hippocrates and the beatles lessons for informal settlements

Working Group II: Session III

Hippocrates and the BeatlesLessons for Informal Settlements

Partha MukhopadhyayCentre for Policy Research

Basic Facts in India• A larger share of people live in slums in the larger

cities but the larger share of slum dwellers are in the smaller cities– This pattern is valid over time

• While much is made of “non-tenable” locations, it does not seem to affect notification (recognition)– Perhaps an issue in larger cities

• Regardless of whether they are notified, a certain level of public services is provided to slums– Situation improving over time– Supplemented by self-provision, especially in big cities

2

In Slums: Similar Industries of employment

3

Difference of proportion of employment in slums and other areas by Industry

-20%-15%-10%

-5%0%5%

10%15%

20%

Food

man

ufac

ture

Clot

hing

& fo

otw

ear

Mac

hine

ry m

anuf

actu

re

Oth

er m

anuf

actu

re

Publ

ic Ut

ilitie

s

Cons

truc

tion

Govt

. Ser

vice

s

Trad

ition

al S

ervi

ces

Mod

ern

Serv

ices

Socia

l Ser

vice

s

Hou

seho

ld S

ervi

ces

Million Plus Non Million Mumbai

Note: Positive difference implies higher proportion employed in slums. Data Source: NSS 65th Round Housing Conditions and Amenities in India 2008-09

But, different jobs

4

-20%-15%-10%

-5%0%5%

10%15%

20%

Man

ager

s

Prof

essio

nals

Tech

nicia

ns

Cler

ks

Serv

ice a

nd sa

les

Craf

t and

trad

es

Mac

hine

ope

rato

rs

Elem

enta

ryO

ccup

atio

ns

Oth

ers

Million Plus Non Million Mumbai

Lower share in slums

Higher share in slums

Difference of proportion of employment in slums and other areas by occupation

Note: Positive difference implies higher proportion employed in slums. Data Source: NSS 65th Round Housing Conditions and Amenities in India 2008-09

Take-away• Industries of employment of slum residents not much

different from the rest of the city– Clothing and Footwear is more “slum-intensive”

e.g., see Pani and Singh (2010)• Employs a lot of the richer slum residents

– Construction employs a lot of poorer slum residents• Traditional Services, i.e., trade, hotels, retail and

transportation is a big employer– Household services not a huge number, despite the popular

perception• Slums are important for the city, not just for the personal comfort of

richer city dwellers• Modern services is not insulated from employees who live

in slums

5

Take-away• Occupations of slum residents differ somewhat from

the rest of the city residents– Fewer managers, professionals and technicians and more

craftsmen, tradesmen and elementary occupations among slum residents

• Coupled with similarity in industries of employment, this implies that different grades of workers in the same industry live in different types of city neighborhoods– Deep interlinking, where no industry is insulated from

actions that affect slum neighborhoods• Reinforces the integral nature of slums to the

economy of the city, whether larger or smaller

6

Private (Individual sector) Slum development

• Slum residents undertake a significant amount of construction– Conforms to census data

showing rise in number of in-house latrines and drinking water connections

• Households in notified slums spend more than those in non-notified slums– De Soto vindicated?

• But, notified slums have richer households

Notified Slum

Non-notified

Slum

Squatter Settlement

Other areas

10% 850 500 600 1200

25% 2000 2000 2000 3600

50% 7200 5500 5000 15000

75% 32000 25000 15000 50000

90% 150000 70000 50000 175000

7

In notified slums, half the households spend less than Rs. 7,200 but 10% spend more than Rs. 150,000 per yearFor the top 10%, slum households spend more per sq. ft. than non-slum households

Distribution of construction expenditure by type of area

Imagining the Indian City: The Chinese Model?

If China can do it…

Conclusion and Implications

Reasons for slum removal do not hold

Untenable• Slums in “non-tenable” areas are notified

and provided services– Assumption that these sites cannot be

provided services is invalid– Services improving over time

• Difficult to defend the argument that the locations are unfit for human habitation

• Untenability is not a valid reason for slum removal in many cases– If notified, regardless of location,

Located in an area classified as “Others (non-Hazardous/Non-Objectionable)”, even if not notifiedIf at least 10% of households in the slum report having patta, possession certificate or occupancy rights, even if it is not notified and not located in an area classified as “Others (non-Hazardous/Non-Objectionable)”.

