You are on page 1of 26

Südasien-Chronik - South Asia Chronicle 3/2013, S.

135-160 © SüdasienSeminar der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin ISBN: 978-3-86004-295-3

Islamabad – Living with the plan1

Looking at sheer numbers, Islamabad can be regarded as a successful
model of urban development. Half a century after its inception and the
implementation of the plan the city has grown to 1.2 million inhabitants,
the ‘urban sprawl’ beyond the limits of the plan has occupied more
space than assigned in the original plan. From 1972 until 2009 the
residential areas have been expanded from less than one fifth of the
agglomeration‘s space to an extent that has increased by half, mainly
on the expense of mixed vegetated areas. Nevertheless, at the same
time the space occupied by agricultural farm activities for the supply of
the citizens with goods and products of daily necessities has remained
bigger and is still covering approximately one third of Islamabad (Butt
et al. 2012: 111). The distinction between rapid urban development
and the need to supply its growing number of citizens with nutritional
and dairy products could well be a founding principle for planning cities.
Deficiencies and shortcomings are often embedded in a static perception
of urban development that lacks vision and imagination when it comes
to present and future demands of urban citizens and when unexpected
growth occurs.
Living with the plan Islamabad is presented as a case in point for
myopia in designing original plans, for necessary adjustments to daily
needs of residents and for vested interests of different stakeholders
that need to be negotiated in the framework of power and forceful
interventions. At the same time Islamabad functions within Pakistan
as an exceptional city which has got a planning authority that other
municipalities still grossly lack to have or fail to apply (Niaz Ahmad
& Anjum 2012). Planning and designing urban space is embedded in
socio-historical contexts and provides an expression of contemporary
thinking, fashions, power structures and influences from inside and
outside. Participation of future inhabitants is a rare exception while
planned cities often replicate the aspirations and affluence of decisionmakers.



1. Planned cities – from absolutism to post-colonialism
Planned cities fascinate not only the ruling elites who commission them
but also the urban researchers who analyse them. Prominent examples
include the new cities founded by absolutist rulers in Europe and Asia,
colonial planned cities in the Third World, Ebenezer Howard’s garden
city movement and similar concepts. In a somewhat different context
we find the planning and implementation schemes of authoritarian
regimes in their search for an appropriate and well-ordered microcosm
in which everyone can or should be assigned to a proper place.
At their respective scales, architects and urban planners strive to
create new forms of building that realize their perceptions of existing
urban structures and sometimes apparently express utopian visions.
Zeitgeist and contemporary power structures, architectonic insights
and technological progress create important settings for carrying out
‘modern’ experiments which thus become a place, a city. They all share
a certainty born of hope: to create living conditions for a better world
and a better society. In most cases such developments are discussed
solely from the perspective of clients and architects. Big names are
linked with big projects. The part played by local factors and actors is
studiously ignored. Modifications in planning and construction are rarely
the result of a participatory decision-making process.
The same applies particularly to the post-colonial creation of new
capital cities. Brasilia was an early manifestation of such ideas, a
symbiosis of the political power of the President Juscelino Kubitschek de
Oliveira and a concomitant constructivism stimulated by the architectural
daring and building non-conformity of Oscar Niemeyer (Stephenson
1970). Africa and Asia saw a trend towards building new capitals,
relocating from coastal cities to geographically central locations in the
newly independent nation states. For example: In 1979 the Tanzanian
government under Julius Nyerere transferred its capital from Daressalam
to Dodoma as a symbol of the Ujamaa village movement. Nigeria moved
its capital from Lagos to Abuja (1982); the Japanese architect Kenzo
Tange was commissioned to design the concept. In 1984 Côte d‘Ivoire
moved its capital from Abidjan to Yamoussoukro, the birthplace of the
then president, Houphouet-Boigny. Closer to South Asia is the relocation
of Kazakhstan’s capital from Almaty (Alma Ata) to the newly built
Astana, which is visible evidence of the new independence gained after
the collapse of the Soviet Union, the changed relevance of geographical

