment. This is of particular

importance to a country like India, where unemployment

is a very serious problem. The number of workers in

building construction increased from 1.15 million in

1961 to over 1.26 million in 1971 and to over 2.05 million

40

in 1981. In 1981, workers in building construction activity accounted for 1.14 per cent of the total workers of the country. In terms of 1977-78 wage rates, one crore rupees investment in housing (pucca) was estimated to generate a total of 923 man years of direct employment. Number of man years generated by investment of te.1 crore in residential building constru­ction at 1983-84 wage rates, can be seen in the Table 2.4.

Table 2.4 shows that direct employment (on-site) and indirect employment in building materials and supporting industries for skilled and unskilled labour in different types of house construction. Un­skilled labour on site is more than that of skilled labour in all types of house construction. Indirect employment in terms of the number of man years are 904 in urban pucca, 832 rural pucca, 880 semi-pucca and 1,179 kutcha respectively. The Government of India has been implementing number of employment generation programmes like NREP, RLEGP and so on in rural areas.

It reveals that housing sector is also one of the employment generating programmes of this nature.As a potential employment generating activity, addi­tional employments are generated, through which the economically weaker sections and low income groups

77149 41

S.K. UNIVERSITY LIBRARY. ANANTAPUR-5! 5 003

Sour

ce : H

ousi

ng St

atis

tics, N

.B.O

. New

Del

hi, p.

44.

Not

e : 1.

Indi

rect

empl

oym

ent in

rela

tion t

o bui

ldin

g mat

eria

ls an

d sup

porti

ng

indu

strie

s.2.

Num

ber of

many

ears

gene

rate

d by in

vest

men

t of Rs.

1 cror

e in re

si­

dent

ial b

uild

ing c

onst

ruct

ion a

t 1983

-84 w

age/

pric

e leve

l.

Tota

lla

bour

vo-4"*kT“ 1,

352

1,68

0 cn£*CM

086*9

Indi

rect

labo

ur

904

832

880

1,17

9

3,79

5

Dire

ctU

nski

lled To

tal

labo

ur labou

r

invoin 520

800

1,30

0i ii ii i1 £ 'CO| T* 1i m i

381

350

590

1,10

0

2,42

1

Skill

edla

bour 5

r- 170 o

r*CM 200

1 il vS |

N1 I1 I

SI.

Type

ofN

o.

stru

ctur

e

1• Urb

an pu

cca

2. Ru

ral pu

cca

ao0

10tn.K\ 4.

Kutc

ha

1 1t 11 11 11 11 1'3' 1 +» 1 o1 M 1t 1

TAB

LE 2.

4EM

PLO

YM

ENT PO

TEN

TIA

L IN HO

USI

NG

42

can take advantage of the scheme to augment their incomes,

GROWTH OF POPULATION iWith rapid increase of population the problem

of housing is assuming enormous proportions in our country. The problem of housing may arise owing to the trend of population growth. The trend of popula­tion growth determines the increase and decrease in the demand for housing. The demand for a house or dwelling unit is arrived at on the standard of norm followed and accepted in India - one dwelling unit for five persons.

The trend and the rate of growth of popula­tion have been worked out in the Table 2,5* We have taken the base year 1901 to highlight the trend of growth of population during this century, and also the predicament we have been placed in during the last three decades. It can be seen from the Table 2,5, that the total population increased from 238 million in 1901 to 548 million in 1971. The total increase of population during 80 years has been nearly two and a half times. The population growth is maximum during 1951, 1961, 1971, 1981 and for 1991 estimated indices from these years show 152, 184, 230, 287.4 and 359.44

43

1 1

1 1

1 1. m1 <U 1

o

* 3 '1 £3 1

M1 1

100.

00 oON•M3

CO

o.<r

ON

o•

CMt-

oON.

r* 209.

40 OKN

3CM

oin•

voKN 53

5.10

789.

88

Urb

anpo

pula

­tio

n

29.8

5 -4on.

inCM 28

.09 VO

"4•

knKN

inr•

oin.

CMVO 78

.90

108.

2015

9.73

235.

80

Indi

ces

100.

0010

8.40

107.

0011

7.70 8

rmT*

OCMkn•4r*

8CMC-T* 21

0.80

251.

9030

1.00

Rur

alpo

pula

­tio

n

208.

5522

6.16

223.

23 CMin

sCM

r*m.

-4

CM 298.

60 oKN

8KN

O

.ONKN•4

in-4.

inCMin

CMON |.

n- i CMVO 1

Indi

ces 8

8 105.

70 s•in

o 117.

0013

3.70 oin

•rinT— 18

4.20

229.

8028

7.40

359.

44

Tota

lpo

pu­

latio

n

238.

40 o«

CMinCM 25

1.32 co

ON.CO

b-CM 31

8.66

361.

10 oCM.

ONKN■4-

oON

SFin 68

5.18 in i

co. iVOin i co

Yea

r

1901 r-

T"cnt- 19

21

1931

1941 t1-

inONr~ 19

61

1971

1981

1991

*

(in m

illio

ns)

TAB

LE 2.5

GR

OW

TH OF

POPU

LATI

ON

IN IND

IA - (

1901

-198

1)

Sour

ce : C

ensu

s of In

dia

Not

e * : E

stim

ated

.