– Only 4.1% are left ‘untenable’

Unproductive

• Slum residents work in similar industries as non-slum residents, albeit in different occupations in the industry– Integral to city’s productivity

• Both non-notified and notified slum residents invest in housing proportionately more than non-slum residents

• Unproductivity is not a valid reason for slum removal – Slums residents are largely

productive investing citizens

11

Hippocrates and Beatles• There is a case for looking

to Hippocrates and Beatles – Never do harm– Let it be

• The extent of service provision in slums is better than popular perception and (more importantly) can be and is being improved– Slum improvement is an

ongoing (and viable?) strategy

• Inconsistencies in the process of notification send out confusing signals about what is tenable – Induces a sense of (false?)

promise and prompts more self-investment, which can increase reluctance to change location later

• Land based financing ignores the contribution of existing use of land

12

Local / National

• Less policy, more politics– Local solutions– Variation in the nature of the

problem• A smaller city focus on

improvement may have more bang for the buck

• More tractable scale• Higher need for better

amenities– Lower ability to self-

provide

• Problem: Local does not control much– Where does change start?

• New cities– Governance

• Non-Elected– Private land and public

goods• Earmarking by regulation?

• Implications for land acquisition– Keeping the settlements out

of the acquisition?• lal dora, gaothan

– Current Chinese practice

13

Going forward…• What is the slum the solution to and what would

slum-free-ness be the solution to?• I owe the phrasing of this question to Raka Ray of Berkeley

• Recognize slum ≠ poor ≠ unproductive– Focusing on slums leaves out much of the poor– Understanding the slum economy and its linkages

• Livelihood related social protection issues– Functionality of the city

• What is the nature of housing that is being demanded?– Quality– Rental

14

Thank [email protected]

Pillars do not make cities, people do

A construction site is never a tidy place

mailto:[email protected]

Comparing form in India and China

© theswankytraveler.com

Comparing form-1

© Rafiq Maqbool/AP Photo

Urban growth under rural administration is a national phenomenon

This Census town phenomenon is not confined to a few states, though it is much more in some states (where administrative thresholds for becoming urban are high) than others.

It is not clear what planning standards to use for them

Only a third of these census towns are close to a large (more than 100,000) city – it is not just a periphery issue

18

India: 32.8%

97%69%

45%39%39%

33%30%

24%22%

21%21%

18%14%

13%13%

10%4%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

KeralaWest Bengal

JharkhandOrissa

Tamil NaduNCT of Delhi

Andhra PradeshPunjab

Uttar PradeshRajasthan

MaharashtraHaryana

BiharGujarat

KarnatakaMadhya Pradesh

Chhattisgarh

Share of urban growth due to census towns

Source: Census of India 2011, 2001

Informal settlements in Indian Cities Coimbatore Sept 2016

Gorard’s Index of Segregation

% of Households that need to move across wards for a uniform distribution across wards

GenderMale

LiteracySC/ST

In-house drinking

water

In-house latrine

Two wheeler

Delhi 1.0% 9.7% 25.3% 35.9% 47.8% 12.0%Mumbai 1.6% 7.6% 19.6% 21.4% 17.7% 16.0%Bangalore 1.1% 8.3% 20.2% 34.5% 35.9% 11.0%Hyderabad 0.6% 8.7% 22.8% 32.1% 43.1% 8.5%Ahmedabad 0.8% 7.7% 28.2% 24.2% 35.4% 13.3%Chennai 0.7% 8.6% 27.7% 27.9% 43.7% 9.9%Kolkata 2.3% 16.6% 35.0% 24.3% 37.3% 15.5%Surat 3.4% 6.6% 28.8% 39.0% 37.9% 19.2%Pune 1.2% 9.4% 25.0% 29.2% 36.5% 8.3%Jaipur 0.6% 12.7% 25.0% 41.3% 53.1% 10.0%

The level of ‘segregation’ for SC/ST is less than that observed for race in the United States‘Segregation’ is even higher for amenities like in-house latrines and water