In their dimensions and aims. 2. The newly sovereign Indian Union required additional centres of administration. the new capital of Orissa. these projects can easily compete with Islamabad in neighbouring Pakistan.3 Gandhinagar was planned as the new capital of Gujarat to relieve the strain on the city of Ahmedabad and is the third major urban construction project in response to the pioneering impact of Le Corbusier and Louis Khan in Dhaka. and the strong position of the president Nursultan Nazarbayev. Great Britain held great hopes of her investments in New Delhi. The centre of power shifted from the international port city of Karachi. Mewada (Kalia 2004). K. Pakistan‘s new capital .FOKUS: ISLAMABAD relationships.5 million inhabitants. was responsible for planning Bhubaneshwar. which influenced Edwin Lutyen‘s 1912 design for the colonial capital of New Delhi (Jain 1990). At the same time Dhaka4 became the capital of East Pakistan. which replaced Cuttack. Pakistan is a prime example for the relocation of a capital city. The colonial architectural heritage was reinterpreted in a nation state context and the Anglo-Indian buildings were put to a different use. which then ended its term sooner than expected New Delhi immediately became the capital of an independent India. and the central government provided funds for new capitals to be built. meant to be the imperial city. Three of them also had an international impact: Chandigarh became famous through Le Corbusier‘s design of Punjab‘s new provincial capital. to the new planned city of Islamabad. The spirit of modern urban planning spread to the Indian sub-continent from the West. but Gandhinagar was the work of Balkrishna Doshi and H. ranging from India‘s temple towns with their geometric layouts to the “Anglo-Indian cantonment” (Pieper 1977). the earlier seat of power. In a similar manner the military rulers of Myanmar shifted its capital from the coastal town of Yangon to Naypyitaw in 2007.2 The architect and urban planner Otto Königsberger. expressing Pakistan‘s desire to adapt to the new situation of a bi-territorial sovereign state and its interest in 137 . Both had already designed famous buildings in Ahmedabad.symbolising a new beginning Like the cases just quoted. a refugee from Nazi Germany. the capital is planned for 2. New Delhi. South Asia has set the precedent for planned cities. hailed as the “gateway to the world” (Wilhelmy 1968). In 1956 legislation was passed dividing India into federal states.

the continuing confidence in the prospect of an accelerated post-colonial development. work.d. and having to renovate decaying buildings. The idea of a replicable urban and housing model arose from Constantinos Doxiadis‘s vision that a universal city system – what we would now call a global system – would fuse to form an urban network. one of the world‘s leading planning consultancies that had built its reputation on concepts such as ekistics (the science of human settlement) and dynapolis in the search for the “City of the Future” (Mahsud 2001. is now developing new sectors in an expanding city. 2). adapting the concept to modern requirements: all these tasks present as great a challenge as achieving acceptable levels of hygiene. Hence early description and analysis largely focused on the planning concept. Islamabad has been accepted as the capital and is growing steadily (Fig. This concept was implemented in the spirit of the Athens Charter and reflected modern.138 HERMANN KREUTZMANN the internal development of its remote provinces. and the desire to create a liveable urban environment. Frantzeskakis 1995. Scholz 1996). recreation and traffic (Fig. 2007. of untrammelled growth. Doxiadis n. This ‘capital in the making’ interested many observers who studied the planning concepts and the early construction phase. The Capital Development Authority (CDA). 1). adapting the planning concept to contemporary social conditions. adequate provision of drinking water. shopping. 1997. 2008). Important reference material from this period has recently been used for comparative studies (Botka 1995. Kreutzmann 1992. the ecumenopolis. Islamabad originally embodied the principle of proliferation. Many authors have drawn attention to the city‘s grid layout. The majority of the authors involved take the original planning concept as their point of reference when analysing the ‘new’ capital. The contract was awarded to Doxiadis Associates. Mahsud 2001. keeping or breaking infrastructure promises made in the early phase. Nayyar 2002.5 The building of Islamabad was to express the optimism of the 1960s. internationally debated approaches in architecture and urban planning.). Maintaining and developing housing and commercial complexes. the chief planning and administration body. Yet almost two generations have passed since then. Pakistan and hence Islamabad drew considerable initial attention owing to Pakistan‘s then status as a “model developing country” (Pfeffer 1967). and reliable . Hence. and all parts of the earth would thus interrelate (Benevolo 1983: 1015. whereas more recent studies tend to concentrate on effect-oriented issues. the concept of separate sectors for housing. 2008.

i. to guarantee adequate housing has been fulfilled. and the survival of households with jobs in the informal service sector. and where building quality has a significant impact. van der Linden 1986). these issues will be addressed with reference to the ‘new’ capital. Further items on the current agenda of urban studies include the exclusion of certain population groups and access to vital resources (Berner 2003. because this is where the chief planner himself implemented his concept of social mixing. Evers & Korff 2000. Bähr & Mertins 2000): (i) The development of ‘squatter settlements’ on vacant public and private land in or at the edge of cities. the appropriation of land for dwellings by marginalised sections of the population. where he was responsible for the construction work. Kreutzmann 1992. Urban studies largely focus on two elements (cf. The focus will be on the sectors that Doxiadis planned as core residential areas in the first development phase. Hardoy & Satterthwaite 1989. the CDA. 3. Both aspects are linked to fundamental questions 139 .FOKUS: ISLAMABAD waste disposal to stabilise the capital city‘s environment.e. (ii) Downgrading of existing housing districts owing to social mobility or devaluation. The question will not be whether they are evident in Islamabad. To assess how far the claim formulated by the planners and their successor. Islamabad. Both elements came into the focus of various issues of urban analysis. Kreibich 1998. Squatter settlements and slums in the new capital? The issues addressed here relate to one aspect of urban geography: the housing situation of the lower income-groups of society. the use of urban space. Various authors have already shown how excluded and marginalised groups have seized urban land and defended it against the diverse interests of city authorities and self-appointed profiteers (Evers 1986. a process generally described as slum formation. In the following. The question will also be raised of how a fast growing city copes with supplying inexpensive housing for its lower-income groups. Werlin 1999). we shall take a close look at housing quality and the current housing situation in Islamabad. but how they are handled by various actors. Recently the focus has turned to legal issues of possession and claim in ‘illegal’ squatter settlements. In the early phase physiognomic and functional aspects were highlighted. The discussion included the identification of redevelopment areas.