44

respectively. We find the maximum increase of population between 1961 and 1971. This is affirmed by the fact that during the first decade for our plan from 1951 to 1961 the rate of population growth has been 1,2 per cent while during the second decade the rate of popu­lation growth was 2.2 per cent. In the moral and urban areas we see the same trend. It can be noticed that indices for the years 1951t 1961, 1971, 1981 and in 1991 estimated the rural population growth (with the base year 1901) are 143, 173, 210, 252 and 301 respe­ctively, The urban population growth trend is notlcia- ble during 1961, 1971, 1981 and in 1991 estimated with their indices of 264, 363, 535 and 789 respectively.The phenomenal growth of the urban population raises the problem of urban agglomeration and influx of rural labour to urban areas. Consequently, it led to an urban housing chaos owing to the migration of people from rural areas.

TRENDS IN HOUSING PROBLEM :

The dimension of housing problem may be assessed by comparing the number of households with the census houses decade-wise since 1901. This may be assessed at the national as well as at the rural- urban levels separately. As per the 1901 census, for

45

540 lakh households there were 558 lakh census houses. This Implies that there were about 18 lakh surplus houses. This surplus situation continued till 1941,Since then the surplus turned into a deficit. In 1951, for 660 lakh households there were only 643 lakh houses leaving the deficit to the tune of 17 lakh houses. The corresponding deficit in 1961 was 57 lakh units. In 1971 the deficit has increased to 97 lakh housing units. In 1981 the deficit was 40 lakh units.In 1991 the deficit was estimated about 16 lakh units. This is shown in Table 2,6,

Table 2,6 reveals that the quantitative housing problem appeared around the year 1951 and since then it has been growing progressively in aggregate.The visible drop in housing supply since 1931 can be attributed to the economic depression. This tendency of housing supply continued and by 1951 housing burgeoned into a problem at the national level, A large surplus of about 41 lakh dwelling units not only disappeared but also the surplus situation turned into a situation of deficit to the tune of 17 lakh units. From Table 2,6 one can notice a decline in housing supply during World War II when housing construction was slowed down. This low ebb of housing supply was further accentuated by

46

TABLE 2.6

TRENDS IN HOUSING FROBLEM :IN INDIA (1901-1981)

SI.No.

Total Total

(Units in lakhs)

Surplus PercentageYear No.of

house­holds

No.ofoccupiedcensushouses

deficit(col.4—3)

surplus or deficit

1 2 3 4 5 6

1. 1901 540 558 + 18 + 3.33

2. 1911 578 637 ♦ 59 + 10.28

3. 1921 586 652 + 66 + 11.26

4. 1931 649 710 + 61 .+ 9.42

5. 1941 719 760 ♦ 41 + 5.72

6. 1951 660 643 - 17 - 2.57

7. 1961 846 789 - 57 - 6.73

8. 1971 1,004 907 - 97 - 9.66

9. 1981 1,197 1,137 - 40 - 3.34

10. 1991* 1,427 1,425 - 16.44 - 1.15

Source : Computed from Census Data. 1901-1981 for column 3, 4 Census of India, Vol.1, Part II.

Note * ; Estimated.

47

the partition of the country. The 1951 census reveals a very unique fact that despite a considerable fall in household growth around 1941 and 1951» there was a large size of housing deficit, and this was due to the transfer of territory with houses to Pakistan. The estimates made in 1951, 1971, 1981 and for 1991 reveal that housing deficit increased progressively despite considerable expansion in housing supply. This situa­tion was obviously the outcome of tremendous increase in the number of households during that period.

The housing scenario in the rural and the urban areas is separately depicted in the following manner.RURAL LEVEL : In 1901 when there were 482 lakh ruralhouseholds, there were 502 lakh houses. Thus, there were 20 lakh surplus houses. This situation continued till 1951* But the situation reversed since then. In 1961 when there were 620 lakh households there were only 651 lakh census houses, leaving housing deficit to the tune of 39 lakh units. This housing deficit grew to 68 lakh units in 1971 and decreased to 47 lakh units in 1981, This can be seen from Table 2.7.

48

TABLE 2.7TRENDS IN HOUSING PROBLEM IN RURAL AREAS - (1901-1981)

SI.No. Year

Total No. of house­holds

TotalNo.of occupied census houses

SurplusorDeficit(Col.

3-4)

Percentage of surplus or deficit

1 2 3 4 5 6

1. 1901 482 502 ♦ 20 + 4.562. 1911 519 578 + 59 + 11.363. 1921 521 584 + 63 + 10.784. 1931 571 631 + .60 + 10.575. 1941 620 664 + 44 + 7.976. 1951 536 541 + 5 + 0.937. 1961 690 651 - 39 - 5.658. 1971 795 727 - 68 - 8.669. 1981 908 861 - 47 - 3.086

10. 1991* 1,037 1,019,6 - 32.49 - 3.13

Source s Computed from Census Data. 1901-1981, Census of India.

Note * s Estimated.

49

At rural level one can observe a steady and progressive expansion of housing surplus from 1901 to 1921 after which the tempo of housing supply slowed down and by 1971 the problem became very acute with 68 lakh units by 1981, with 47 lakh for 1991 estimated with 32 lakh units of housing deficit. The Great Depression after World War II, the partition of the country and the rapid growth of households were several factors which account for this kind of housing situation.