The Indian Model…

State-led: Ten Inequality Producing Actions in Delhi

• First, DDA builds for the relatively richand not for the poor

• Second, people cannot formally develop land for housing

• Third, courts often do not recognise rights of residents of JJCs. By one reading, courts in Delhi have been a demolition machine

• Fourth, the state uses the law to constrict employment options, by relocation of industry

• Fifth, it impedes the progress of even the few relocated JJC residents by peripheralising the location and reducing the plot size in RCs

• Sixth, services remain poor in RCs, despite being legal and planned settlements,

• Seventh, in some UACs, the residents have to depend on an extensive private piped network; distributing water from borewells, which is more expensive, poorer in quality and limited in supply

• Eighth, JJCs in Delhi that are often demolished to ostensibly build infrastructure like roads, flyovers and the Delhi metro rail bear the brunt of the costs, but the benefits disproportionately accrue to privileged households

• Ninth, agencies like DJB exclude existing UACs and JJCs from their network plans, due to their ‘illegal’ status

• Tenth, transport investment in Delhi is skewed towards the metro railway, which accounted for 86% of the plan investment in sector in 2013-14

21

Source: State Produced Inequality in an Indian City Seminar August 2015 PATRICK HELLER and PARTHA MUKHOPADHYAY

People-led transport: smart?Bus services uncommonParatransit is a common mode of public transport

Usually licensed by district authoritiesLittle organisationShared use, per seat fare instead of per vehicle fare

Usually, detested by authoritiesDoes not have to be this way

Kolkata started with metered auto rickshawsSoon moved to point to point serviceOrganized into point to point routes by unionsRoutes recognised by transport authorities

People-led employment: WorkSimilar industries of employment…

-20%-15%-10%

-5%0%5%

10%15%

20% Million Plus Non Million Mumbai

…but, different jobs

-20%-15%-10%

-5%0%5%

10%15%

20% Million Plus Non Million Mumbai

Source: NSS 65th Round Housing Conditions and Amenities in India 2008-09

Note: Positive difference implies higher proportion employed in slums.

24

Where do urban men work? Formal and Informal

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Mining

Manfuf

actur

ing

Utilit

ies

Constr

uctio

nTrad

e

Food s

ervice

Transp

ort an

d Com

munica

tions

Financ

ial In

termed

iation

Real E

sate

Govern

ment

Educa

tion

Health

Other C

ommun

ity

Private

Hou

seho

lds

25

Where do urban women work? Formal and Informal

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Mining

Manfufac

turing

Utilitie

s

Constr

uctio

nTrad

e

Food se

rvice

Transp

ort and C

ommunica

tions

Financia

l Inter

mediat

ion

Real E

sate

Governmen

t

Educa

tion

Health

Other Com

munity

Private

Househo

lds

People-led: Housing (45 cities of more than 1mn)

One room or no room Two or less rooms

2

13 15

9

6

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

No.

of C

ities

Percentage of Households

In 43 or 45 cities, more than half the households live in two or less rooms

3

1413

10

5

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

No.

of C

ities

Percentage of households

Informal settlements in Indian Cities Coimbatore Sept 2016

Source: Census of India 2011

Putty or Protest…

Is this Idealistic?

• Planning and especially, Architecture, are professions– Is it worth looking at households who will not be clients?

• Responses at a number of levels– Simplest is to think of public agencies as clients

• Compared even to cities in China, where planning is a relatively recent discipline, public agencies in India are very small and poorly staffed – this can change…

– Singapore Housing and Development Board, Shenzhen Urban Planning and Design Institute

– Economic growth requires this mixture of population• “Clients” would not exist without this population

– Moral

Professional relevance

• Is the profession relevant for :– A household in a two-room

house+ Sharing the house with

another couple+ Sharing a toilet with another

household+ In an area that is not planned+ In which three fourths of the

population lives• Or for

– A household in a “village” that has given up farming, but is relatively far from a large town

• This is as much an issue of analysis– What is driving these forms

of urbanisation • Within the city?• In the census towns?

• As design– Can we do in-situ service

provision (not just demolish and redevelop on site) of settlements?