who built housing of different sizes and standards according to an index based on civil service income groups (Fig. however.140 HERMANN KREUTZMANN of housing provision. 3). 3. The first four sectors (G-6. the CDA. He designed Islamabad as a series of square sectors set parallel to the city‘s backbone – the main axis. social structures in the sector were cemented and permanently reflected income hierarchies. In the case of Islamabad. At present. Extensive packages of building plots were reserved for government property developers. a topic of current discussion in the spectrum between housing as a human right and housing as a commodity (Berner 2003.6 Here are Islamabad‘s oldest buildings dating to the early 1960s. a field of tension that subsumes both the actions of the housing seekers and the official reactions to them. Jinnah Avenue (named after Pakistan‘s Father of the Nation). the ultimate responsibility rests with its development authority. the allocation procedure and housing shortage in Islamabad put paid to the idea of regular removals. F-7) are located at the eastern top of this broad-band backbone and form the nucleus of residential and functional development.1. Werlin 1999). G-7. which means that . Mahsud (2001: 95) has drawn attention to a contradiction in the planning concept: The spatial dynamics of areal growth and predetermined expansion of the metropolitan area stands in contrast to stagnation within the individual sectors with regard to social mobility and changes in the social structure. Planned social structure or stagnation of a dynamic concept? Constantinos Doxiadis envisaged an urban environment – a dynapolis – that would experience almost endless growth manifested by areal expansion and high urban density. F-6. Once established.7 Basically. Government employees were to live in social segregation in the accommodation assigned to them. flanked by the commercial centre. Before long. Soon. this procedure meant that promotion would involve moving house: social and spatial mobility were interlinked. the government housing programme was no longer able to cope with rising demand. which begins at the Presidential Palace (Aiwan-i-Sadar) and the Parliament building–then running southwest-ward. there is not sufficient housing in Islamabad for at least half of its civil servants. A strictly delimited hierarchical concept regulates the distribution of available housing space.

Much of the existing housing is not occupied by the income groups for whom it was originally intended. It is estimated that between one third and half of all Islamabad‘s workforce commute between the twin cities of Islamabad and Rawalpindi (Mahsud 2001. after three decades of utilization. Today one only needs to be told an address in Islamabad to guess the district‘s desirability and the social status of its inhabitants. deteriorating public infrastructure. Social stratification has found its spatial expression: The E and F sectors are now reserved for members of the upper-middle and upper classes and for diplomatic personnel and members of international organisations and enterprises. Nayyar 2002).8 Building lots in the private housing sector are said to have been distributed at lotteries or auctions. Doxiadis gained approval for his proposal that only higher-income groups should be considered (Mahsud 2001: 95). Whether rented or owner-occupied. In the latter case the distance and lack of access to the central business districts reduces the desirability of the housing there. in terms of units the latter (837 dwellings) accounts for only 19 per cent. building quality standards. Since then. a government commission investigated the state of the first development phase in the G-6 sector. employees of the intelligence agency. A significant number of building sites in good locations were allocated to leading members of the armed forces. The commission‘s report states that government housing occupies 59 per cent of available residential land. The H zone is almost entirely reserved for public – mainly educational – institutions. whereas the smaller 3. At this time.FOKUS: ISLAMABAD especially the low-income groups are forced to make the long commuter journey to Islamabad from Rawalpindi every day. according to official statistics only 15 per cent of these are wrongfully occupied (GoP 1991: 6).610 government units are mainly occupied by civil servants employed by the central government. government housing under Estate Office management was already so run-down 141 . However. and private housing 41 per cent (GoP 1991: 2). bureaucrats and sportsmen for their ‘services’. all real estate in Islamabad is expensive and has significantly shot up in value since the early years. whereas the I sectors provide more basic housing close to factories and industrial plants. Mainly worthy medium-rank civil servants reside in the G sectors. and rigid property structures have been at the forefront of public debate about adequate housing in what used to be the core of the city. In the early 1990s. So contemporary reality and market forces have overruled the initial principle of a social mixture aimed at representing overall society.