URBAN LEVEL : In urban areas the situation has beenquite different from that of rural areas. In 1901, for 58 lakh households there were only 56 lakh houses, leaving the deficit to the tune of a 2 lakh housing units. But in successive decades upto 1931 there were more houses than the number of households. The situation however, reversed around 1941, when for 99 lakh house­holds there were only 96 lakh houses leaving a deficit of 3 lakh housing units. Since then the magnitude of housing deficit began to grow. In 1961 there were 18 lakh units of housing deficit and the housing deficit in 1971 stood at 29 lakh units, in 1981 it stood at 13 lakh units and it is estimated that for 1991 it may be 20 lakh units. Unlike rural India, in urban India housing problem arose since 1931. Also, there was a

50

steady and progressive growth in the number of house­holds throughout the century. These can be verified from Table 2,8, It appears that at the time of Depression, World War II and during partition, urban centres happened to be an abode and refuge of the people. In fact, war industries acted as pull factor in the urban centres. At the time of partition , refugees prefered to stay in urban areas. These are reasons why despite expansion in housing supply, urban areas stiffered from housing problem since 1931.

It is evident from the foregoing census data that numerical housing deficit developed around 1951 at national level, by 1961 at rural level and around 1941 at urban level. It appears from Table 2.8 that at national level from 1951 onwards housing deficit increased at the rate of 4 lakh housing units per year. During the period between 1961 and 1971 rural housing deficit has grown at the rate of 2,9 lakh units per year. The corresponding figure for urban India would be 1.1 lakh units per year. It implies that housing problem has been undergoing phenomenal growth during the plan period.

51

TABUS 2.8

TRENDS IN HOUSING FROBLEM IN URBAN AREAS - (1901-1981)

_(Units in^lakhs^

Si.No. Year

TotalNo.ofhouse­holds

TotalNo.ofoccupiedcensushouses

Surplusor

Deficit(Col.4-3)

Percentage of surplus or deficit

1 2 3 4 5 6

1. 1901 58 56 - 2 - 3.44

2. 1911 59 60 + 1 + 1.69

3. 1921 65 68 + 3 + 4.61

4. 1931 78 79 + 1 + 1,28

5. 1941 99 96 - 3 + 3.03

6, 1951 124 103 - 21 - 16.93

7. 1961 156 138 - 18 - 11.53

8. 1971 209 180 - 29 - 13.46

9. 1981 289 276 - 13 - 4.49

10. 1991* 309.6 423,19 - 20, 17 - 7.48

Source

Note *

Computed from Census Data. 1901-1981, Census of India.Estimated.

52

GROWTH OF HOUSING DEMAND, SUPFLY AND SHORTAGE :

In economic terminology, the housing demand is not exactly the same as the housing need. Effective demand for houses is backed by the ability to pay economic price or rent which, in turn, depends on the general prosperity of the country in terms of the per capita income and the national income. In other words, the per capita income of individuals and families or households, out of which rent, cess and tax are paid, determines the effective demand.Whether or not individuals and families or households can afford to have a house at an economical price or rent may be a question of housing demand. But every individual and family or household should be provided with a shouse or a shelter, as per their housing need which is concern of the social welfare policy.

To solve the problem of housing, therefore, we have to estimate the housing demand which is influ­enced by many factors like population growth, its age- wise sex ratio and its rural and urban composition, migration, family structure, marriage rate, reproductive age groups and many other consequential factors. The increase in the demand for houses in urban areas experienced during the past two decades is phenomenal

53

because of many social and economic factors which consequently led to the migration of the rural labour force - especially agricultural and landless labourers in search of ^obs in urban areas.

In spite of the increase in the supply of houses in terms of percentage in urban areas the housing supply falls short immensely owing to the agglomeration and migration of people from rural areas leading to the formation of slums and squatter settlements in urban areas. The demand for housing supply and shortage in terms of the growth of population from 1951-81 are shown in Table 2.9.

The demand for housing has been estimated on the basis of the housing stock (supply) and the shortage situation. This is worked out in the above table (2.9).

At the all India level , the housing shortage which was of the order of 7.8 million units at the commencement of First Five Year Plan increased to 15.44 million units in 1981. Out of which the shortage in rural and urban areas accounted for 13.29 and 2.15 million units respe­ctively. The percentage share of shortage in rural and urban areas would come to 81.37 per cent and 18.63 per cent respectively in terms of the total housing shortage of 23.3 million units. The estimation shows

POPU

LATI

ON

GRO

WTH

AND

SHO

RTA

GE O

F HO

USI

NG

IN IN

DIA

54

Sour

ce : C

ensu

s of In

dia.

Not

e * : De

man

d est

imat

ed on

the b

asis

of on

e hou

se/d

wel

ling u

nit fo

r fiv

e pe

rson

s. Popu

latio

n fig

ure o

btai

ned f

rom

cens

us re

ports

suppl

y of

hous

ing s

tock

obta

ined

for 1

951,

1961,

and 19

81 cen

sus re

ports

of

Indi

a.

111»

Dem

and S

uppl

y Sho

rtag

e iii

t-r- 11

2.19

5

1.71

7

3.22

7 r~-4tn.■4 5.

839

Urb

an fO 1T“ 1

A

inOin.o

T~

mVOo•-4r

mr-•4.