– Can we work with non-network solutions that build on individual’s investments?

• How do you deal with rising investment in septic tanks?

So,…Pieces of Putty• Can cities be remoulded?• If so, by whom?

– SPVs– Chief Ministers– Municipality– Or…

• If so, how?– Planning– Investment in

infrastructure– Or…

Places of Protest• Protesting by Voice

– Estamos presentes• The right to stay put in

Mumbai

• Protesting by Action– By building

• Unauthorised colonies in Delhi

– By providing services• Paratransit in Kolkata

– By working

[email protected]



Does “Chindia” matter/ make sense?

To keep the planet warming more than 2 degrees, we have a budget of roughly 3700 bn. tons of CO2emissions. We have spent 2200 bn.Currently, the world is emitting 35 bn. tons a year – which means we exhaust our budget around 2060…85% of China’s emissions and 55% of India’s emissions are from citiesNumbers may hide as much as they reveal. Consumption and population (China)

0

5

10

15

20

25

CO2 emissions per capitaMay not be as high

May not be as low

Measuring differences

5.05

3.30

2.44 2.32

1.501.98

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

GDP at marketprices (current

$)

GDP at marketprices

(constant $)

GDP, PPP(constant 2011international

$)

GDP percapita, PPP

(constant 2011international

$)

GDP perworker, PPP

(constant 2011international

$)

Shanghai toMumbai GDP

(current PPP $)

‘Reasons’ for Slum Removal

Untenable

• Slums are on land unfit for human habitation– Hazard for slum dwellers and

public health

• Implicit assumption that site cannot be provided services

• Q. Is this true and what is happening on the ground?

Unproductive

• Land is needed for more productive use– Implicit assumption of slum use

being low/ zero productivity

• Use of land after slum removal

• Q. Who lives in slums and are they productive?

34

Plan of Presentation• Definitions and Data Sources

– Comparability of different sources• Tenability

– Where are the slums?• Location

– Amenities in slums• Do services differ by tenability/ notification?

• Productivity– Who are the people living in slums?– What do they do?

• Occupation– How do they view their future?

• Investment in housing• How well do the reasons for removal hold?

35

Definitions and Data Sources• Slum: A slum is a compact area …with a collection of poorly built

tenements, mostly of temporary nature, crowded together usually with inadequate sanitary and drinking water facilities in unhygienic conditions... Such an area will be considered as a slum if at least 20 households live in that area for the purpose of this survey. Certain areas notified as slums by the respective municipalities, corporations, local bodies or development authorities will be treated as ‘notified slums’. Slum will be considered in urban areas only. An area having at least 20 households of notified slum …will always be considered as a slum.

• Squatter settlement: Sometimes an area develops into an unauthorised settlement with unauthorised structures put up by “squatters”. Squatter settlement will include all slum like settlements which do not have the stipulated number of 20 households to be classified as a slum

36

Slum Households: Diverse ‘Truths’

37

Census 2001

NSS 58th Round 2001-02 NSS 65th Round 2008-09

Characteristics of Slums

Housing Conditions

Characteristics of Slums

Housing Conditions

Andhra Pradesh 13,24,762 11,29,374 12,06,112 14,98,298 9,24,898

Bihar 1,31,099 69,363 61,559 25,367 47,424

Chhattisgarh 2,15,685 1,09,902 79,459 59,059 94,005

Gujarat 3,86,318 1,57,863 1,57,485 3,00,168 3,00,553

Haryana 3,23,020 .. 25,169 10,710 20,595

Karnataka 4,52,114 4,83,828 2,12,962 4,09,377 3,06,629

Madhya Pradesh 6,74,143 3,08,138 3,80,464 2,62,646 2,95,745

Maharashtra 23,75,963 31,82,576 22,30,211 29,11,170 23,19,531

Orissa 2,26,408 18,208 22,849 1,69,349 1,78,222

Punjab 2,74,570 8,962 7,826 4,351 7,633

Rajasthan 2,74,427 56,860 60,837 36,654 49,605

Tamil Nadu 9,66,162 6,19,618 3,31,700 7,24,613 4,14,848

Uttar Pradesh 8,88,267 2,27,799 2,18,660 2,16,279 3,28,692

West Bengal 9,15,380 15,30,920 4,43,658 4,42,626 4,37,210

Delhi 4,15,637 2,12,299 2,12,741 24,49,998 4,93,994

Chandigarh 29,086 12,848 5,34,803 16,203

Others 2,77,678 1,14,034 1,45,493 1,04,358 1,12,012 Total 1,01,50,719 82,29,744 58,10,033 1,01,59,825 63,47,799