drivers and security staff far exceeded expectations. In contrast to the physiognomic criteria and strict functional separation practised up to then. 3. and providing more recreation areas and neighbourhood shops. occupied by construction workers and located close to the various building sites.9 It was planned to seek investors. and clean public facilities and private homes. No change was suggested to the basic pattern of subdividing sectors into communities with different hierarchies of function. to build privately funded tower blocks (GoP 1991: 9). There was a dire lack of housing .542 units. further storeys were added. Planning concepts such as those proposed for the redevelopment of sector G-6 (but as yet only partially implemented) dominate the development of new sectors at the periphery of Islamabad.11 Most domestic workers were to live in the ‘servants‘ quarters’ of wealthy residents. trade and services was proposed. cf. and for domestic servants. and the total number was to be more than doubled to 9. the report (which only makes suggestions about hitherto public property) proposes making the units compacter. Doxiadis‘s social segregation plans had included only occasional ‘followers‘ colonies’ (in G-6/2 and F-7/4. Informal solutions to housing shortages: katchi abadi in Islamabad When Islamabad was being built (starting in 1961) temporary squatter settlements grew up. cooks. and a mixture of housing.142 HERMANN KREUTZMANN that an extensive redevelopment plan was approved. Doxiadis‘ complex eleven-class system – of which the last six are found in G-6 – was reduced to three classes on a new five-fold scale. wider roads and improved access to all residential areas will meet changing requirements. some of which were to be rented to civil servants and some sold. The civil servants‘ dwellings were to be replaced by new buildings up to eight storeys high. The basic road system is strengthened by roads that mostly intersect at right-angles. launderers. Fig. On the whole. These are unlikely to meet the increasing demand for low-cost housing10 because travel distances between home and work continue to increase.2. Little is said about evaluating the original intentions and the sustainability of the structures that have been created. The need for service personnel to look after parks. especially for the well-developed margins of the sectors. remove waste. for example. improving the living quality and accessibility. 5).

housing workers from 2. This site. but unfortunately they are living in the dirtiest environment”. Hence the planned resettlement operation would involve moving more than 2. The move and the greater distance away from their jobs in the city centre mean the inhabitants suffer further cuts in their household budgets. I-11. According to the 1985 directive issued by the then Prime Minister M.000-3. squatter settlements) grew up in the areas generally left out of development plans: strips along rivers and streams and in orographic depressions. in monthly instalments.000 households. and the CDA did not want this legislation to apply to the new capital. is notorious because of an earlier action in 1992 when 1.000 people. the ‘followers‘ colonies’ with some 3. So it is very important to live near the workplace to save the high cost of travel. Second. or an estimated 20. 4) (CDA 2000. In addition. 2001.12 However. F-7. 2001).000 143 . there were squatter settlements housing 13. In the mid-1980s already. the ‘Afghan colonies’ in the industrial and wholesale trade zone in sectors I-9. G-7. further growth was to be prevented if possible. Not much has changed for them and their families. now there are eleven katchi abadi with about 50. In the early phase already. as there is no public transport system. Khan Junejo.. known as the Model Urban Shelter Project (MUSP). the housing shortage provided the chance to legalise informal settlements.000 people. and claim basic amenities. 4) and the ‘Muslim colony’ (Fig. Kreutzmann 1992. 6) near the government departments in the parliament district near to the shrine of Bare Imam. katchi abadi (basti. 4). Informal settlements are everyday reality for almost a tenth of Islamabad‘s residents.e.000 households of the service personnel mentioned in sectors F-6.000 inhabitants (Fig. they are expected to pay the cost of the new 75m2 plots themselves. the existing katchi abadi were to be regularised. i. CDA 2001 and Fig. They can be divided into two groups: First. in Alipur Farash near Lehtrar Road (Fig. G-8 (Fig.200 households were moved there from a neighbouring katchi abadi in sector F-9 (City Park. now Fatima Jinnah Park. cf. I-10. out of the city centre to the arterial road in Farash.000 households (CDA 2000. 1).FOKUS: ISLAMABAD for low-income groups providing domestic and public services. improve their infrastructure. Most of the households have incomes in the 2. The Muslim and Afghan colonies were to be demolished and their inhabitants resettled in new accommodation a long distance away. about whom Mahsud (2001: 96) says: “They are engaged in providing a clean environment to the residents. Mahsud 2001).