COT—

■4s•

SCM

CM 1CDtn t•5

■iii

110\ I1

ooin•CM

r*

Ir*•tnr*

•r*CM

in■4cn

•

tnT~ 1T~. |in4- 1

Dem

and S

uppl

y Sho

rtag

e 11t

001

■ •

mlOvo.in006*9

inCTvCO.tn

T~in•4O.*4IS

r*VOOv.CD

•4 IS00 1.tn tCM

Rur

al 1 V1

1 1i i 54

.057

65.1

60 otn.VO

CO

*00 IT-• |

8 ,T"voCO 1in. iin

CM 1T~

i ii t1

i ta a

59.7

20

090*Zl

30%.b-

00

v-cno.ino

Dem

and S

uppl

y Sho

rtag

e i i

i ii

inl l

7.85

8

vo•

CD 17.1

22 r*Oin•inCM

0vO 1S-. |

r*tn i

Tot

al

il

i<rt

1 a

3ind

79.2

23 coin•4•

CMOv

137.

036 1

13.7

35 00O 1ov. 1crv

m ir-

1 1

itn «

ii

72.2

20

•C-C0 10

9.58

0 s ;OS

• 1r*^ tT*

Yea

r iCM 1

i 1951

1961

1971

1981

* 1rOS 1Osr* $

i • •r-f O

i co 55i

r- 1 •r-

•CNJ

• • •ITS 1

(In m

illio

ns)

55

that the demand for housing is expected to go upto 177 million by 1991. Out of expected increase in the demand for housing to the tune of 35 million units, the share of rural and urban areas would come to 20 million and 15 million units respectively. Therefore, the housing shortage in India by 1991 is estimated to increase from 23.3 million units in 1981 to 32 million units in 1991. This indicates the housing shortage to the extent of 32 million units in 1991, the rural and urban areas share of housing shortage being 26 million units and 6 million units respectively.

But no survey has been made to assess whether the shortage of housing after the introduction of the Union Land Ceiling Act has had an impact in bridging the housing gap. The public sector outlay for housing had been raised from Rs. 1,490.87 crores in the Sixth Plan to fe.2,458.21 crores in the Seventh Plan. The measures were taken for raising ceiling on Government loan assis­tance for various social housing schemes, increasing the ceiling on the cost of construction and norms of income eligibility.

The Government was considering certain amend­ments to the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act

56

and Rent Control Act, apart from the provision ofseveral fiscal incentives for investment in housing,including new incentives announced in the budget for1987-88 and the setting up of a National Housing Bank,it was proposed to raise the quality of Housing andUrban Development Corporation (HUDCO) from Rs.75 crores

4to 8s. 135 crores during the Seventh Plan.

HOUSING NEEDS BY 2001 A.D. s

The country will require an additional 76million houses to eliminate the housing shortage by2001 A.D. About 57 million houses will have to beconstructed in rural areas and 19 million in urbanareas. The increase in the number of households wasprojected on the assumption that population would growat a rate of 1.5 per cent per annum. For accommodationof a very modest nature, investment of about fc.75,000

5crores a year would be needed.As Prof. Johansson has opined, housing demand

may differ greatly from country to country, depending

4. Indian Economic Diary, (Vol.XVIII, No.17, April 30 - May 6, 1987), p. 11164.5. Ibid., Vol.XVIII, No.25, June 18-24, 1987, p.11222.

57

upon the degree and speed of industrialisation and urbanisation, the level and the rate of Increase of real Income, income distribution etc. The future demands for housing, therefore will depend upon the changes in the size of the population, in the number and structure of households, in the location of the business activity, degree and speed of industrialisa­tion, urbanisation and in income levels.^

Economic theory suggests that the demand for almost any good will be affected by changes in its price, in the price of near substitutes and changes in the average level and distribution of income. It also seems likely from a study of the institutional features of the housing market and changes in the Government policy on such issues as rent control and subsidising house building will influence the demand for housing in the private market. For long term predictions, the effects of population and household changes will also have to be taken into account. The following are the important factors which determine housing demand : 1) Income level of the people and the

6. A. Johansson, country Monograph, Sweedish Studies of effective demand for Housing, United States, New York, 1963, p.39.

58

manner in which income is distributed, 2) price level of the housing unit, 3) price level of other commodities4) standard of living and the taste of the people, and5) location characteristics of housing and its setting.

Rise in income level of the households, other things remaining the same, causes a demand movement upwards for housing. However, if the income and prices move upwards hand in hand, the chances of rise in demand for ownership would get neutralised, whereas fall in the income levels, generated by lag in the economic activity would dampen housing demand.

The demand for a commodity is a function of the price of the commodity. That is to say, the demand for a commodity depends upon the price of that commodity. Since incomes are limited, when the price of a certain commodity rises, there will be tendency, to substitute other commodities. But housing is without a substitute and hence as far as housing is concerned the question of going for a substitute does not arise. However, it is a durable commodity which can be repaired and used longer and therefore, rise in its price may dampen the demand for additional houses both for ownership and renting. Housing is an extraordinary expensive commo­dity. On top of that when price shoots up, low and

59

middle income earners will be deprived of housing facilities.

Price of essential commodities other than housing may also exert most influence on housing demand. When the limited income is spent on other expensive goods, saving declines and housing demand is relegated to the background, because it needs heavy investment.That is to say, housing demand is dwarfed owing to a general rise in price level.

The standard of living has some influence onhousing demand. The concept of living standard usedhere refers to "all those things which can insist uponhousing". As stated by H.Kyrak, "all those things oneinsists upon housing the essential values to be sought

7made up one*s standard of living". In other words, they determine the first thing to be secured through the expenditure of time and money. A community whose standard of living is quite high will try to have housing units with reasonable standard and vice versa. The view that the rising standard of living will generate an increasing demand for more and better housing demand has

7. Hexel Kyrak, "The Family in the American Economy", Chicago University, Chicago Press, 1953, p.371.

60

been highlighted by Prof,J.B.Culling Worth8 when he wrote about housing needs and housing policy. Whether one will choose better housing, ownership or renting depends on one's own tastes which are not quantifiable.

