It also estimates the proportion of slums where certain specific facilities have improved/ deteriorated over the five years preceding the date of survey. 1932 Saka 26th May. This report is based on the data collected from 365 notified and 365 non-notified slums found in 4738 surveyed urban blocks. The present report gives the condition of urban slums. covering ownership. Both ‘notified slums’ – areas notified as slums by the municipalities. corporations. mostly of temporary nature. living facilities like electricity. road within and approaching the slum. The survey covered the whole of the Indian Union except for Leh (Ladakh) and Kargil districts of Jammu & Kashmir.PRESS INFORMATION BUREAU GOVERNMENT OF INDIA Dated the 5 Jyaistha. latrine. structure. sewerage. drinking water. crowded together usually with inadequate sanitary and drinking water facilities in unhygienic conditions. in the condition of facilities available therein. The field work of the nationwide survey was carried out during July 2008 to June 2009. garbage disposal. 2008-09 The National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) has released Report No. drainage.534 titled "Some Characteristics of Urban Slums. if any. 2010 PRESS NOTE Some Characteristics of Urban Slums. area type. The aim of the survey was to collect information on the present condition of the slums and on recent changes. 2 . local bodies or development authorities – and non-notified slums were surveyed – a non-notified slum being any compact urban area with a collection of poorly built tenements. (ii) interior villages of Nagaland situated beyond five kilometres of a bus route and (iii) villages in Andaman and Nicobar Islands which remain inaccessible throughout the year. 2008-09" based on the survey of urban slums conducted in its 65th round. and distance of slums from the nearest primary school and government hospital/health centre.

• About 10% notified and 23% non-notified slums did not have any drainage facility. • About 49 thousand slums were estimated to be in existence in urban India in 2008-09. etc. About 48% of the slums were usually affected by waterlogging during monsoon – 32% with inside of slum waterlogged as well as approach road to the slum. Latrines with septic tanks (or similar facility) were available in 68% notified and 47% non-notified slums (up from 66% and 35% respectively in 2002). The corresponding proportions in 2002 had been 15% for notified and 44% for non-notified slums. 24% of them were located along nallahs and drains and 12% along railway lines. 3 . the corresponding percentage for the non-notified ones being 50%. and 9% where only the approach road was waterlogged in the monsoon. owned mostly by local bodies. Only 1% notified and 7% non-notified slums did not have electricity connection. 7% where the slum was waterlogged but not the approach road.Comprehensive data on this subject was last collected by NSSO in its 58th round (July . • • • For 95% slums. The present report provides key indicators from the 58th round as well. • • About 73% notified and 58% non-notified slums had a motorable approach road. for comparison. state government. a majority of the dwellings were pucca. • The sanitary conditions in the slums in terms of latrine facility during 2008-09 showed considerable improvement since 2002. the major source of drinking water was either tap or tubewell. 10% notified and 20% non-notified slums (down from 17% and 51% in 2002) did not have any latrine facility at all. At the other extreme.December 2002). • About 57% of slums were built on public land. Some important findings of the survey are given below. Underground drainage systems or drainage systems constructed of pucca materials existed in about 39% notified slums (25% in 2002) and 24% non-notified slums (13% in 2002). • Underground sewerage existed in about 33% notified slums (30% in 2002) and 19% non-notified slums (15% in 2002). • In 64% of notified slums. About 78% of notified slums and 57% of the non-notified slums had a pucca road inside the slum.

About 10% notified and 23% nonnotified slums did not have any regular mechanism for garbage disposal.mospi. • Facilities such as street light. like notified slums. both during the survey and five years earlier. it was due to the Government’s efforts in about 80-90% of was rare (about 9% or below). Among these slums. In case of non-notified slums. -------------- 4 . facilities like street light. sewerage and garbage disposal were each reported by more than 20% of the slums to be non-existent. facilities had improved in about 50% of notified slums in terms of roads (both within-slum road and approach road) and water supply. The incidence of deterioration of any of the existing facilities in notified slums during the last five years was quite low (about 6% or below).in) of the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. Deterioration of any of the existing facilities in nonnotified slums. garbage was collected at least once in 7 days in 93% notified and 92% non-notified slums. drainage. both notified as well as nonnotified and for all the facilities. sewerage and medical facilities were each reported by more than 10% of notified slums to be non-existent both at the time of survey and five years earlier. latrine. • Where improvement had been brought about during the last 5 years. • In case of most slum facilities – sewerage and medical facilities being exceptions – the facility was reported to have improved during the last five years in more than 20% of non-notified slums.• Government agencies were collecting garbage from 75% notified and 55% nonnotified slums. Improvement in educational facilities at primary level was attributed to NGOs in 13% of the notified slums where such improvement was reported. latrine. The percentage distribution of slums in some major States by type of ownership of land is given at Annexure. drainage. This report is also available on the website (www. • Over the last five years. NGOs were also found to have played a role in the improvement of latrine and sewerage system in non-notified slums.

r.r.Annex Percentage distribution of slums in some major States by type of ownership of land notified slum State/UT private public not known /n. non-notified slum 41 12 50 2 32 33 0 18 73 69 37 36 59 66 50 98 68 67 100 80 16 23 60 64 0 23 0 0 0 1 0 2 11 7 3 1 53 29 20 47 34 43 28 35 81 62 42 35 46 67 74 47 66 50 71 66 19 28 54 63 1 5 7 7 0 7 1 0 0 10 5 2 5 . (1) Andhra Pradesh Delhi Gujarat Karnataka Madhya Pradesh Maharashtra Orissa Tamil Nadu Uttar Pradesh West Bengal all-India: 2008-09 all-India: 2002 (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) private public not known /n.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful