Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.
See Premium Plans
 
UNCOVERING MYTHS OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN MUMBAI
ata Institute o Social Sciences organised a pre-con-erence workshop, on “Uncovering Myths o UrbanDevelopment in Mumbai” as a prelude to the Ur-ban Age India Conerence organised by the LondonSchool o Economics and the Alred HerrhausenSociety o Deutsche Bank in Mumbai on November1, 2007. Te workshop acilitated open interactionamong academics rom Indian and internationaluniversities on signicant hypotheses emerging romrecent urban-renewal discourses on Mumbai.An international panel comprised o academics romthe London School o Economics, Harvard LawSchool, emple University in Philadelphia, Universi-dad Iberoamericana in Mexico City, along with prac-titioners rom Rockeeller Foundation and the Stateo Sao Paulo joined a majority o aculties drawn rom various disciplines at ata Institute o Social Sciencesand academics rom Indian Institute o echnology Delhi (II), II Mumbai, Mumbai University, IndiraGandhi Institute o Development Research (IGIDR),International Institute o Population Sciences (IIPS)and Pune University.Te workshop was open and minimally structured inorder to initiate deliberations. Four hypotheses wereposed in the orm o questions:- Slum-ree Mumbai or Urban Renewal?- Modern ransportation Systems: Aimingor Sustainability?- Emerging Service Sectors: Is LabourMarket prepared or the transition?- Access to Social Inrastructure:Implications or Quality o Lie?
Slum Free Mumbai for Urban Renewal?
Much o the debate on a plethora o Mumbai prob-lems is invariably linked to migration, its implicationsor housing and land use patterns. Pro. Sujatha Patel,Head o Department o Sociology at Pune University,while initiating the discussion, said that Mumbai isthe city o migration and there has been politics o migration associated with it ever since its existencein 18th century. It is all related to the way the city was ocially dened and in 1975 there was a growingmovement to renounce any urther migrants. Tereis today enough evidence to say that within greaterBombay (municipal administrated), there is naturalincrease in population and those who are settlingdown are doing out so outside Mumbai in the Mum-bai Urban Agglomeration and the planned MMR re-gion.Te visible allout o migration or the city o Mum-bai has been slums. For a very long time there was adebate whether slums are a problem or slums are in-digenous coping solutions. Dr. Amita Bhide, Associ-ate Proessor at ISS stated that slums in the currentcontext are a ‘resource’ or builders, internationaldevelopers, politicians, and even NGOs. So it is notabout ‘slum-ree’ Mumbai, but ‘slum perpetuation’ inMumbai or Urban Renewal. Te current rehabilita-tion schemes championed by Government in part-nership with builders show the condence city poli-cymakers and politicians have not only in displacingpeople, but also rehabilitating them.1
ISS WORKSHOP, MUMBAINOVEMBER 2007
Pre-conference workshop organised by
Tata Institute of Social Sciences
 
Studies have shown that much o the claims o reha-bilitation by the government have merely been the re-location o people rom prime city areas to ar-ungareas. Te trade os or the displaced amilies havebeen devastating in terms o loss o livelihoods andconstricted access to education and health. Tis givespeople no choice but to squat again within the city limits, not because they preer living closer to theirworkplaces but so as to avoid expenditures on travel.With high participation rom the private sector, re-habilitation is a viable proposition involving little in- vestment rom the Government. Hence it is likely tobe continued in the name o making Mumbai ‘slum-ree’.Te ree housing policy o the Maharashtra Govern-ment in 1990s, according to Pro. R. N Sharma o ataInstitute, actually marked the death-knell or the vul-nerable poor to secure their livelihoods and tenure.Te nexus o politicians and city builders using theploy o cross-subsidization to tackle ‘housing pov-erty’ actually displaced them to distant places whilegranting builders extraordinary prot on the sale o extra FSI in the open market. Such vulnerability o the poor was eectively used by ‘builder maa’ to re-place market orces and urther inequalities in hous-ing. Property rights are not well dened, which ishighly relevant to urban renewal through housing re-development. So ‘who to rehabilitate’ is a contentiousissue that as been politicized greatly, as conrmed by many other experts.Pro. Lindsay Bremner, emple University was in-trigued to know about the inormal land markets op-erating in slums and how people acquire and sell landin slums. In response to the query, Pro. Sharma com-mented that the notion o slums being homogenousentities where all people are poor should be doneaway with. Tere are many interest groups existingand contesting the space within the slums. More sobecause the slum land has become a part o the urbanrenewal process and has come in the open marketthrough government SRA schemes. Te discussioncentred around the conspiracy to create more vulner-ability among the poor who cash in on the opportu-nities to create capital by the builders. Slums have al-ways been a part o the city but now they stand in theurban renewal market – which is the major paradigmshif that has taken place in recent years.
Modern Transportation Systems: Aiming for Sus-tainability?
Pro. S. Sriraman rom Bombay University chairedthe session, quoting Singapore Prime Minister dur-ing his Mumbai visit, that what is important is notto have higher capacity, modern world class systemso transport but to go to the basics o mobility, some-thing which is not being attempted in any reasonableway in any o our cities, let alone in Mumbai. Tepricing o services in systems like suburban trainsis on a binge. Since there is no ocus on rationaliz-ing pricing systems in any o our modes, this has re-sulted in crisis o sustainability and viability o thesesystems.In a report submitted to the Railway Board in 1993,Pro. Sriraman had suggested a marginal increase inthe price o season tickets in suburban railways thatcould take away 10-12% people o the system. Tesituation is such that in non-peak hours or even holi-days, Mumbai trains are packed as everyone has sea-son tickets and wants to take a ride and move around.It is impossible to charge a are or public transportin India, which cost more than that o running a mo-torcycle which is Re 1 / km. BES (BrihanmumbaiElectric Supply and ransport) company that runsbus services in the city, is on the verge o collapsing.On almost 100 o its 400 routes, there are no pas-sengers throughout the day and they are not able toshut the services. Tis is not sustainable or any cleanpublic transportation system. As status quo remains,we may be on the road o no return.ransportation planning has a lot to do with city sizewhich has not been a part o any transportation de-bates. Pro. Geetam iwari rom II Delhi said thatthe relationship between place o work and residenceis very important in understanding city size. I one2
 