According to the working group's estimate, during First Five Year Flan period, the rate of housing supply in urban area came to about 3.5 units per 1,000 people per year. The corresponding figure for the rural

Qarea was about 0,44 units only,7 The overall rate ofhousing supply for the nation as a whole thus works out

10to 2 houses per 1,000 people per year. According to the working group, we should aim at an annual constru­ction rate of at least 5 houses per 1,000 people in the Fourth Flan and tempo should be stepped upto 10 houses per 1,000 people in the Fifth Plan in order to catch up with the housing needs in ten years time.11

Housing is a high capital unit and unlike other household purchases, it is a costly thing. The

8. J,B.Culling Worth, "Housing Needs and Housing Policy", Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1960, p.12.

9, Report of the working group on housing for Fourth Plan, 1968, Op.cit., p,1; Ibid., p,2.10. Ibid.,11. Ibid., p.3

61

capital cost of a dwelling is a very high multiple ofthe average income of earning workers. Even if anunskilled worker in India saving some 10 per cent ofhis income, it would take 49 years to finance the

12construction of his house with his own savings. The cost of a housing unit is so high that for an ordinary worker it is next to impossible to have a house from his life time earnings.

HOUSING GAP ;

The housing gap has two aspects : 1. quantita­tive aspect and 2. qualitative aspect. The quantitative aspect has two phases. One is the difference between the number of households and number of housing units. This will show the numerical housing gap. The other refers to the inadequacy of housing space either per person or household in relation to minimum housing space required for healthy living, which of course is socially accepted minimum standard as well.

The "qualitative housing gap" refers to several things and hence it may be gauged from different angles. It can be by way of poor quality of the

12. Report of the Banking Commission, Government of India, 1972, p.408.

62

surroundings, the age of the dwellings, the quality of materials of construction and absence or inadequacy of essential facilities like kitchen, water supply, latrine and bath room.

The examination of the size of housing gap is the main focus of this analysis. Here the comparison is made between the number of households with number of census houses. As per the census data, housing gap developed in 1951 at national level when the gap amounted to 17 lakh housing units. The gap grew to 57 lakhs,97 lakhs and 60 lakh housing units in 1961, 1971 and 1981 respectively and it was estimated 37 lakhs for the year 1991, This can be verified from Table 2,10,As regards rural India, housing gap developed around 1961 when there was a gap of about 39 lakh housing units. This gap grew to 68 lakh housing units by 1981 and it was estimated at 32 lakhs houses for 1991, In urban India, with a gap of 21 lakh housing units in 1951, But by 1961 the gap stood at 18 lakh housing units after which it increased to about 39 lakh housing units in 1971 and stood at 13 lakh housing units in 1981 and it was estimated at 5,82 lakhs in 1991,

It is quite clear that housing gap has been outstanding at national and regional levels. The

HOUSING GAP IN INDIA

jNo. in_lakhsji

Total

Rural

Urban

No,

arxicuxars ig51 igg1 ig?1 1g81 1gg1 i

g6l ig71 1g81 iggi ig

51 1gg1 ig71 ig81 iggi

1• Number of

households

660

846 1004 1197 1427

690

795

908 1037

124

156

209

289 4000

2, Number of

census houses

643

789

907 1137 1425

651

727

861 1019

103

138

180

276 4

232

3, Housing gap

(1-2)

17

57

97

60

37

39

68

47

32

21

18

29

13 5,

82

4, Changes in the

housing gap

2,5

6.6

9.6

5.0

2,6

5.6

8.5

5.2 3.16 16,9 11.5 13.4 4.5 1

.51

Source :

Computed from Census Data.

Note * :

Estimated figures.

cn

64

significant thing that comes out from the analyses of census data is that Indian housing problem emanated from the poor quality of our housing stock which is indicated by the predominance of kutcha and bad houses in the housing stock.

TYPE AND QUALITY OF HOUSE CONSTRUCTION :

It is estimated that about 50 to 60 per cent of population in the world lives in houses that are unsatisfactory, poorly constructed, inadequately equipped and have unacceptable environmental conditions. It is said that the problem of housing is peculiar to big cities and towns and it is non-existent in villages. However, this is not true. The facilities of housing accommodation are much worse in villages than in towns. In towns it may be in the form of less space and dis­proportionate to their needs. But in villages, problem of housing is not in the form of growing slums but are unhygienic and their construction is haphazard and un­satisfactory. The distribution of houses by quality of construction is shown in Table 2,11.

Although the data indicates the Improvement in the quality of structure over the years, however, still only less than a quarter of rural houses and less

65

TABLE 2.11DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSES IN INDIA BY TYPE OF STRUCTURE

Si. Type ofNo. structure

__ 1261____Rural Urban ____mi___Rural Urban

___ 1281...Rural Urban

1, Pucca 13.0 46.0 19.0 64.0 23.0 65.22. Semi-pucca 37.0 35.0 37.0 23.0 43.5 24.23* Kutcha(Serviciable) 38.0 14.0 32.0 9.0 23.4 6.7

4. Unserviciable kutcha 12.0 5.0 12.0 4.0 10.1 3.9

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source : N.B.O. 'Housing Statistics at a Glance, New Delhi, 1987, pp.17-18.