Data Used in Analysis• Different sources can provide wide variation

– Some estimates are patently absurd• Delhi, Chandigarh

• Analysis uses– Characteristics of Slum data to investigate issues of

tenability and relationship to service provision– Housing condition data for household level analysis and

comparison of slum with rest of city– Three broad categories

• Million plus cities• Other cities• Specific cities

38

Tenability

Where are the Slums and What is their status?

Which Cities?

Bigger Cities have a higher proportion living in Slums, but…

41

Notified Slums

Non-Notified Slums

Total Slums Squatter Other Areas

All India 5% 4% 10% 1% 89%

Non Million 3% 4% 7% 1% 92%

Million Plus 10% 7% 17% 1% 83%

Mumbai 24% 19% 43% 0% 57%

Delhi 8% 11% 20% 1% 80%

Kolkata 15% 6% 21% 0% 79%

Pune 11% 2% 13% 0% 87%

Hyderabad 6% 6% 12% 0% 92%

Bangalore 2% 5% 7% 0% 93%

Chennai 7% 0% 7% 0% 93%

Ahmedabad 0% 1% 1% 0% 99%Data Source: NSS 65th Round Housing Conditions and Amenities in India 2008-09

Smaller Towns account for a higher share of Slum Dwellers

42

Notified Slums

Non-Notified Slums

Total Slums Squatter Other Areas

All India 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Non Million 50% 61% 55% 83% 76%Million Plus 50% 39% 45% 17% 24%

Mumbai 20% 18% 19% 0% 3%Delhi 6% 10% 8% 2% 3%Kolkata 5% 2% 4% 0% 1%Pune 4% 1% 3% 0% 2%Hyderabad 2% 2% 2% 0% 2%Bangalore 1% 3% 2% 0% 3%Chennai 2% 0% 1% 0% 2%Ahmedabad 0% 0% 0% 0% 1%

Data Source: NSS 65th Round Housing Conditions and Amenities in India 2008-09

Where in the Cities?

‘Whose’ lands do what slums occupy?

44

2008-09 2002

Tenable Non-Tenable Tenable Non-Tenable

NotifiedNon

Notified NotifiedNon



Notified

Private 43% 51% 29% 31% 41% 40% 25% 27%

Public(local)

44% 31% 50% 39% 40% 37% 51% 40%

Public(non-local) 0% 0% 7% 12% 1% 4% 8% 19%

Others 13% 18% 13% 18% 17% 19% 16% 14%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Data Source: NSS 65th Round Characteristics of Slums 2008-09 and NSS 58h Round Characteristics of Slums 2002

Location: Dharavi

45

• The location of Dharavi is integral to the intensity of efforts to ‘redevelop’ the area.

BKC

Non-Tenability ≠ Non-Notification

46

8%

16%

9%8%

13%14% 14%

18%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

NonTenable

Tenable NonTenable

Tenable NonTenable

Tenable NonTenable

Tenable

Notified Non Notified Notified Non Notified

Million Non million

Shar

e of

Slu

ms

in In

dia

Data Source: NSS 65th Round Characteristics of Slums 2008-09

Non-Tenability ≠ Lack of Services

47

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Public None Public None Public None Public None

Non Tenable Tenable Non Tenable Tenable

Million Non million

Latrines 2002

2009

0%

4%

8%

12%

16%

20%


Million Non Million

Street Lights2002

2009

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%


Million Non Million

Covered Drainage2002

2009

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


Million Non Million

Garbage Collection by ULBs

2002

2009


47

& Non-Notification ≠ Lack of Services

48

0%

4%

8%

12%

16%

20%


Million Non Million

Street Light2002

2009

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Public None Public None Public None Public None


