What Has Changed in Ganeshnagar – Dumping Site of PAPs in Ahmedabad?

With a team of documentary makers of a channel, I had a chance to revisit Ganeshnagar after about 3 and half years. Last I went was with a group of students, when one room of the present school building was constructed. Then, I wanted the students of planning, housing specialisation doing their studio exercise on rehabilitation strategy, to see how not to do rehabilitation. In 2012, when I went, I was a bit sceptical about going for the fear of being recognised as a member of the Buch Committee involved in the monitoring of Sabarmati riverfront rehabilitation and on whose head the blame of inadequate and inequitable rehabilitation has been laid. Luckily then and even now, my identity did not come to the fore and hence in the way of my visit.

The living conditions in 2016, remains as we had documented at the Centre for Urban Equity (CUE) in Ganeshnagar in 2012 (See http://cept.ac.in/UserFiles/File/CUE/Advocacy/Living%20Conditions%20in%20Ganeshnagar_Resize.pdf). Prior to that, in 2009, Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) working with the poor and displaced in the city had held a public hearing on displacements (http://cept.ac.in/UserFiles/File/CUE/Advocacy/Public%20Hearing%20on%20Displacements.pdf), also documented extremely poor living conditions in the location. But, there is some change; the height of the garbage dump at Pirana, just across the road from Ganeshnagar, has increased and can now be seen from Ganeshnagar. Earlier, we could only smell the garbage, as the public hearing report documents, but could not see it.

For those who know Ahmedabad, coming from Narol circle and way to crossing Sabarmati river, Pirana garbage dump, which now is about 50 to 60 meters high, comes on the left side, that is to the north of the road and Ganeshnagar is on the right, that is to the south of the road. Standing in Ganeshnagar, if one faces north, one can first see high tension lines passing through, and then the Pirana garbage mountain. This garbage mountain did not exist 4 years back. The garbage dump was and the olfactory senses revolted on reaching Ganeshnagar, but, now one sees, one smells and one experiences the garbage dump! This is the first big change.

Ganeshnagar site has been used for dumping the displaced households from various infrastructure development projects post 2008. Term dumped is used, as they were literally dumped and not shifted through any pre-planning. Hence, there are evictees of road projects, flyover projects, Kankaria lake development projects and the biggest displacement project of all Sabarmati Riverfront project. In 2011 November, about 4,000 to 5,000 households evicted from the Sabarmati riverbank, evicted under the Gujarat High Court order, were dumped on the site in a short period. Ganeshnagar became a large temporary rehabilitation site. The idea was that these households would then be given a permanent rehabilitation unit. Which many were given; taken to Vatwa rehabilitation site, Odhav rehabilitation site, etc. But, many are still left on the Ganeshnagar site. Some 20,000 BSUP (Basic Services for the Urban Poor) dwelling units constructed in the city proved rehabilitation to the project affected people of the city. Imagine, what would have been the plight of these households if JNNURM was not designed and if BSUP was not introduced! In December 2016, about 850 households still remain in Ganeshnagar. Some of them were from the riverfront, and have been given an allotment letter for a plot of land in Ganeshnagar. Strangely, there was no map accompanying that would tell them which plot of land in the large site.

There were some households who were evicted in 2008 and have been living on the site since then. Post 2011 dumping of the riverfront evictees, our public hearing and pressure of the NGOs who went to assist the large mass of evictees in 2011, the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) constructed water supply points with water taps and public toilets. The water taps are broken, the hardware vandalised and stolen, and no water is coming.

Public Toilet in Ganeshnagar

The public toilets are not maintained and are now filled with shit. The area around the public toilets is also full of animal and human shit, plastics and all kinds of rubbish; completely unusable! This forces everyone to defecate in the open! Do we have to go anywhere to witness hell! Nehruji said about Kashmir, if there is heaven on earth, it is here it is here! We have to say about Ganeshnagar, if there is hell on the earth, one of them is here! The second change is that the facilities provided by the AMC for the residents of Ganeshnagar rehabilitation site, as many have been allotted plot of land on the site, are now under total disrepair and unusable.

Broken water taps

The third change is that two rooms of an anaganwadi, which also came through the pressure of the NGOs, have been constructed. Thankfully, they are working. A lady came at about 10.30 am and was cleaning. There is also a school building now. The school is working. But, the rooms are also used for gambling and drinking when the school is closed. The caretaker (chowkidar) of the school, who had objected to the abuse of the school premises, was murdered two months back.

Anganwadi at Ganeshnagar

School at Ganeshnagar

The fourth, and probably the most dangerous change that has come is setting up of a unit of ‘gau rakshak dal’ (a cow protection unit – dal in a sense is a mini battalion). The organisation was constructing a pucca building in the centre of the site. The representative of the unit, who got a whiff of our visit to the site, came instantaneously as we entered, even before we could get out of our vehicles. He asked us in some minor menacing way, who we were. Our answer to him was the same question bounced back. After telling his affiliation and on our query as to what he was doing here, he said, he was providing water to the site residents. Any guess as to what would be coming forth here in the future! The impacts of demonitisation were ofcourse not missed out on us.

