Affordable shelter with a better quality of life

Kirtee Shah

THERE have been government efforts over the years to provide housing to people, particularly in urban areas. But much remains to be done, and time is running out. In the next 30 years there will be a need to provide housing to 400 million people in cities. A change in mindset is needed to see housing as not just an economic activity, but an environmentally sustainable one involving people. A house is a social good which goes beyond bricks, cement and the real estate business.

A “house” is a place that becomes a “home” through the chemistry of love, care, compassion, affection, togetherness, and giving. It is a place for family where values are shaped and culture germinates. It’s the cradle of human society.

 

Put people at the centre of housing programmes, houses are for them

Housing in India is created by people through their inventiveness. Housing programmes run by the government therefore need to involve the people for whom they are meant. It should use their energy, resources and motivation in a creative way.

Housing is for the people and they must be empowered as clients, residents, financiers and contributors. It is an aberration that people have been excluded from the housing process as it is practised now. They should be at the centre of the process.

It is seldom recognized that 60 percent of all rural housing stock in the country, despite massive looking government schemes, are created and designed according to the family’s needs, constructed within means, supervised by family, approved by neighbours and mostly financed by the owner. It is a family product.

And, out of 10 houses that come up in our cities the public sector’s contribution is one unit, the organized private sector’s is two units, the unorganized private sector’s is three units and the community’s contribution, including housing in slums, is four units.

These are rough figures, but they tell us that housing is predominantly an informal, unorganized and little regulated activity. Any housing programme should give people/communities a role.

 

Make land more affordable and easily available for housing 

For housing, land is needed in urban areas. It should be affordable and freed up from procedural red tape. The reality is that in the absence of a vision for making land available, the cost of land has risen and become unaffordable — not only in the metros, but also in the smaller Tier II and Tier III cities. 

A house bought for Rs 1.5 lakh in Ahmedabad 25 years ago is sold for Rs 5.5 crore now, that too just for the land, as the house is demolished. If the cost of construction has risen five times, the cost of land has risen perhaps 100 times.

And that is only the cost part. Land use planning, land records, management, administration and so on are a murky business and embroiled in corruption, underhand practices and black money. Cleaning all this up should be a priority. 

 

Have an in-situ slum upgrading strategy, along with formal affordable housing 

Urban slums aren’t going away. Improving the quality of life in them should be a priority. In-situ upgrades are required and affordable housing must be among them. Any initiative should be affordable for both the low-income buyer and the subsidizing government.

There is not much evidence to suggest that the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY), under which 12 million affordable houses are being constructed for the economically weaker groups, has impacted slums in cities in any significant way.

The programme is well-conceived with multiple options to choose from but it does not meet the unique needs of urban slums.

It would be far better to draw on international experience in dealing with slums. That is, make in-situ upgrades, secure land tenures to remove the fear of eviction, incentivize investment in housing by the people themselves and have the local authority provide infrastructure.

The Jaga Mission project of the Odisha government, under which slum development is being done under the in-situ slum upgrading strategy, is drawing attention for its success.

Slum communities are witnessing visible change, the cities look more attractive, and the subject experts see successful scaling up of pilots. Most importantly, giving land titles to the slums has not led to any disruption.

 

The regulatory system needs improvement

Reforms are required across the board from zoning regulations to building bylaws to the building permit system. The regulatory system seems to be designed to suffocate creativity — so badly needed to speed up projects, reduce cost, introduce new ideas, save resources  and innovate in technology and construction. It is arbitrary and subjective in interpretation and results in corruption and money going to officers and political bosses. Streamlining the regulatory system could result in savings of 15 to 20 percent in construction costs.

 

Find professionals who know how to deal with modern problems

Municipalities lack modern expertise. Officers, architects, planners and contractors aren’t equipped to deal with the various, complex problems of burgeoning cities. Perhaps they can be retrained to an extent. If not, bringing in better professionals is imperative. It can’t wait in the face of a rising tide of problems relating to environment, finance, waste and energy. 

 

Kirtee Shah is an architect based in Ahmedabad.