Million Non million

Latrines2002

2009

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%


Million Non Million

Covered Drainage2002

2009

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


Million Non Million

Garbage Collection by ULBs2002

2009


Non-Notification ≠ Lack of Services

49

Million Plus cities Non Million Cities Mumbai

2001-02 Notified Slums

Non-Notified Slums

Other Areas

Notified Slums

Non-Notified Slums

Other Areas

Notified Slums

Non-Notified Slums

Other Areas

Latrine

Exclusive use 16% 9% 64% 27% 19% 55% 2% 2% 60%

Shared 15% 13% 25% 14% 6% 19% 7% 9% 26%

Community latrine 55% 53% 5% 18% 12% 5% 91% 83% 13%

No latrine 13% 24% 5% 41% 62% 20% 0% 6% 2%

Drinking Water

Exclusive use 24% 18% 58% 14% 8% 43% 33% 34% 86%Building common use 26% 11% 24% 17% 8% 27% 38% 20% 11%

Community 51% 71% 17% 69% 84% 30% 29% 46% 3%

DrainageUnderground 26% 13% 65% 5% 1% 20% 6% 11% 74%

Covered pucca 20% 7% 10% 5% 3% 14% 37% 14% 13%Open pucca 35% 34% 16% 45% 24% 36% 49% 43% 11%Open kutcha 5% 22% 3% 16% 11% 10% 6% 24% 0%No drainage 14% 24% 6% 29% 60% 21% 2% 8% 2%

Garbage

Local body 84% 67% 71% 63% 26% 54% 99% 97% 98%Residents 4% 13% 19% 9% 19% 18% 0% 0% 0%

No arrangement 11% 20% 8% 27% 53% 23% 1% 3% 0%Others 0% 0% 2% 1% 2% 5% 0% 0% 1%

Data Source: NSS 58th Round Housing Conditions and Amenities in India 2002

Non-Notification ≠ Lack of Services

50


2008-09 Notified Slums

Non-Notified Slums

Other Areas

Notified Slums

Non-Notified Slums

Other Areas

Notified Slums

Non-Notified Slums

Other Areas

LatrineExclusive use 24% 14% 66% 37% 28% 60% 1% 11% 58%

Shared 23% 14% 28% 23% 16% 24% 9% 5% 28%Community latrine 50% 63% 4% 12% 23% 3% 89% 81% 14%

No latrine 4% 9% 2% 29% 33% 13% 0% 3% 0%

Drinking Water

Exclusive use 37% 24% 59% 26% 17% 46% 41% 29% 80%Building common use 24% 18% 27% 18% 15% 25% 21% 28% 13%

Community 33% 55% 10% 52% 63% 23% 30% 41% 5%Others 6% 3% 4% 5% 5% 6% 8% 3% 2%

DrainageUnderground 46% 17% 73% 11% 9% 26% 14% 19% 84%

Covered pucca 26% 26% 12% 13% 8% 15% 52% 40% 12%Open pucca 20% 29% 13% 44% 32% 34% 29% 36% 3%Open kutcha 3% 14% 1% 8% 10% 7% 0% 3% 0%No drainage 5% 14% 2% 24% 41% 18% 5% 3% 0%

Garbage

Local body 84% 76% 77% 61% 43% 57% 92% 86% 98%Residents 3% 6% 14% 15% 18% 13% 0% 1% 1%

No arrangement 9% 16% 7% 24% 38% 26% 8% 13% 0%Others 4% 2% 3% 0% 1% 4% 0% 0% 0%


Productivity

Consumption

Who lives in slums? Many poor, but also quite a few rich

53

National UrbanDecile


Notified Slums

Non-Notified Slums

Other Areas

Notified Slums

Non-Notified Slums

Other Areas

Notified Slums

Non-Notified Slums

Other Areas

1 15% 16% 69% 6% 7% 87% 33% 63% 4%2 18% 17% 66% 5% 8% 87% 68% 14% 18%3 18% 13% 69% 5% 5% 89% 55% 25% 21%4 16% 9% 74% 5% 5% 90% 28% 24% 48%5 14% 7% 79% 4% 4% 93% 47% 24% 29%6 13% 8% 79% 3% 3% 93% 29% 41% 31%7 13% 7% 80% 3% 3% 95% 41% 29% 30%8 11% 8% 81% 2% 2% 95% 33% 24% 43%9 8% 5% 87% 1% 1% 97% 21% 20% 59%10 2% 2% 96% 1% 0% 99% 6% 4% 89%