Urban Planning, New Urban Agenda and Inclusive Cities

Context

Habitat III held at Quito from October 17 to 20, 2016 is successfully over, declared UNHABITAT. The communiqué from UNHABITAT also states that the ‘New Urban Agenda’ has been adopted by the countries. The Habitat Conferences are events to set urban development agenda for the next 20 years and hence in this context, the New Urban Agenda is an important document. The first Habitat Conference was held in 1976 in Vancouver and the second was held in Istanbul in 1996.  The New Urban Agenda has been set out also in the context that more than half the population in the world is now residing in urban areas, cities and towns, across the world. Many more will transit to urban areas in the next two decades, particularly in Asia and Africa.

Therein lies the importance of New Urban Agenda for India. India is on the path to urbanize, expecting 600 million residents or 40% are expected to be residing in the cities and towns in India by 2031. If urban India were to be a country, that it would be the second largest country in the world! The full pdf document of the New Urban Agenda is available on the Habitat III website link: https://habitat3.org/the-new-urban-agenda/

The New Urban Agenda

The New Urban Agenda says all the right things. The agenda acknowledges that: “Since the United Nations Conferences on Human Settlements in Vancouver in 1976 and in Istanbul in 1996, and the adoption of the Millennium Development Goals in 2000, we have seen improvements in the quality of life of millions of urban inhabitants, including slum and informal settlement dwellers. However, the persistence of multiple forms of poverty, growing inequalities, and environmental degradation, remain among the major obstacles to sustainable development worldwide, with social and economic exclusion and spatial segregation often an irrefutable reality in cities and human settlements.”

“We are still far from adequately addressing these and other existing and emerging challenges; and there is a need to take advantage of the opportunities of urbanization as an engine of sustained and inclusive economic growth, social and cultural development, and environmental protection, and of its potential contributions to the achievement of transformative and sustainable development.”

“By readdressing the way cities and human settlements are planned, designed, financed, developed, governed, and managed, the New Urban Agenda will help to end poverty and hunger in all its forms and dimensions, reduce inequalities, promote sustained, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth, achieve gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls, in order to fully harness their vital contribution to sustainable development, improve human health and well-being, as well as foster resilience and protect the environment.”

The New Urban Agenda rests heavily on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set up in 2015 to be achieved by 2030. The SDG 11 is: to achieve “inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable human settlements”.  The SDG 11 is about both urban and rural settlements. But, since the expected transition is towards urbanisation, this goal becomes extremely important for urban settlements. The New Urban Agenda has principles and commitments. It then lays out implementation plan with regards to:

i)       The Transformative Commitments for Sustainable Urban Development in the areas of (a) Sustainable Urban Development For Social Inclusion and Ending Poverty, (b) Sustainable and Inclusive Urban Prosperity and Opportunities for All and (c) Environmentally Sustainable And Resilient Urban Development

ii)     Effective Implementation through (a) Building the Urban Governance Structure: Establishing a Supportive Framework, (b) Planning and Managing Urban Spatial Development, and (C) Creating Means of Implementation.

iii)    Follow-Up and Review.

Urban Planning in the New Urban Agenda

Urban Planning has been recognised as an important tool for the implementation of the New Urban Agenda. The agenda talks about integrated planning and balancing of short term and long term needs of the cities. The agenda does talk about relating urban spatial planning with social and economic conditions. It talks about promoting planned urban extensions; infill; prioritising urban renewal, regeneration and retrofitting (primarily to contain urban sprawl) as appropriate; providing high quality buildings and public spaces; promoting integrated and participatory approaches involving all stakeholders and inhabitants; avoiding special and socio-economic segregation and gentrification; preserving cultural heritage; and preventing and containing urban sprawl. The urban renewal commitment includes upgrading of slums and informal settlements. The agenda states that “We will promote …..” the above. Hence, lets investigate each one of these commitments from our Indian experience of how urban planning has worked out or not worked out.

The first issue is with regards to containing urban sprawl through planning. Urban sprawl in the Indian cities have happened due to the real estate interests in cahoots with those in the executive and elected wings of the government. The mid-2000s saw expansion of urban boundaries of many metropolitan cities namely Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Hyderabad etc. Ahmedabad’s boundaries were expanded from 198 sq km area to 466 sq km area, that of Bangalore from about 250 sq km to about 800 sq km. and so on. The purported idea was to have planned development within the new jurisdiction. Also, their respective urban development authorities’ boundaries too were extended to undertake planning in the peri-urban areas, i.e. laying of physical infrastructure lines of water and sanitation and put in public transport system.

Has that happened? Yes, the roads have been laid out. In case of Ahmedabad (I have close experience of this city) the roads have been laid out without appropriate footpaths and edges. Public transport system has not followed. This has created need for more private transport and hence already, the roads are getting clogged even before the densities have increased. The water and sanitation infrastructure is also not yet in and hence infrastructure in the extended areas are private, provided by the residential estates themselves in case of formal developments and by host of informal water providers in the informal settlements. Our research at the Centre for Urban Equity (CUE) in one large informally developed area shows that this has led to multiple conflicts (See http://cept.ac.in/centre-for-urban-equity-cue/policy-briefs; http://www.crdf.org.in/cue/saic/). The formal residential estates in the city, due to lack of centralized water system are mining the ground water, at the peril of sustainable development!