At the same time. starting with the Blue Area business district. Meanwhile the process of adapting to changed contexts and greater expectations is continuing apace. and international confrontation and isolation in the wake of 9/11. Islamabad is booming in spite of varying economic crises. Conclusions Islamabad‘s squatter settlements and weekly markets developed as a result of the lack of basic facilities and represent an independent. 7). planner-free adaptation of urban functions to the needs of an increasingly differentiated urban population. The urban fabric is becoming denser in the core and is expanding spatially at the same time. In tune with the city‘s name. Original plans to limit commerce to the ground floors of buildings have been overruled. 4) are protesting against the regularisation of informal settlements because they assume that their own property will then be worth less. 8). In the past few years the local markets have expanded into . there have been a number of demonstrations in which the inhabitants of katchi abadi tried to draw attention to their promised rights (Qaiser 2004). This fear seems realistic in view of plans to upgrade housing (Fig. residents of the nearby legally built ‘pakka’ domiciles (Fig. thus increasing their visibility as daily meeting points within the urban environment. Negotiations about implementing the modified development plans are far from completion. At the end of 2004 more than half of the households due for resettlement were still living in the Muslim colony. a military government.144 HERMANN KREUTZMANN rupee range. As an urban structure. They are afraid that infrastructure and development measures may force them to leave if they lack legal tenure. These socially heterogeneous residents refused to submit to crude planning schemes like the Doxiadis concept and the subsequent. In Pakistan an All Pakistan Katchi Abadi Alliance has formed in the meantime. modified master plans. many new mosques have been built as Islamic endowments (auqaf) on vacant neighbourhood land. On and off. also including representatives of the informal settlements in Islamabad. which puts them in the ‘extremely poor’13 bracket. The inhabitants of the katchi abadi due to be regularised have similar incomes (Fig.14 4. refusing to be intimidated by the CDA‘s regular threats to demolish their houses. The processes of regularisation and resettlement in Alipur Farash have repeatedly come to a standstill.

An increasingly dense structure is also visible in the housing sector: plots of land are being divided and buildings are higher and narrower. Almost unknown in the early development phase. reinforcing the trend towards urbanism as reflected in density. 145 . 4) are developing into attractive locations for specialised trade and industry. High-rise buildings tower over the Blue Area. blocks of owner-occupied flats are increasing in number. Jinnah Super. Islamabad‘s growth – purely areal as envisaged by Doxiadis – is continuing both upwards and outwards. expansion is proceeding southeast-ward (Fig.FOKUS: ISLAMABAD previously vacant spaces. The functional centres in the sectors (Abpara. Fig. new sectors continue to be developed. and property prices are still rising. So is social segregation. Super Market. Ayub Market. and upper storeys are being used by shops. Melody Market. 1). restaurants and services.

based on Landsat image 2000 . Source: H. 1.HERMANN KREUTZMANN 146 Fig. Kreutzmann. Islamabad-Rawalpindi: landscape utilization through built-environment.

Source: H. Kreutzmann 1992. Population Development in Islamabad. 2. Government of Pakistan 1999 147 .FOKUS: ISLAMABAD Fig.

based on Government of Pakistan 1991 .HERMANN KREUTZMANN 148 Fig. Social hierarchy in sector G-6. Kreutzmann. 3. Source: H.

FOKUS: ISLAMABAD Fig. Kreutzmann 2004 149 . 4. Source: H. Source: Localities of katchi abadi in Islamabad.

France Colony (F-7/4). 5. Kreutzmann. based on CDA 2000. 124 . Source: H.HERMANN KREUTZMANN 150 Fig. p.

6. p. Source: H. 25 .FOKUS: ISLAMABAD 151 Fig. Kreutzmann. Muslim Colony. based on CDA 2001.

152 HERMANN KREUTZMANN Fig. Source: H. 7. Kreutzmann . Income structure of households in selected katchi abadi in Islamabad 2000.

115. 118 153 . 8. pp. based on CDA 2000. Source: H.FOKUS: ISLAMABAD Fig. Kreutzmann. Comparison between informal settlements and planned structures in the katchi abadi of sector G-7/1.