Total 10% 7% 83% 4% 4% 93% 24% 19% 57%


Big Cities are different but Mumbai is truly Maximum

54

96

82 80

53

71 69 70

57

41

11

60

32

16 15 12 12 9 8 6 5 3 20

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Per

cen

tage

National Urban Decile

Bombay DelhiKolkata MillionNon million


Share of Slum-Dwellers by Consumption Class

Employment

Where does their income come from?

56

All Deciles Bottom Three Deciles Top Three Deciles

Million Plus Non Million Million Plus Non Million Million Plus Non Million

Slums Other Areas Slums Other

Areas Slums Other Areas Slums Other


Areas

Primary 1% 1% 11% 9% 0% 2% 12% 15% 0% 1% 8% 4%

Food manufacture 1% 2% 3% 3% 1% 1% 4% 4% 2% 1% 1% 2%

Clothing & footwear 12% 8% 11% 6% 6% 11% 9% 6% 21% 6% 14% 5%Machinery manufacture 3% 5% 1% 3% 1% 2% 1% 1% 3% 5% 3% 4%

Other manufacture 11% 10% 8% 8% 5% 9% 10% 8% 12% 10% 7% 8%

Public Utilities 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 1% 1% 1% 2%

Construction 13% 7% 19% 11% 22% 11% 23% 17% 6% 4% 9% 5%

Govt. Services 5% 8% 5% 8% 8% 3% 2% 3% 4% 11% 14% 15%

Traditional Services 41% 37% 34% 35% 49% 50% 35% 39% 34% 31% 27% 29%

Modern Services 6% 15% 4% 7% 3% 3% 2% 3% 9% 22% 8% 13%

Social Services 3% 5% 3% 7% 1% 5% 2% 3% 5% 6% 7% 13%

Household Services 3% 1% 1% 1% 5% 3% 1% 1% 3% 1% 2% 0%


What kind of jobs do they do?

57

All Deciles Bottom Three Deciles Top Three Deciles

Million Plus Non Million Million Plus Non Million Million Plus Non Million

Slums Other Areas Slums Other



Areas

Managers 4% 18% 6% 13% 4% 12% 6% 7% 3% 23% 9% 18%

Professionals 9% 13% 4% 11% 6% 5% 2% 4% 14% 19% 9% 21%

Technicians 2% 8% 3% 6% 0% 2% 1% 2% 5% 11% 10% 11%

Clerks 5% 7% 2% 6% 1% 1% 1% 2% 6% 10% 5% 10%

Service and sales 17% 13% 12% 15% 14% 15% 10% 15% 17% 12% 13% 14%

Craft and trades 22% 17% 27% 18% 13% 23% 28% 23% 30% 12% 23% 11%

Machine operators 13% 10% 10% 8% 10% 13% 6% 8% 10% 7% 14% 6%

Elementary Occupations 27% 12% 32% 18% 52% 28% 41% 32% 14% 5% 15% 6%

Others 1% 1% 4% 5% 0% 1% 5% 7% 0% 1% 2% 3%


Housing Investment

Slum houses are small(even for rich slum residents in big cities)

59

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Notified

Non-notified

Squatter

Other

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Notified Slums

Million

Other

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Non notified Slums

Million

Other

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Other areas

Million

Other


Proportionately more Slum Residents undertake new construction

60

Million Plus cities Non Million Cities

Notified Slums

Non-Notified Slums

Other Areas

TotalNotified Slums

Non-Notified Slums

Other Areas

Total

1 19% 4% 3% 6% 5% 6% 6% 6%

2 7% 10% 2% 5% 4% 6% 4% 5%

3 6% 4% 4% 5% 13% 5% 5% 5%

4 6% 15% 4% 5% 5% 1% 7% 7%

5 3% 5% 2% 3% 4% 7% 4% 4%

6 2% 6% 3% 3% 4% 4% 5% 5%

7 6% 11% 4% 5% 7% 2% 4% 4%

8 5% 16% 3% 4% 3% 4% 4% 4%

9 8% 4% 2% 3% 8% 1% 4% 4%

10 6% 3% 2% 2% 8% 4% 3% 3%

6% 8% 5% 3% 6% 4% 5% 5%


Percent of Households undertaking new construction by consumption decile

…and they spend a fair bit too

61

05.