Source: http://www.crdf.org.in/cue/saic/

The sprawl has followed revoking of the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act (ULCRA) in 1999, which led to possibility of accumulation of large parcels of land by the developers. These lands were purchased on the city’s periphery. Their prices would not have sky-rocketed if they were not brought within the municipal limits. Once a few real estate projects come up in the newly extended boundaries of the city, the municipal government is forced to put in at the least roads, which then pushes up the land market prices benefitting those who have accumulated lands in the newly extended city limits. Ricardian principle of land rent states that as more and more lands are brought in use, the price of best lands increase as some uses are ready to pay more for central or best location. Thus, new land supply not necessarily reduces land prices, but on the contrary increase the land prices. Thus, the new real estate projects on the city’s periphery comes at high prices than expected while the city sprawls and makes it all the more difficult for the municipal government to invest in infrastructure. But, the high-end real estate projects that come up cannot wait till the municipal water and sanitation network comes in. They invest in their own; septic tanks for sewerage and groundwater mining tube-wells, the latter leading to depletion of ground water.

Affordable Housing and Planning

If the city has already sprawled, what needs to be done. The obvious answer is refill, as the New Urban Agenda suggests. But, these refills also come at high costs as the land prices have already increased on account of sprawl. The refill therefore does not address the requirements of low-income housing in the city. The land prices going up makes all plots precious and hence are not available for squatting by the poor. The first phase of informal settlements’ or slums’ development in the cities have been on the public lands. Post enactment of the ULCRA, the private lands were brought by the owners under informal settlements to avoid their acquisition under the act in case these were categorised as surplus. At least, informal housing was possible within the city limits. But, post revoking of ULCRA, this option has gone for the low-income households. The informal settlements then developed on the sub-divided agricultural lands outside the municipal limits. The CUE study of Bombay Hotel area is one such informal settlement that developed in 2000s (See http://cept.ac.in/UserFiles/File/CUE/Working%20Papers/Revised%20New/31CUEWP%20-31-Bombay%20Hotel.pdf). The circumstances of its development is also unique, but, we do not go into this at the moment.

The infill in the sprawled parts of the city would be affordable for the low-income housing unless public lands are made available and the municipal government decides to use these for this purpose than selling them for raising finance. Consequently, the Basic Services for the Urban Poor (BSUP) schemes under the Jawaharlal Nehru Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) and recent Affordable Housing schemes are all largely outside the city limits or on the periphery of the extended city limits. Already, the economic segregation has happened through the land market logic. In cities with social segregation, another layer of segregation is added to the economic segregation. Can such divided city structures be undone now through urban planning interventions? What would such an intervention be?

The New Urban Agenda talks about relating spatial planning with socio-economic goals. It also talks about doing away with segregation in the city on the class, caste and religion basis. The pathways to such an city future is more public housing at affordable rates than leaving housing to the market.

Provision of ‘Housing for All’ will require first of all lands available at affordable rates. Land price escalation due to urban sprawl does not help. In particular, the poor prefer locations near their place of employment and would prefer in-situ redevlopment in case of slums or central location in case of new housing. Does urban planning have mechanism for the same? Yes, in the case where Town Planning Scheme (TPS) mechanism is used, under which a certain percentage of private lands are acquired by the planning authority in lieu of providing infrastructure. These become the public lands, used for raising finance and also for public housing. This mechanism is useful if it is used with the right spirit. All depends on the orientation of the state government in using such lands for low-income housing. Availability of a mechanism does not mean that it would be used. In Ahmedabad, such public lands – these are called lands reserved for Socially and Economically Weaker Sections (SEWS) lands – have been used for the purpose. But, not always. A great amount of such lands have been encroached upon for other uses.

As mentioned earlier, planning often comes much after the developments have already taken place. The permissions for formal real estate projects are given even when the TPS is in draft stage. The informal developments happen whether there is TPS or none. When the TPS comes to an informal settlement, the land appropriation for public purpose can lead to significant demolitions. In instances where informal developments have already happened, a new mechanism of planning has to be introduced; it has to be flexible and negotiated solution. These have to be tripartite negotiations, between the occupants, the planning authority and original landowner. Hence, urban planning automatically would not lead to the goals of the New Urban Agenda or the SDG 11. There has to be inclusive governance mechanism in place for urban planning to play a transformative role for equitable cities.

In all, there are multiple challenges to be faced if urban planning has to meaningful and address SDG 11 of inclusive and sustainable urban development. I have not discussed here the issues of resilient and safe cities, as this would be another article. It is clear from this discussion that urban planning as practiced now will not rise upto the challenges of urban development in the present state of Indian cities. Planning has to be redefined; its mechanisms have to be redefined and associated legislation need to be modified to truly address the requirements of creating habitable cities that would respond to the socio-economic needs of the current population. Do we have this courage to be self-critical and bring about much needed reform in urban planning approach and mechanisms. If yes, the urban future in India is bright.

Smartly, It’s Old Wine, Old Bottle and A New Label

Welcomingly, since 2006, as a country, we have paid attention and devised, funded and implemented programmes and projects for urban development. The label under which this happened may not have been liked by many, but, that JNNURM (Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission) brought for the first time relatively massive funding for urban development, mainly urban infrastructure projects such as water supply, sanitation (sewerage, rainwater drains and garbage management), public transport, housing for the low-income households and heritage. Cities and states capable of taking advantage of the national government funds have benefitted. Well and good.