1. Pucca : A unit with predominent material of wall androof as follows sWall s Burnt bricks, G.I.Sheets or other metal sheets, stone, cement concrete etc.Roof : Tiles, slates, corrugated or zinc or

metal sheets, ACC, RBC, RCC, brick, lime stone etc.2. Serviceable Kutcha : A unit with mud walls and thatched

roof.3. Unserviceable Kutcha: A unit with thatched walls and^hatched roof.4. Semi-pucca : All units which do not fall in any of

the above categories.

66

than that of a quarter of urban houses are pucca in the year 1981. While about a half (43.5 per cent) of houses have either walls or roof made of flimsy mate­rials, while about a third (33.5 per cent) of total rural houses have both walls and roof are made of flimsy and non-durable materials such as thatch, reed, palm leaves etc. Thus, more than three-fourths of total housing stock is unhealthy and in a way reflects the crisis of housing in rural areas. Consequently, urban area has better qualitative housing than the rural area. On the above mentioned basis, the pucca, semi- pucca housing and serviceable and non-serviceable kutcha units in rural areas account for 23.0, 43.5, 23.4 and 10.1 per cent units respectively. In urban areas, pucca and non-pucca housing units work out at 65.2 per cent and 34.5 per cent respectively.

HOUSING MATERIALS :

Housing material is another decisive factor of quality of the house because it is the kind and quality of the material used that determine the life of house and also the efficiency of the service obtained by the inmates. The Census and NSS differentiate between pucca and kutcha on the basis of the materials used.

67

The housing materials are produced both in the organised and unorganised sectors. A very few organised or public sector undertakings like the National Building Construction Corporation and the Hindusthan Housing Factory are producing good quality bricks and other house building materials. On the other hand, materials like cement, iron and steel and the major part of protected timber are controlled by the organised sector industries. Moreover, the produ­ction of housing materials is controlled by organised construction finns or agencies which are predominantly monopolized. This also affects equitable distribution of house building materials either produced in the public sector or private sector. Materials like bricks, cement, timber, iron and steel and aggregates are used for both residential and non-residential purpose. The distribu­tion of predominent housing materials such as wall, roof and floor required are presented in the Table 2.12.Major components of walls like grass, leaves, reeds or bamboo for the construction of different types account for 12.74 per cent in rural houses and 6.11 per cent in urban houses as per the census of 1981. About 57.9 per cent houses in rural areas and 23.77 per cent in urban areas are with thematerial of mud, unburnt bricks etc. Moreover, about 29.39 per cent houses in rural and

TAB

LE 2,1

2D

ISTR

IBU

TIO

N OF

HOU

SEH

OLD

S BY PRE

DO

MIN

AN

T MA

TER

IAL O

F WA

LL, RO

OF A

ND

FLO

OR

IN IN

DIA

68

6.11

.tnCM 70.1

1

100.

00 CMCM•t>-

x~ 82.7

8

100.

00 c-in.inm

m4

3o »o. ioO 1T"

•CMT~ 57

.90

29.3

9 oo.oor

COto.in*4

CMVO.■cl-in

oo.8 85

.91 CTvx~

.4T“

o 1O 1 •O 1or 1

5.26

22.2

0 ,4in•CM

O

Oo•ooT~

18.9

2

81.0

8 8•OO

NA

3S3 |

11.5

657

.35

30.0

9 oo.oo

T~

o4-.oin

oVO.OV

4

8»oo

T"

<55 N

A g!

WA

LL :

1. Gr

ass, le

aves

, reed

s or ba

mbo

o2.

Mud,

unbu

rnt b

ricks

or wo

od3.

Burn

t bric

ks, G

.I.Sh

eets

, stone

, cem

ent

conc

rete

etc.

All ty

pes o

f mat

eria

lsR

OO

F :1.

Gras

s, lea

ves, r

eeds

, that

ch or

bam

boo,

m

ud, un

burn

t bric

ks or

wood

2. Ti

les, s

late

, sing

le A.C

.She

ets, b

ricks

, lim

e ston

e, RCC

RBC

, etc.

All t

ypes

of m

ater

ials

FLO

OR

:1.

Mud

2. Wo

od, pl

anks

, bam

boo,

logs, b

rick s

tone

& lim

e, cem

ent, m

isce

llane

ous e

tc.

All t

ypes

of m

ater

ials

•1 H II

. •III

____

Iggl

__R

ural

Urban12

71R

ural

UrbanM

ater

ials

SI.

No.

Sour

ce : C

ensu

s of In

dia,

1971,

1981

69

70.11 per cent in urban areas the walls were built with the material like burnt bricks, G.I.sheets, stone, cement, concrete etc. During the year 1981 the materials of roof like grass, leaves, reeds, thatch or bamboo and wood constituted about 45.38 in rural areas and 17.22 in urban areas. The component of tiles, slates, single A.C. sheets, bricks, limestone, R.C.C. etc., account for 54.62 per cent of building materials in rural and 82.78 per cent in urban areas. As far as floor material is concerned about 85.91 per cent houses in rural and 35.57 per cent houses in urban areas have mud floor in India, whereas houses having floor with wood, planks, bamboo, brick, stone, lime, cement mosaic tiles etc., constitute 14.19 per cent rural areas and 64.43 per cent in urban areas respecti­vely. As mentioned above, it is known that the material quality of wall, roof and floor in rural and urban areas differs widely.