000e

-06

.000

01.0

0001

5D

ensi

ty

0 500000 1000000 1500000 2000000 2500000Total Cost of 1st constr. in last 1 yr.(Rs.)

kernel = epanechnikov, bandwidth = 1598.82

Kernel density estimate

0.0

0002

.000

04.0

0006

.000

08D

ensi

ty



Kernel density estimate0

.000

01.0

0002

.000

03.0

0004

Den

sity

0 200000 400000 600000 800000Total Cost of 1st constr. in last 1 yr.(Rs.)


Kernel density estimate

0.0

0001

.000

02.0

0003

.000

04D

ensi

ty



Kernel density estimateNotified Slums

Non-notified Slums

Squatter Settlements

Other Areas


How can 5% of slum households be ‘managers’?

in million Share of Owners

Managers 12.3 7.9 64%

Professionals 9.3 3.5 38%

Technicians 6.5 1.0 16%

Clerks 5.3 0.1 2%

Service and sales 14.0 4.6 33%

Craft and trades 4.0 0.6 15%

Machine operators 17.9 4.5 25%

Elementary Occupations 7.4 1.7 23%

Managers 17.7 2.8 16%

X 0.1 0.0 21%

Total 94.4 26.7 28%

From the NSS 66th Round ‘Employment & Unemployment Survey’ (EUS) in 2009-10, we find a large majority of senior officials/ managers are ‘Owners’ Their share is 64%

Owners are defined as those working in partnerships or proprietorship and self-employed.

Note: EUS is individual level data and cannot be separated by those living in slums and non slums.

62

Where is the Indian City?

Working Group I: Session IIIntegrated Planning, Management and Governance Structure Imperatives

Where? Urban India is more about morphing places, than about moving people

64

24.3% 25.3%

8.2%

25.6%

6.7% 2.6%

6.4%

0.9%

25.6%34.1%

7.4%

32.9%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Million Plus Towns

1L - 10L Towns

Census Towns

Other Urban Areas

Share of Urban Population by Type of Urban Area2001 2011_New 2011_Old

Census towns are functionally urban (share of non-farm work more than 75%) and large (more than 5000 people) villages, that continue to be administered by rural authorities. The new scheme, SP Mukherji RURBAN Mission, in the Ministry of Rural Development

Source: Census of India 2011, 2001

The spread of majority Non-farm (50%+) Villages over time

Villages with ‘better sanitation’ than smaller towns in the state

What drives urban population growth?

The growth of urban population can be decomposed into natural population growth in existing urban areas, boundary expansion, changes in classification from rural to urban (for both statutory and ‘census towns’ ) and net migration.

The chart shows that the share of change in classification (35%) – see census towns in previous slide – is more than net migration (23%), though gross rural urban flows (36%) are comparable.

Over 1999-2001, natural population growth in existing urban areas accounted for 69%, compared to 42% over 2001-11

20.6 38.5 31.8-11.5

-15 0 15 30 45 60 75 90

Components of Urban Population Growth (mn.)

Net Rural Urban Migration Natural Growth and expansion

Change in Classification Urban Rural Migration

32.1 Total Rural Urban Migration

Is this growth serviced?

Piped Sewerage

46% 43%

93%

79% 82%

40%

8%

25% 22%27%

5% 2% 5%9%

3%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Core District MR Urban (Non-Core) MR Rural

Treated Tap Water

78%

67%64% 65%

88%

77%

30%26%

18%

47%

22%

2%

15%12%

15%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Core District MR Urban (Non-Core) MR Rural

Thank [email protected]

Pillars do not make cities, people do



hippocrates and the beatles lessons for informal settlements

Government & Nonprofit