Suddenly, post May 2014, the new national government, with a different colour of their flag and policies, inundated us with new buzz words, one of them is the ‘Smart Cities’. We knew then that it was Smart to talk and do something about cities. But, that’s all we knew. Frantic efforts at finding meaning to the phrase Smart City, imagination to the concept, and framing of aspirations about the city-images begun to be build. Those who won the race were the IT Companies, who begun to sell dreams about cities managed through IT-enabled infrastructure, technology-led city life, seen in the Sci-fi, James Bond and many other Hollywood films. The whiff of such an automated, high-tech driven life intoxicated urban-dwellers. Press a button, the garbage is gone, and so on.

In this imagination, GIFT City (Gujarat International Finance Tec City), was being developed, much before the Smart City mission was envisaged by the national government. Original plan only stated a city that was managed by technology through a Central Command and Control Centre (C4). The emphasis was on technology and its control over city’s management through “efficient, safe and smart buildings’. But, the newer posting on GIFT City’s website says that it will be benchmarked against such specially developed centres in existing cities such as La Defense in Paris, Pudong in Shanghai, and so on. The site now states that this project would be having “high-quality, mixed use district of residential, commercial and open space facilities that optimize land and real estate values.” In addition, idea of ‘eco-city’ too has been introduced in the concept of GIFT city, which will have green buildings.

Another buzz-word in the GIFT City is the Transit Oriented Development (TOD), that is bringing high density development on a transit corridor to reduce travel requirements and hence through that reduce carbon emissions. Never mind if Indian cities have higher density than suggested for a TOD development in the American context! The GIFT City land area is about 3.58 sq km, and people can go from one place to another in GIFT City walking, or cycling. TOD is a concept relevant for large cities, say where people commute for more than half an hour. Hence the introduction of TOD in GIFT city is a misconception or use of just another buzz-word. At best, GIFT City will be a township abutting Gandhinagar, with high-end real estate. This article is not about the GIFT city and hence we move on.

Smart City: Concept

Smart City as an idea, is one that is data intensive, networked city, in which, “networked products gather, store and share user data” for real-time decision-making in managing the networks, towards “highly-efficient living environments”. The decisions are automated. The main idea is systems approach to city management for obtaining day-to-day efficiency in urban living.

To understand in simpler terms; lets take example of Delhi metro or Mumbai’s suburban train. Smart systems will have real time data on: (i) where each train is, (ii) number of people in each coach in the train, (iii) number of people on each platform on the metro/ suburban train stations, (iv) time taken to embark or disembark from a train and time taken to clear the platform, (v) time taken for disembarking commuters to leave the platform after going through the exit gates that are automated through magnetic cards (we do not have this system in Mumbai), and so on. If there is congestion on a platform, or a problem in one train, and so on, can be corrected in real time and the commuters informed.

In other words, Smart Cities concept if required to be implemented, humongous data would be required. Data collection on all aspects of city living is not a bad idea. But, currently, data do not exist. Smart Cities are data-intensive. Data can be used for improving living conditions and data can also be improved for surveillance! We will have to see how the data is going to be used.

But, what are the proposals that our cities have sent under the Smart Cities Mission. The proposals have come in the context of the guidelines issued by the Ministry. The Smart City features mentioned in the guidelines are: (i) promoting mixed-land use, (ii) housing for all, (iii) walkable or cyclable localities, (iv) adequate green cover, (v) variety of transport options including TOD, (vi) citizen-friendly governance, (vii) giving a brand identity to a city and (viii) applying smart solutions to infrastructure services. Nothing problematic about these features and these then becoming goals! In fact, these are welcomed goals; whether we will be able to achieve them requires one article for each one of them, and can be written about subsequently.

Smart City Proposals Received

The actual proposals from the cities received by the Ministry of Urban of Urban Development (MoUD) are with regards to vast array of projects; to name a few types: affordable housing / slum redevelopment; retrofitting or redeveloping open spaces; retrofitting or redeveloping lakes or lakefronts, riverfronts, seafronts; retrofitting or redeveloping business districts and markers; developing heritage areas; improving flood management; improving street facades; transit infrastructure development; mega projects such as convention centres, stadiums, museums, etc.; incubation centres; rental housing; GIS-based property and land management systems. Are these all technology-intensive; answer is NO. Why are they part of Smart Cities? Answer is that these projects are required for our cities; whether implemented under the rubric of urban renewal or smart cities!

These projects were proposed also under the JNNURM and will be covered under the AMRUT (Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation) programme, which is yet to take-off. Some exceptions such as of flood management, city level mega projects, open space redevelopment and business district development were not covered in JNNURM. JNNURM and AMRUT are project-based programmes while Smart Cities is area-based, that is multiple projects converging in one area. AMRUT, which replaces JNNURM is for all cities whereas Smart Cities programme is for only 100 cities, of which 20 cities have sent their proposals in the areas mentioned.

In a way, Smart Cities is a new label, same contents, same implementing agencies the local governments. Same wine, same bottle new label.

Then why new label? One that in the partisan Indian politics JN of JNNURM would not have stuck well with the incumbent dispensation at the national government level. New label gives a new identity. Anyway, it is Smart to be having the same old wine in the same bottle. Who cares for the label if the wine is favourable!

Why Women Do Not Feel Safe in Cities?