At present it is the turn of the sectors D-12 and E-12. Prentice 1966. pp. Hermann. Africa and Latin America. 127-142. See Begum 2007 for recent studies on urban development and planning in Dhaka. Kureishy 1959. N. Nilsson 1973. Bajwa. Kalia. Dettmann 1974. considering the ‘Corbusier Plan’ to be a product of reciprocal influences and discourses involving many actors (cf. 1967. Pott 1964. and was the chief architect of the planning concept for Bhubaneshwar. Later on he advised Pandit Nehru on building ‘low cost-housing’ for refugees from Pakistan after partition. Le Corbusier made his plans with no knowledge of the locality. Copyright (c) Oxford University Press. when the cabinet of the central government finally came to a decision. Rashid Husain 1965. Louis Khan was commissioned to design the parliament building in Dhaka. Planning and living in Islamabad: Master Plan changes and people’s actions are transforming Pakistan‘s capital. Nafis Ahmad 1973. Most recent discussions question whether specific individuals were solely responsible. The CDA was instructed . which had been the subject of a land rights dispute lasting from 1988 to May 2004. advising governments in Asia. Perera 2004). Karachi: Oxford University Press. Scholz 1972. The 1933 Schinkel Medal and State Prize in Architecture winner enjoyed a word-wide reputation as an eminent urban planner. 1967. as his later critics were pleased to note. Aurada 1961. Krenn 1968. Hardoy 1964. This essay originally appeared as: Kreutzmann. Otto Königsberger (1908-1999) began his planning career in India when he worked for the Rajah of Mysore as chief architect and planner. Urban Pakistan: Frames for Imagining and Reading Urbanism.N.HERMANN KREUTZMANN Endnotes 1 2 3 154 4 5 6 Reproduced here with permission of Hermann Kreutzmann (author) and Oxford University Press. before he took the post of UN consultant. which still stands out strangely from the rest of the city. Jamoud 1968. Gardezi 1980. 2013. ed. Yakas 2001. See for background on Bhubaneshwar Kalia 1994. In the meantime more than 20 sectors are involved in the development process. 1988. In: Khalid W. Lovejoy 1966.

Hence. ranging from A (31m² flat for low earners) to L (official residence for ministers: 325 m2 with another 86 m2 for servants). 10 The call for low-cost housing for all levels of public-sector employees in Islamabad is again spotlighted as a central target in the revised master plan (CDA 1991).FOKUS: ISLAMABAD to begin development immediately (Raza 2004). this plan primarily upgrades housing for the lower income groups (Government of Pakistan 1991).5. Dawn 28.208 units. and about regularisation and infrastructural improvements in informal settlements. Class IV (111 m2) of 3. tending to reinforce the displacement of lower income groups.10. Qaiser (2004). Class III (149 m2) of 1. after which all katchi abadi had the chance of regularisation if they had at least 40 housing units. also see Zaidi & Lehner (1991). because it is near the former site of the French embassy.650 units. These sizes are in the middle range of the previous categories.789 dwellings in G-6/1 alone and hence 95 per cent of all public housing. 12 The cut-off date was 23 March 1985. cf. 9 The smallest housing category (Class V = 77 m2) was to consist of 4. Only the smallest units (31-66 m2) for the three lowest income groups (A-C).2001. were abolished by this classification and replaced by the new lowest category (Class V). in 1990 the total was 206 (cf.2004).684. comprising 1. 19. 11 The ‘followers‘ colony’ in F-7/4 is known locally as ‘France Colony’ (Fig. Dawn. 5). 8 A recent question in the Senate disclosed that Pakistani prime ministers had awarded 549 building plots to selected members of the armed forces and politicians between 1971 and 1999. Owing to its prominent location in the wealthy district it has repeatedly been the topic of discussions about the disparity between rich and poor in the capital. Cf. Class V units correspond to the earlier category F housing. The procedure as formulated in the 1985 Ghulam Haider Wyne-Report was incorporated into the 2001 ‘National Katchi Abadi Policy’ on which all further procedure is based. Rent increases affected the lower categories more than the higher ones. Kreutzmann (1992: 32-33 and Table 2) on the classification into 11 categories. 13 The National Human Development Report for Pakistan (Akmal Hussain 2003: 53-61) put the monthly minimum consumption 7 155 .

19-26. People with incomes below this level were classified as ‘extremely poor. Outline proposal for redevelopment of Sector G-6. 2007. _______. . excluding durable goods. pp. 1993. 1961. 34 (1-2). Assessment of urban sprawl of Islamabad Metropolitan Area using multi-sensor and multi-temporal satellite data. Marginalviertel in Großstädten der Dritten Welt. Islamabad. 52 (7-8).310 rupees. 13. Final report. Günther. Islamabad. Ekistics. Benevolo. 220221. July. Islamabad. pp. personal communication. Social Policy & Administration. Pakistan national human development report 2003. Islamabad/Rawalpindi planning and development consultancy. pp. 103. 41 (4). 1991. Capital Development Authority (CDA). 410-418. 37. pp. Frankfurt/Main: Campus Verlag. Bähr.156 HERMANN KREUTZMANN 14 levels for poor households at 2. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering. _______. 1988. Islamabad. Islamabad. Die Geschichte der Stadt. Aufbau von Islamabad. 1986. December 2004. 61-83. pp. 62 (373-375). Leonardo. Karachi: Oxford University Press. 209-235. Islamabad is beautiful! The News. 2003. Master plan for the capital territory (as revised and implemented). Geographische Rundschau. _______. Aurada. Internationales Asienforum. Poverty. 2000. Islamabad after 33 years. Islamabad. Bibliography Akmal. 1991. _______. 2012. 1983. Mohsin Jamil et al. Jürgen & Mertins. Erhard. pp. Hussain. growth and governance. Berner. Begum. Anwara. Mitteilungen der Österreichischen Geographischen Gesellschaft.’ Ahmed Zaib Khan Masud. Botka. 101114. Butt. Alternativen zum un-sozialen Wohnungsbau? Reformversuche in Pakistan und den Philippinen. Dusan. Fritz. 1995. 2003. Urban housing as an issue of redistribution through planning? The case of Dhaka City.