PRODUCTION OF BUILDING MATERIALS :

The major house building materials are cement, limestone, finished steel, semi-finished steel, A.C. sheets, ceramic tiles, paints and varnishes, sanitary wares, sheet glass and commercial plywood and so on.

70

Cement is one of the important house building materials and is used not only for house construction but also for all construction activities such as building of dams, bridges, aerodromes, roads etc. Lime is one of the main substitutes for cement. Besides, other house building materials, lime is used for the other purposes also by a host of consumers and manufacturers. Lime is made available as slack lime or hydrated lime for house build­ing purposes. Limestone is calcinated in lime kilns to yield quick lime. The quick lime obtained through calci­nation cannot be kept for a long time unless slacking and grinding are done immediately. Hydrated lime is produced after proper treatment of quick lime with water to give it a stable and powder form to be used as building mate­rial. This hydrated lime may be used in combination with surkhi and/or fly-ash as a substitute for cement mortar. Surkhi is obtained after grinding good quality of brick bats. The quality of surkhi therefore, depends on the quality of bricks which may be manufactured from good soil.

Iron and steel are important house building materials. They are used in all types of house constru­ction and in all major construction activities. Consi­dering the scarcity of this product, it is suggested to

71

use them economically lor all types of houses.Material produced from local sources are cheaper and avoids the problem of transportation of materials from a long distance involving additional cost. Their use in construction reduces dependence on expensive mate­rials like cement and steel which also consume good amount of energy to produce. The familiarity of the local artisans with correct use of indigenous materials and its acceptance by the people are positive advantages. Rural houses due to poor quality, require frequent main­tenance besides being highly vulnerable to fire and natural hazards like rain, floods and earthquacks. The liveable quality of the houses must be improved. The Table 2,13 provides the details of production of housing materials in India. The technology should aim at impro­ving the durability and liveability of the houses. The house should be constructed with improved materials adopting innovative techniques so that people have a better resistance to the vagaries of nature and also provide comfort and convenience to the occupants.

BASIC AMENITIES :

From the larger point of view, no account of housing is complete without a consideration of basic amenities. The situation of basic amenities in villages

72

TABLE 2.13HIODUCTION OF BUILDING MATERIALS

SI.No. Item Unit 1983 1984 1985

1. Cement Milliontonnes25.70 29.60 32.00

2 • Limestone n 44.80 48.40 51.60

3. Finished steel n 6.20 8.86 10.45

4. Semi-finishedsteel

n 1.64 3.16 5.25

5. A.C.Sheets 1000tonnes

575.00 567.50 644.00

6. Ceramic tiles fl 52.00 95.00 99.00

7. Paints & Varnishes n 114.20 128.20 136.40

8. Sanitary-wares n 32.30 33.70 37.20

9. Sheet glass Million 24.30 25.20 34.80Sq.M.

10. Commercial plywood n 54.00 69.00 88.70

Source : Housing Statistics, National Building Organisation, 1984, p.41*

73

is far from satisfactory* It is estimated that out of every five houses, four are without any basic amenities. They lack privacy and have no bath rooms or latrines attached to them. The unavailability of safe drinking water and proper means of disposal of human waste constitute a major impact on the quality of life in rural and urban areas.

Among all basic amenities water is the most important one for every one, but unfortunately many of our six lakh villages have been facing scarcity for many years. The protected water supply i.e., water from taps is available only to 10.29 per cent of rural population. The other sources which may be exposed to the risk or pollution are to the extent of 61,62 per cent. Tube wells (16.21 per cent) tanks and ponds (3.38 per cent) rivers, lakes etc., (9.29 per cent). Thus, 90 per cent of rural population are exposed to unsafe drinking water giving scope for rising gastro­intestinal disorders, the most important cause for Illness and death among infants and children. Further, 92 per cent of households do not have any build-up latrines. Most of the villages also do not have any drainage facilities, resulting in the overflowing of the dirty water on the street lanes of the villages causing muddy and unhygienic conditions. Besides

74

poor sanitary facilities most of the houses do not have outlets for smoke to go. This results in pollu­tion and bad environment.

A house even if made of durable materials or in good condition cannot be considered complete unless it has certain facilities such as kitchen water tap, latrine and bath room because these are basic needs. These facilities are admittedly part and parcel of housing.a) KITCHEN FACILITIES i Preparation of food is a very important function of a family which has to be done inside the house. This indicates that kitchen is a very important and indispensable part of the house.But the paradox is that the bulk of the Indian houses do not have this essential part.b) DRINKING WATER SUPPLY : Water facility is a veryimportant component of a house because water is nece­ssary for several purposes. Owing to lack of protected water supply, people fall a prey to several fatal dis­eases. So, provision of water should be considered as an indespensable part of housing, since the bulk of Indian houses do not have this vital item. This canbe seen in the Table 2.14.

DR

INK

ING

WATE

R SU

PPL

Y IN

IND

IA

75

Sour

ce : N

SSO

, 28th

Roun

d, 197

3-74

, Reg

istra

r Gen

eral

, 1981

Cens

us,1 1

11 1

11 1

1t 1

* 11 T-l1

T“l 1 1

11 1

1

Urb

an

iii

ii

58.2

7 om•

4CM 10

.68 OJ

o•T-

r~

•o

COm.r-

4i

100.

00

il

ai

iiii

31.6

156

.05 <r

r-•

4CM.