A few days back, driving slowly on a pot-holed road of Ahmedabad, a young man, probably in his mid-twenties, driving a car purchased for him by his parents, most probably his father, was honking impatiently to overtake me on a curve. The honk said: “Get out of my way, the royal prince is coming”. Partly out of my pride and partly due to prudence in driving in the situation that I have described, I did not make way for the modern day prince to pass. This angered him. At the first opportunity that he could overtake me, as I was driving at the normal speed of 30 kms an hour, a speed that you can drive on Ahmedabad roads, he slowed the car, looked behind to see who the woman was, a fleeting thought passing his mind that now I will harass her by driving at about 10 km per hour so as not to allow her to drive at my speed or pass him. This resolve of his lasted half a minute; probably he may have realized that I was not of the age when he would get fun harassing me. He went away. But, I was cautious; I slowed my speed further to allow him to disappear so that he does not get the idea to follow me for further revenge.

After all, ‘revenge’ so to say, is a fun game for some now. Or women are a fun game for some now, as we now understand from Jyoti Singh’s experience in Delhi – drunk men wanted fun. The two taxi drivers picked up a girl on footpath in Kolkata recently to have fun through the night, fun ending they killed her. And many more as such incidents are being regularly reported in dailies. While moving in a car, being cautious through the day and not generally venturing out on the streets late at night, women of our class are protected from such fun-seeking prowlers. But, the experiences such as the one narrated in the first para are common for many. These desires to have revenge on people, women particularly, who have nothing to do with the revenger, is new, of last decade or so. Economic reforms, ensuing consumerism and commodification of women’s bodies, have lot of answering to do for the state of affairs.

In some of our recent researches on women’s safety in public spaces in Ahmedabad, 52 per cent women using the Sabarmati Riverfront space and 57 per cent women using Lal Darwaaja bus terminus and areas around for shopping, reported sexual harassment. In the first public space, a single woman was not found using it; women users always came in groups or accompanied or with kids, but never alone to even take a morning walk. The second public space had to be navigated alone for taking public bus, but, women avoided dark lanes, footpaths that had parked vehicles or abandoned vehicles and cars, and parts that had men’s urinals.

To think of the reasons for such harassment, there are many. First one is, inspite of 67 years of independence and Indian Constitution that give Right to Equality before law (Article 14), traditional value systems continue to dominate family and gender relations in public life due to prevalence of patriarchy, which is male domination in power. Hence, how can a woman not give me a way? But, inspite of it, and reforms on account of Indian Constitution and some decades of nation building, women have progressed. Families have supported women to progress; government programmes too have supported women to progress. Women have indeed come out in the public sphere and hence episodes of harassment in public spaces being experienced and reported. This does not mean that women are safe in private space as 70 per cent women have experienced domestic violence in India say statistics. In fact, to escape the domestic violence, women have begun to come out of their homes to seek independence from this tyranny. Violence on women in the public space is a public concern, while domestic violence, some may argue is not a public concern. I disagree that domestic violence is not a public concern; it is as women should report to law for such violence.

Male supremacy being challenged in the public spaces has invited a backlash, something we see now. While women’s coming out and challenge to patriarchy has invited another dubious backlash, of assertion of religious fundamentalism, a practice that is now visible across two major religions in India and across many parts of the world. The increase in religiosity, more as a ritual than the spirit of religion, is pushing for reassertion of patriarchy. While these cultural expressions of patriarchy have become aggressive, there is also massive failure of mobility of large masses of young men entering the labour force due to economic model practiced and lack of improvement in quality of human resources. For example, quality of education is very poor and one sees little possibilities of improvement in them. There is lack of decent work (at adequate wages, decent working conditions and with social protection) opportunities, creating frustration among the youth, particularly of the lower income classes. Some of that is getting directed into criminal activities and violence. Women, become objects of their such‘games’.

Lack of development and mobility opportunities, and being thrown in the harsh ‘survival of the fittest’ game, never experiencing human treatment at home or in the society, a segment of population has indeed become ‘cannibal’, a metaphor used by Lu Xun, a well-known Chinese litterateur of late 19^th to early 20^th century, who in his story Madman’s diary, the “madman” sees “cannibalism” both in his family and the village around him, and he then finds cannibalism in the Confucian classics which had long been credited with a humanistic concern for the mutual obligations of society, and thus for the superiority of Confucian civilization. The story was read as an ironic attack on traditional Chinese culture and a call for a New Culture. In another story titled ‘Ah Q’, he portrays the character as one who is a bully to the less fortunate but fearful of those who are above him in rank, strength, or power. We see this cannibalism in play today. This is not just among a segment of the have-nots who have preyed on women, but, also men in power, who think women as objects of their desire.

But, such behavior of private spaces has now become public due to three major state failures. One is failure of criminal justice system and of police system. I am not knowledgeable on these issues but basing these statements on what I have read. Incidents of police themselves preying on vulnerable is now known and women generally tend to fear policemen and refrain from going alone to the police-station, particularly women of low-income classes as they are not expected to have any political or financial backing.

Lastly, there is much desired in the design of public spaces which have to appear safe through safe infrastructure and sensible and human-centric design. Our enquiry in the safety of public spaces for women’s safety begun from this concern, which have been described at length in one upcoming paper of the Centre for Urban Equity at CEPT University. There are others as well on the website that discuss the safety concerns of women in resettlement sites and informal peri-urban housing area in Ahmedabad and in all types of residential localities in the city of Guwahati.