2000.2001. Islamabad the beautiful? The News. Constantin Apostolos. Hardoy. 1990. Klaus. Islamabad (unpublished). Hans-Dieter & Korff. Islamabad the capital city. Doxiadis Associates. Outline proposal for redevelopment of sector G-6. 1999. the new capital of Pakistan. hierarchy and spacing of the urban road network in Islamabad. Census Report of Islamabad. John M. 1989.2. Two new capitals: Brasilia and Islamabad. Ekistics. Frantzeskakis.1990.2010. _______. Dettmann. pp. 1991. Report (Phase I & II).6. 18. pp. n.2001. Southeast Asian Urbanism: The Meaning and Power of Social Space.doxiadis. 1964. Islamabad. N. David. 1998 District Census Report of Islamabad. 17. 1960. Islamabad (Pakistan). 1978.1990. 28.10. 224-43.2003. Hardoy. Islamabad.d. 1980.1. Islamabad.pdf. 105. Plan und Wirklichkeit. n.2003. Gardezi. Islamabad. Ekistics. _______. Islamabad guide book.5.1990. pp. 19. Configuration. 2. _______. pp. Progress Report Phase III & IV. Islamabad. Pakistan Pictorial. 1964. 2. The planning of new capital cities. Upgradation & rehabilitation of Katchi Abadis in Islamabad.5. 2-6. 62 (373-375). Doxiadis. Bielefeld. 320-325.01.3. Rüdiger. A. 331-34. Jorge. _______. Islamabad. 18. _______. Population Census of Pakistan 1972. Islamabad guide map. the capital of Pakistan. Preliminary plan for Islamabad. _______. _______. Frontier Post. 2001. Hans-Dieter. Hassan. Evers. Dawn. 10. 1995.d. Muenster: LIT.d. Islamabad. 30. Die Erde. pp.7. Poverty and labour supply strategies among the urban poor of Jakarta.2004. _______. June. pp. S. Upgradation & rehabilitation of Katchi Abadis in Islamabad. 1974. 20. 1983. Evers. Irfan. 3. 30.FOKUS: ISLAMABAD _______. 236-241. London: Earthscan Publ. n. http://www. Ekistics. retrieved 1991. Karachi. Statistical Pocket Book of Pakistan 1990. 1986. 4. 41039. 157 . Squatter citizen: Life in the urban Third World. Islamabad. 2000. Jorge & Satterthwaite. Ekistics. Islamabad. Government of Pakistan (GoP). 1981 Census Report of Islamabad. The.

The design of Islamabad. Institut für Raumplanung. 18-25). Pakistan Geographical Review. In: Mark Swenarton. 93-97. 50. 27-31. Applied Geography and Development. 1990. pp. Ekistics. pp. Representing the state. Kalia. Khan. 438-443. From a temple town to a capital city. 1966. New York: Routledge. 1968. Kreibich. pp. pp. Chandigarh: The making of an Indian City. 1998. Anspruch und Realität einer geplanten Hauptstadt: Islam­abad in Pakistan. 1997. pp. Inst. New capital of Pakistan. Hermann. 25 (150). _______. 1988. The politics of making. A modernist town planning experience of the 60‘s. Lovejoy. Linden. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Arbeitspapier 160. Islamabad – New capital city of Pakistan. 46 (1). 14 (2). Kureishy. The making of a metropolis. 64-86. Planning and growth of Delhi. Univ. 2001. pp. . Derek. Regularisation of katchi abadis after 41 years. pp. Dortmund: IRPUD. The Journal of the Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts. Ravi. _______. 1986. Jan van der. 1994. 2004. Erdkunde. Abdul Majid 1988. Zum Problem des Hauptstadtstandortes in Pakistan. 2007. _______. The sites and services approach reviewed. Feb. Bhubaneshwar. Gandhinagar. Jamoud. Unpublished Master thesis. _______. 20. University of Leuven. 1992.158 HERMANN KREUTZMANN Jain. 329-333. eds. Symbolism and ideology in Doxiadis’ plan for Islamabad. New Delhi: National Book Organisation. Doxiadis‘s master plan for Islamabad. 26-39. 923-941 (published as well in: 1966. Pakistan Times. Kreutzmann. für Raumplanung. Islamabad – The visionary capital. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Volker. Islamic Review. 1967. 1959. Ahmed Zaib Khan. Leuven. Die Urbanisierung des Südens. Dortmund. 28. Khalil Ullah. Manufactures and Commerce. Ashok Kumar. Islamabad. Building national identity in postcolonial India. Commonwealth Journal. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press. Hilmar. Geographische Rundschau. pp. Igea Troiani & Helen Webster. Leo. 5123. Zur Nachhaltigkeit informeller Siedlungsentwicklung. 54. _______. 10. Krenn. New site for the federal capital of Pakistan. 1968. Mahsud. Aldershot: Gower. Prospects and presence of a planned capital city: The case of Islamabad in Pakistan.