is walking to work which is the case with Mumbai’s55% people, then Mumbai is essentially a very smallcity. It doesn’t matter i 16 – 20 million people livehere. Secondly, average commuting time in Mumbaiis 28 minutes, which is less than Mexico city, Johan-nesburg or other urban age cities. Tus the majorconcern or this city is that planners are ignoring thewalking trips, even when planning or public trans-port. Tis is because every public transport trip isrst a pedestrian trip. It is obvious that one is ignor-ing the majority o pedestrian users while planningmainly or the remaining 40% people who travel intrains and buses combined, also termed as captive us-ers, who have no choice but to travel in these modes.Adding to this Mr. Sudhir Badami, Member o theRoad Monitoring Committee or Potholes, said thatthe mindset o authorities is that they don’t believethat ootpaths are important. It may be a long timebeore the city can make walking comortable.For whatever reasons, even today Mumbai can betermed as an environmentally riendly, transportparadise where the majority o people walk or movein public transport and the dependence on privatemodes is very small. In Mumbai since people stay close to their work, they have zero carbon emissionsand probably can demand carbon credits or ourslums. Street crimes in Indian cities is very low com-pared to cities like Los Angeles. From a sociologicalpoint o view, such phenomenon occurs when one al-lows inclusive cities to come up not by planning, butby deying ormal planning process as in the case o Mumbai or other Indian cities.Pro. Dinesh Mohan rom II Delhi said that it ap-pears that migration in itsel is not the problem whenan I proessional migrates rom Silicon Valley toMumbai. So ‘who migrates’ is the issue, with morelikely the solutions producing the problems or thiscity. Tese solutions are high speed public transportto bring people into South Mumbai and employ themin extensive construction activity throughout thecity. So it is not that Mumbai Suburban trains thathave caused the problems or the city? Te concept o CBDs (Central Business District) which exists only inMumbai, has a lot to contribute to the transport situ-ation in the present context. CBDs require the trans-portation system to readily bring people into the city centre. I there are no CBDs, the whole concept o transport changes. Mumbai certainly doesn’t needhigh capacity, ast transportation system but ratherneeds to create inrastructure or people walking, bi-cycling and medium capacity surace systems whichare also low cost.
Emerging Service Sectors: Is Labour Market pre-pared for the transition?
Pro. Sharit Bhowmik rom ISS said that the compo-sition o its labour orce changed dramatically in lastew decades in Mumbai. In 1961 as per census, 65% o the population worked in the ormal sector. By 1991,the trend had reversed – 35% working in the ormalsector and 65% in the inormal sector. By 2001, morethan 70% people worked in the inormal sector in thecity. Tis meant insecure employment or a majority o the people with low wages and undened work-ing hours. Tis inormal labour is unregulated by any labour laws. Globalisation seems to be pushing thetrend o increasing inormal employment, to keep thelabor costs cheap. Te inormal sector is well reect-ed in the housing patterns in the city. As per hous-ing survey conducted by State department, Bureauo Economics and Statistics in 2000, 73% o urbanhouseholds lived in a one room house, 18% in 2 roomsand the remaining 9% in 3 or more room houses. Fiveyears earlier, only 69% population lived in 1 roomhouses. Tus the quality o the housing stock in thecity is directly related to the employment and wageso the people inhabiting the city. Te prole o peopleworking in the inormal economy matches up withlow-cost slum housing they preer. And conversely,these people are able to provide cheap labour to thethriving market, only because o their cheap housing,mostly sucing with a walking trip to work. So it willnot be a misnomer to say that slums are actually pro-lierating, to counter the economies o urban marketand labour.Mumbai is also a city where anyone can nd a job.Te organised employment has moved rom the mainpart o Greater Mumbai to outside Mumbai and areasesp. the Tane – Belapur belt. Tis is evident rom thetrain trips that allegedly increased rom city suburbsto distant suburbs upwards rather rom city suburbsto the downtown area. With the breakdown o themills, the slums have also shifed upwards to the sub-urbs and outskirts o Mumbai.3
Search
Search History:
Searching...
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
  • p.
    • Notes
    Load more