The broad findings of these studies related to infrastructure planning and design are:

i)             Lack of walkable and wide footpaths forces women to walk on road-sides, navigating the parked vehicles and hence squeezed to walk on narrow stretches and become vulnerable to robbery and physical harassment such as pawing. Hence, there is a requirement of wide footpaths to walk safely. Is that possible? There has to be a holistic approach to street design so as to cater to the largest proportion of street users and not just the private motorized vehicles.

ii)           Lack of well-lit road-sides and public places do create a sense of insecurity among the women users of these two spaces. The public spaces and roads have to be well-lit. There is a need to set up a governance mechanism so that it is possible to maintain public spaces well-lit at all times.

iii)        While activities and people on the road make women feel safe, over-crowding increases the possibilities of their harassment, particularly physical harassment such as pawing.

iv)        Over-crowded spaces where women feel more harassment could have vigilance / surveillance mechanisms including policing during peak seasons.

v)          There is a need of street activities that go on till late night. In Indian situation, and in eating out cultures such as Ahmedabad, street food markets could create a sense of security on the streets and other public spaces. There can also be thought of houses opening up on the street fronts, shops opening on the street fronts and so on, to have diversity of activities.

vi)        Derelict areas, spaces where there are waste dumps, wreckage, parked cars and carts, and public toilets frequented by men, are all found to create a sense of unease among women as they fear assault in such locations. This is an issue of city management and there is a need to improve maintenance of city’s assets.

vii)      Predominant use of any space by men also creates a sense of unease. Men tend to hang around pan parlours/ cigarette shops, tea stalls, eateries, sitting on their vehicles or standing around. Such places need to have more surveillance. But, additional activities to such places could be attracted so that the spaces are also visited by families and groups of women. Culturally, women do not loiter around. But, if the perception of public spaces changes to being safe, there is likelihood of increased use of these spaces.

Modernizing the Railway System – Experience from China

Preamble

India has begun to plan High Speed Rail (HSR) and will implement 2,000 km of network by 2020. The first one between Ahmedabad and Mumbai is under planning stage. A recent research study on HSR in India states that: “HSR creates opportunities for regional economic development by improving connectivity between large urban centres, as well as other small and medium cities along the corridors, and generates socio-economic benefits by improving access to employment, health, education and time savings.” In doing so it will also deliver sizeable reduction in energy in the long term for short haul travel as it will replace air and road transport, both high energy consuming transport options (See http://www.unep.org/transport/lowcarbon/PDFs/Role_of_High_Speed_Rail_Final.pdf) for detail findings and policy recommendations.

People Republic of China (PRC), henceforth called China, has developed by now is 19,000 km, which has been reported in the Indian media as well (April 21, 2016 Indian Express) and is expected to reach 30,000 km by 2020. The initial speed planned for the HSR was 380 km per hour (kmph); trains were run at about 310 kmph for a short period till an accident occurred in 2011 July that led to officially reported death of 40 people, the speed has been restricted to about 300 kmph now. China has developed its own HSR, learning from Shinkansen of Japan and Siemens’ technology of Maglev trains. There is one Maglev in Shanghai. But, after that China has not pursued that route. There are some learnings for us in India from the experience of modernizing railway system in China.

I am aware that by taking a position of what China has achieved, I am committing a blasphemy. Some Indian media peddling jingoistic nationalism, a nationalism constructed on hatred and deriding the others (and China has been constructed as the other), and hence suspect this might be considered as blasphemy. Also, as the greatest civilization that has achieved everything in the past and know everything about how to make our future society, we need not learn from any other country, and not China, who has taken cudgels against us, as we read in everyday paper. But, since our Honourable Prime Minister has been impressed with China’s development, so he said when he was the Chief Minister of Gujarat, I am writing this article that it might be spared the ignominy of being called ‘anti-national’. This article does not mean that I have uncritical adulation of China. Anyway, I would like to share what I have observed in China over last about 12 years of my visits to the country.

First high speed trains were operationalised in China in April 2007. One day in April 2007, when we were to take a train from Tianjin to Beijing, a friend said that today the trains may not run because some trains were being converted into high speed trains and the one between Beijing and Tianjin was one of them. Since then, the HSR network covers 28 of country’s 33 provinces and autonomous regions.

So what some may argue and others would say what about those who cannot afford the price of the fast trains? One is skeptical about modernization process as that may also mean discontinuing the low-speed trains for the high-speed months. It is therefore interesting to experience the railway facilities created in China and understand the system, something that is relevant for us in India. The HSR in China works within the larger context of national railway network and local subway network.

Railway Infrastructure in Cities

At this point in time, there are multiple railway stations in all the mega cities. For example, Beijing has Beijing central, Beijing west, Beijing north and Beijing south. Beijing south is especially constructed for HSR. Each one of them is no wconnected by a metro (called subway in China). The existing stations were upgraded to provide this metro connection as well as for the HSRs.

In the month of June 2008, Beijing west station was under repairs like all the public buildings in the city for the Olympics. Our taxi dropped us at the first floor level of this station. The ground floor is for pedestrian entry, for those who have taken a public bus to the station. The bus stand is adjacent to the railway station. The subway line 1 is linked to this station. Subway line 2 connects Beijing central station and Beijing North station. In Shanghai; there is Shanghai central and Shanghai south station located on lines 3 and 2 respectively. In Tianjin, the central station is connected by line 2 and Tianjin west by line 1. Thus, anyone traveling by train, HSR or not, gets to the station by public transport conveniently connected. All stations also have bus links or bus stations adjacent so that those not able to afford taxi or a subway could take a bus.