In: Melvin Ember & Carol R. Asiaweek. Pakistan and Bangladesh. Islamabad. Pakistan-Modell eines Entwicklungslandes. Doxiadis‘ Legacy of urban design: Adjusting and amending the Modern. 61-74. Doxiadis‘ plan for Islamabad: The Making of a ‘city of the future’ 1959-1963. N. pp. 52 (311). Islamabad: A New Capital City. Rashid Husain.D. profile of the new capital of Pakistan. 73 (436-441). Karl Heinz. 2008a. Geography. 1. 211-216. 1988. thesis. 2008b. Pott. 2. July. Ekistics. Beispiel für die Bewältigung des 159 . Constantinos A. 1966. The city of tomorrow. 1973. Encyclopedia of urban cultures. Sheltering the urban poor. Scandinavian Institute of Asian Studies Monograph Series No. 1964. 51. 175-199. Anne. Fred. Aug. Dawn. Prentice. 1967. 1985. pp. Pfeffer. Sten. Faisal Masjid: A symbol of Islamic unity. Cities and cultures around the world. Scholz. 29. Leuven. 63. Unpublished Ph. 2. 2004. a progress report on Pakistan‘s new capital city. Islamabad. Planning Perspectives. Seeking safety in the garden city. 2012. Adam. pp. Islamabad is already twenty-five. Nayyar. 335-336. Ember. _______. Nilsson. Raza. 3. Legal and institutional perplexities hampering the implementation of urban development plans in Pakistan. Opladen: Leske. 1972. 13. 212-216. 1966. Asian Profile. Ekistics. Contesting visions: hybridity. pp. 12. Vol. 12. 1973. pp. 271-77. Niaz Ahmad & Ghulam Abbas Anjum. 2004. 1990. pp. 58-61. 2004. 33-42. _______. March 1967. N. 7. pp. p. Janet. Dawn.1990. 1965. 18. Architectural Review. Perera. _______. Nafis Ahmad. 389-98. _______. pp. Danbury: Groiler.FOKUS: ISLAMABAD pp. 19 (2). Qaiser. 1965. The Pakistan Times Overseas Weekly. 241-263.10. Richard L. Pakistan Quarterly. Cities. 26. Syed Irfan. Impressions of Islamabad. Lund: Studentlitteratur. The new capitals of India. Islamabad. E-12 projects. Meier. 1967. 2002. pp. University of Leuven. CDA told to start work on D-12. Islamabad. pp. p. Karachi. liminality and authorship of the Chandigarh plan. Ekistics. 113-128. eds. Aileen. Nihal. May.

pp. Herbert.4: Location of the katchi abadi in Islamabad Fig. & Lehner. Two newly-created capitals: Islamabad and Brasilia. Glenn V. Rawalpindi. pp. Karachi: Oxford University Press.5: France Colony (F-7/4) Fig. 2001. 1970. 41 (4). Alif F. 127 (4). 1986. The slum upgrading myth. Stephenson.6: Muslim Colony: Settlement and Housing Plot Structure Fig. 1523-1534. private and functional structure in Sector G-6 Fig. Scale 1:30. Figures and Tables Fig. Materialien und aktuelle Informationen zur ‚geplanten‘ Hauptstadt Pakistans.7: Incomes of households in selected katchi abadi in Islamabad 2000 Fig.8: Comparison between informal settlement and new planning in the katchi abadi of G-7/1 . Die Erde. 36 (9). pp. The Muslim Magazine. Pakistans Tor zur Welt. Adam. Herbert. Geographische Rundschau. pp. Werlin. Islamabad. Die Erde. Town Planning Review. 1968. pp. Islamabad. France Colony. Orestes. Karachi.000. Islamabad & Rawalpindi Guide Map.2: Population growth in Islamabad Fig. 1996. May. 317-332. Urban Studies. Last among unequals. 24. _______. 132-162. 3. Yakas. 1999. 293306. Zaidi. Oxford. Wilhelmy.1: Islamabad-Rawalpindi: Land Use and Development of Settlements Fig. 309-320. Survey of Pakistan.160 HERMANN KREUTZMANN Flüchtlingsproblems in Pakistan. The birth of a capital. 1991.3:Social hierarchy in government housing units. 99 (2).