Some hard talk about space

Posted online: 2010-08-09

With all our Five-Year Plans and battery of economists working in the Planning Commission, elsewhere in government and various other organisations, there seems to be almost a total lack of awareness about spatial planning in India. In the last 60 years of our independence, we have become a trillion-dollar economy. However, the ratio of GDP from agriculture, which was 55% has now fallen to 17%, while the GDP ratio of manufacturing has gone up only slightly—from under 10.6% to 18.5% and services (including construction) constitute around 65% from a mere 34%. Such a dramatic change, however, is not reflected in the rural populace. The proportion of people living in rural areas, which was about 80% in 1947, is still as much as 70%.

Also, there has hardly been any significant expansion in employment opportunities in the non-farm sector in rural areas. Therefore, based on a sectoral shift of GDP, the urban-rural ratio has to be at least 50%, if not more, in favour of urban areas. The result of the present lack of spatial planning is now evident in the recent report released by the NSS, according to which there are 49,000 urban slums in India today. 24% of these slums are located along nallas and drains and 12% along railway tracks. Further, 57% of the slums have come up on public land owned mostly by local bodies and state governments.

The UPA government had made the ambitious promise of a slum-free India, with about 10% notified and 20% non-notified slums. All the slums are in dilapidated and unhygienic conditions, with half of them severely impacted by water logging during the monsoon.

The issue that is now arising is not of slum improvement but a total lack of planning in dealing with obvious trends in sectoral distribution of wealth between the agriculture, industry and service sectors. Small agriculture holdings that are not fully viable cannot hold the families as they grow, resulting in migration of the youth. If a study is made based on family-wise holdings, there is little denying the fact that the situation is rife for mass migration to cities and other urban areas, and in turn for the consolidation of holdings. This is where planners have failed to both visualise and anticipate how they would go about the task of attracting and directing rural migrants to the designated urban areas and what arrangements would need to be made for their stay even though it may be transitional. In the absence of such anticipatory measures, it would be difficult to avoid the growth of slums—taking place unabatedly on government land leading to serious implications for general health and law and order related issues.

The contention of Delhi’s chief minister that migration to Delhi has taken place because of rural poverty in Bihar and other poor states may be partially correct but there is little denying that even with better administration of state governments, rural to urban migration is inevitable, given the trends and distribution of GDP.

It is indeed a pity that despite considerable contribution of slum dwellers to the urban economy, there is little recognition or credit by the city. What is therefore needed is developing an appropriate economic model by our economists, which would predict the future quantum of migration, area wise, and direct them to cities with employment potential. One would also need greater clarity with regard to facilities for employment and living. Even in a situation where government land has to be used for the migrants, it could be better planned with some sense of legitimacy, temporary allotment for nominal rent and hygiene systems in place. This would not only facilitate smooth and orderly migration but also avoid the growth of slum lords, violation of law and other associated corruption and criminal activities. Similarly, the provision for supply of electricity, water and public health care facilities, even in limited quantities, could be better planned by local authorities if they are forewarned of the impending migration.

As urban land prices have gone through the roof, it is almost impossible for rural migrants to buy land when they seek to settle in a city looking for work. Provision of temporary rental accommodation even in slum-like conditions, but with proper hygiene, officially sanctified for those entering a city on payment of some minimum rent would be preferable to illegal squatting. Illegal squatting has its own underground economics and is not free of charge. Even in slums, rental accommodation is available and is used. Payments under the table to slum lords, police etc are the expenses that have to be met. However, there is no adequate recognition that these are realities of life and squatting on government land is now an acceptable phenomenon, especially when state governments do not hesitate to legitimise illegal slum settlements, usually at election time. This has become a major issue for electoral bank politics.

Sanat Kaul is a commentator on current issues. This article is co-authored with DB Gupta, senior consultant with NCAER