Photo 1: Tianjin Central Station

Photo Credit: Author

The tickets are scrutinized at the entrance of the station before one enters. Then the luggage is screened for security purposes before entering the main hall. I have seen these machines since 2004, my first visit to China. In the regular times, all these happen in an orderly way, through queues. The peak travel seasons such as the Chinese New Year, or May day holidays, see jamming of railway stations. The cities are very well equipped to handle crowd. But, now, to reduce the episodes of such peaking, China has done away with a few large vacations to many short holidays.

That apart; once inside the main building, in any station, for us in Beijing west station in 2008, we were not prepared for what we saw. Now, we have seen such stations in Tianjin, Shanghai and many other small city stations. For the first time we saw that each train had a waiting room or waiting area demarcated. In some stations, the waiting area is exclusive for the train and those without a ticket to that train are not allowed inside. In some stations, there are common waiting areas and there are boarding gates to the train. For each departing train, whether a slow passenger or a new bullet train and the waiting room number mentioned on the large display board in the main hall. On large stations, the waiting rooms are at ground and first floor level. The Tianjin central station looks like an airport and so does Shanghai south station (See Photos 1, 2 and 3).

Photo 3: Shanghai South Station from Inside

Photo credit: Author 

The underground area of the station is for the parking of private vehicles and queuing of the taxis for picking up the passengers. There is also bus station connection for those not affording to take a taxi or even affording to take a metro. This leaves the ground level space open for constructing a large railway station to hold large number of people at a time.

One is allowed to enter the waiting hall only if one has a ticket to travel. This means that from here on, only the passengers are allowed, which cuts down unnecessary crowds at the station and on the platform. The gate to the platform is opened up only 30 to 40 minutes before the departure of the train. For bullet commuter trains, such as between Beijing and Tianjin and so on, the boarding is allowed only half an hour before the train. Till then, no passengers are allowed on the platform. The trains have food stalls, toilets (which have cleaning attendants throughout the day, at least in the major cities), and sitting areas. Irrespective of what class of ticket one purchases or what class of train one chooses, the railway facilities enjoyed are the same for all. The farmers, the migrant labour, the international executives, etc. all enjoy the same level of facility.

Photo 3: From Waiting Room To Platform

Photo credit: Author

Different Category Trains

In 2008, we were taking a train to Changsha, Hunan province, the south central province, at a distance of 1700 km from Beijing, which the ‘Z’ category non-stop train we took covered in 13 hours. We took a soft seat, which is four berths in a compartment in a sleeper train whereas a hard seat in a sleeper train is six berths. This train had new coaches and our compartment had a television screen inside, with six channel options. Another striking feature was spotlessly white bed sheets covering the berth, and a quilt with spotlessly white cover.

The HSR trains are C, D and G category trains. The slowest trains are ‘N’ series trains. The latter stop at all the stations on the route and hence take much longer than ‘Z’ or HSR trains. They are also the cheapest. The ‘N’ category train that I traversed between Beijing and Tianjin in 2005 took 2 hours. The ‘D’ category HSR takes now 34 minutes between the same two stations. Till 2011, Beijing-Tianjin HSR took 28 minutes but now due to speed reduction the time has increased by 6 minutes. Even ‘N’ series trains, have clean sheets, as I had chance to experience in a train we took to Tangshan from Beijing.

There are other categories of the trains. Slower than the HSR are the ‘Z’ series trains. Slower than them are ‘T’ series and then ‘K’ series trains. ‘N’ series are the slowest. Faster one wants to travel, higher the price of ticket to be paid. By introducing HSR, the slower trains continue to work and provide services to those who would want to travel to small towns and those who have low affordability.

Important Learnings

What we see here is ‘Inclusive Development’, that which includes all sections of the population while upgrading and modernizing infrastructure. Fast trains require better infrastructure at the stations, and this is then shared by all those who can afford only slow trains. This is a first lesson one can learn, of differential categories for differentiated affordability built and managed in such a way that common infrastructure benefits all, irrespective of their paying class. There is a great sense of ‘public goods’ in China. Railway infrastructure is one such major public good.

Other interesting learning for us is to introduce an element of security at the stations. First thing required is to prevent the crowding of the stations, through allowing only passengers inside the waiting halls. The other security measure is through station design. In India people loiter on the railway platforms for various reasons; lack of night staying space, use of toilets and fill water. These are the development problems that need to be addressed nonetheless before embarking on modernizing infrastructure, something we have forgotten in this race to modernize infrastructure for globalization.

Third is giving due respect to train travelers by providing space for them to wait for their trains. This would work if the people travel light, as we see in China (those with large luggage have to check it in and pay for it) and if the trains go on time. Both are not difficult for us. The fourth learning is cleanliness, something that needs no elaboration. ‘Swachhata’ has become an important ‘motto’ for us with the initiative from the Prime Minister.

The last is pricing. Instead of reducing the train fares our Railway Ministers have been habitually doing, the surplus could be used for improving railway travel for our people and people would appreciate that more than the conditions they are traveling at the moment. Our people, large majority of them travel by train, deserve secure, orderly and healthy travel. Modernization does not mean exclusions, that is an important lesson one can draw from the experience of rail travel in China.