CM•

crvo.4in

i

100.

00

11 1

11 t rl

i cotOM 1 T-l

11 1

11 1

1

Urb

an it

ii

4CM.K"\vO 20

.40

11.8

2

0.86 4

l>-.O

4as

«CMt

8 !•O 1

OT— t

■a

1cd

it

ii

10.2

961

.62

16.2

1 CO!A

•K\ 5.

73 VOin.m i

8 I•O 1

or 1

1 1 1

1 1 <fl

1 C*-t It

» mt CM

1 OM ft

' 1 1 1

Urb

an

i

i

i

i 66.9

718

.05

12.6

9

0.76

0.95 CM

4.

O

vor*.

O

O 1o. 1oo »T-

Rur

al

tti

i

<x>VO.

4 65.8

415

.59 oin.

4 8.22 KS

in.o 0.

63 8•

O 1or 1

Sour

ce

i

i

i

ii

i

ti

ii Tap

Wel

lTu

bew

ell an

d han

dpu

mp

Tank

s and

pond

sR

iver

, lake

, cana

lO

ther

sour

ces

Not

recor

ded

All s

ourc

es

ir-1 w No. i

i V* CM IA 4 in vo C"-

Not

e * : Es

timat

ed fig

ures

76

According to the Registrar General of India, as per 1981 census, about 61,62 per cent of rural and 20,40 per cent of urban households depend on well water. A large number of the household in urban areas were provided with tap water,c) LATRINE FACILITY i Lack of latrine facility is a serious matter because this situation compels people to squat in the open place resulting in contamination of air, water etc. It is liable to cause and spread diseases. This is shown in the Table 2,15.

TABLE 2,15

TOILET FACILITY

SI.No, Type _!2ZfcZfL. 1981

Rural Urban Rural Urban1. Flush system 0.48 20.08 - l2. Septic tank system 1.73 13.92 - J 58.153. Services 2.50 30.25 - 14. Other -types 2,28 2.56 mm

5. None 92.40 33.01 - ' 41.856. Not recorded 0.61 0.18

All types 100.00 100.00 100.00

Source : National Sample Survey Organisation, 28th Round, 1975-74, New Delhi.

77

The majority of the households in all states have poor toilet facility in rural areas. Between 3 to 7 per cent of the rural and 30 to 77 per cent of the urban households only have the privilege of using build up latrines. As per 1981 census about 58,15 per cent of households had the privilege using this facility.Of which 51,15 household are owned and 48.85 per cent households are rented. Another pitiable thing is that the facility in rural areas is extremely lower than in urban areas,

d) BATH ROOM FACILITY : India being a hot countrypeople are compelled to have bath more than once in a day. This indicates the need for bathroom facility.As per NSS, 93 per cent of the rural house and 72 per cent of the urban households are without bath rooms. According to middle class family living survey between 54 and 63 per cent of the dwellings were without inde­pendent bathrooms. Family living survey ha3 revealed that In Jharia mining and Jalpaiguri plantation centres,99 to 100 per cent of the dwellings are without bath­rooms. In other 10 factory centres, the corresponding percentage was between 62 and 91 with the exception of Madras where the percentage was 45. As per socio-economic

78

survey, between 49 and 91 per cent of the families13were without bathrooms,

e) LIGHTING FACILITY : In most of the rural and urbancentres, the growth of residential electricity conne­ctions over the years has far outstripped idle growth of water supply. Not only do housing services and upgrading programmes appear to put a high priority for providing electricity to the houses, but in almost any rural and urban areas there is a need to be significant number of dwellings connected to the electricity network. It has been a common practice for governments concerned with low income rural and urban housing to provide as a cost of item recoverable from beneficia­ries. The distribution of households are utilising energy as given below in the Table 2.16.

About 91*67 per cent of households in rural areas and 45.99 per cent of urban people are using kerosene for lighting. So majority of the people in urban areas are using electricity for lighting and in rural areas only 6.55 percentage of people are using electricity. According to 1981 census about 14.69 per cent of the people in rural areas and 62.51 per cent in

13. K.V.Varghese i Housing Problem in India, Eurekh Publications, New Delhi, 1980, p,216.

79

TABLE 2.16PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLD ENERGY

No! of1973-74 1981

Rural Urban Rural Urban

1. Kerosene 91.67 45.99 •• -2. Electricity 6.55 53.48 14.69 62.513, Others 1.73 0.41 - -

4. Not recorded 0.05 0.12 85.31 67.49

Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Source : NSS, 28th Round, 1973-74, Census of India, 1981, New Delhi.

urban areas used electricity for lighting purpose. As per the above information, there is a need for utilising more energy by rural residential households for lighting. The Government of India has also been trying to achieve cent per cent electrification in rural areas.

CONCLUSION :

The proportion of investment in housing in the total plan investment came down from 34 per cent in the First Plan to 10 per cent in Seventh Plan. The

80

income from housing accounted for around 3.5 per cent of the gross domestic product of India. The gross capital formation is slightly at an increasing rate. It was estimated that about 6,980 man-years of employment was generated by investment of te. 1 crore in residential building construction. With regard to increase of population the problem of housing is assuming an enormous proportion in our country. The country will require an additional 76 million houses to eliminate the housing shortage by 2001 A.D. The housing gap was estimated at 37 lakhs for the year 1991. In addition to this, the problem has been increasing from the poor quality of our housing stock is indicated by the predominance of kutcha and bad houses in the housing stock.