PMAY’s ‘Affordable Housing’ - The Theatre of Absurd

‘Brexiting’ has many explanations, one of them being a housing crisis amidst many other ills of globalization, felt across England including in London. As Pratap Bhanu Mehta states (Indian Express June 25, 2016), “if this is a revolt against globalisation, then this vote should be read, above all, as a vote against the city of London which has come to epitomise open immigration, financialisation of the economy, elites that are out of touch, a home for crony capitalism driven by real estate speculation ….”.

The signs were there of disaffection in the housing market even in London. The Housing and Planning Act, 2016, which when introduced as a bill in 2015, invited huge protests particularly from those who could live in London due to Council Housing (social housing), that was available on rental basis. The bill, now an act, sought to sell off council housing to the occupants through provision of Right to Buy, which meant that those who cannot buy had to leave main parts of London to live in suburbs, which was already happening.

The city of London was also demolishing council housing for high-end real estate projects that were extremely expensive. Anna Minton writes in the Guardian on April 20, 2016 that the cheapest one-bedroom apartment in Elephant Park development on former council housing at Heygate Estate in South London would cost £608,000, absolutely unaffordable to large segments of population. And a quarter of it was to supposedly ‘affordable housing’, to be made available at 80% of the market rent! Affordable housing has become euphemism for incremental privatization in housing, promoting paradigm of ownership housing. A large segment of population prefer to live in rental housing as they cannot afford ownership housing and the Housing and Planning Act, 2016, did not have anything for them.

‘Affordable Housing 2022’ named now as Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY) too is promoting ownership housing when only 61% of urban households have ownership housing and 35% live in rental housing as per the 69^th Round of National Sample Survey data (of 2012) in India. In an urbanizing economy, when continuous rural to urban migration is expected, housing programme should be addressing needs for both, rental as well as ownership housing. In particular, public housing, as Britain and other European countries’ experience shows, is rental, with rent subsidy paid to the housing corporation (developer) directly by the government.

The PMAY has two important components, one in-situ slum rehabilitation (ISSR) through private sector participation using land as a resource and second Affordable Housing in Partnership (AHP). The ISSR is the new name of the famous (or infamous) Slum Rehabilitation Scheme (SRS) introduced in Mumbai in 1995. Since 1995, 0.33 million dwelling units (29% of the total slum dwelling households of 2011) have been sanctioned (upto 2014 August) in the city under the SRS and none after the announcement of the ISSR under the PMAY. Only 82,000 units have been completed making SRS tenements available to only 7% of the households living in slums.

In Ahmedabad, SRS has been approved in only 12 of the total 834 slums in city. Ahmedabad’s SRS scheme was announced after Gujarat “The Regulation for the Rehabilitation and Redevelopment of the Slums 2010”. After the ISSR, about 30,000 dwelling units have been sanctioned in Gujarat under ISSR, which would be about 8% of the total slum households enumerated in 2011 population census in the state. At all India level, just 41,200 dwelling units under ISSR have been sanctioned, which will reach 0.3% of the total slum dwelling households in urban India. The numbers are so low because the SRS is viable only in the locations where the land prices are very high as private sector does not step in without certain minimum assured margin of profit. The former SRS and now the ISSR has not been successful because of it is its total dependence on the private sector to deliver what in other context could have been called ‘social housing’. The Rajiv Awas Yojana (RAY), which now has discontinued, had various options available for slum redevelopment and not just SRS, and had possibility of success except for its unnatural death on the change of national government in 2014 May.

The Affordable Housing in Partnership (AHP) is private sector led construction of new houses for the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS), defined as those whose annual household income is Rs 3 lakhs or below. Total of about 423,000 dwelling units have been sanctioned across India and which would reach only 3% of those currently living in slum housing. But, the AHP housing is expensive, costing any price between Rs. 7.5 lakhs to Rs. 10 lakhs and this would require the household to pay Rs. 7,000 to Rs. 9,500 monthly instalment for a loan of 15 years, that is 30% to 40% of their income. This is absurd and hence unworkable.

Besides, the AHP is being development in Affordable Housing belt, which, in case of Ahmedabad is outside the city’s third ring road, about 15 to 20 kms from the city centre. The housing constructed under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM), BSUP (Basic Services for the Urban Poor) component, which had large subsidy, was constructed way outside the city and did not have takers. Only 78% of BSUP housing units are occupied as of mid-2016. Peripheral inaccessible location away from livelihood opportunities is the major reason for such high vacancy rate in the BSUP housing.

Has PMAY learnt anything from the past? Have we as a nation learnt anything from the past? Have we learnt anything from the housing protests and discussions in other countries or not? Nothing. It is the same rhetoric of ‘Affordable Housing’ seen in Britain, the cause of great disaffection leading to Brexit. The ISSR is euphemism for handing over prime lands of the city to the real estate sector, what can be called speculative capitalism. AHP is a way of diverting the subsidies to the builders in the name of the poor, again fuelling speculative capitalism. It is, probably conveniently, forgotten that the cities will not be looking smart without adequate housing for the poor? The subject of ‘Smart Cities’ will be handled in another article but currently both the slogans, Smart Cities and Affordable Housing sound like a Theater of absurd.