It's time state designed inclusive urbanism

IT is learnt that Government of Tamil Nadu (GoTN) would soon be unveiling a new State urban housing and habitat policy. “The process is under way and the policy will be announced soon,” is the cryptic remark of a senior official who wants to remain anonymous. It looks as if the policy is being kept as a closely-guarded secret and likely to be announced in the State Assembly in the first week of July. 

However, a recent programme titled ‘Workshop on Integrated Urban and Regional Planning and State Housing and Habitat Policy in Chennai’ held on June 2 and 3 by the Tamil Nadu Housing and Urban Development Department was held behind closed doors. Though the main objective of the meeting was to draft a strengthened housing policy, the meeting did not include members of civil society groups. Neither was there any discussion about including a participatory approach in the drafting process. Strangely enough, it is understood that GIZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (giz) Gmbh), a German funding agency, was fully involved in the deliberations. This makes one wonder as to who is shaping policies for the people of Tamil Nadu (TN)-stakeholders or a foreign funding agency? 

A draft of this policy was released in October 2016. This draft leaves several unanswered questions, especially relating to Economically Weaker Section (EWS) housing. It does not mention the provisions of the various Acts, including the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance and Improvement Act, 1971, the Municipalities Act and the various other legislations of the state, that have an impact on EWS. Policy draft appears to be devoid of ground reality. This is evident from the fact that there is no concrete assessment about the housing shortage in the state and the nature of such shortage. Only references are made to Census 2011. 

The proposed housing policy has four development models: (a) government construction on government land; (b) private construction on government land; (c) private construction on private land (with incentives to offset land cost for EWS/LIG); and (d) private development on acquired land. There is a deliberate effort by the government to encourage private sector to take up public housing on land owned by the Housing Board. This is a clear case of allowing the private players to do cherry-picking, with the government abdicating its role. 

The big gap: On the EWS housing front, there are a number of gaps. There is no clear-cut vision and guidelines from social justice perspective. Social infrastructure facilities are lacking. Provision for ensuring security of tenure for the EWS/LIG sections is absent. There are no provisions to ensure synergy between various line departments, while implementing the housing programme for the EWS. 

Here are some numbers contained in the policy draft. As per Census 2011, the population of Tamil Nadu was 7.21 crores, an increase from 6.24 crore in 2001 census. Out of this, 48.4 per cent live in urban habitats. In the last decade, the population growth was at 27.1 per cent in urban areas and 6.6 per cent in rural hinterland. The state is on the forefront of the urbanisation trend. Growth rate of urban population in the last decade was 27.2 per cent, against rural population growth of 6.5 per cent. The rate of urbanisation of the state is estimated to increase to 67 per cent by 2030. As per Census 2011, while the number of villages has gone down by 338, the number of towns have increased by 265. With the rapid pace of urbanisation, TN faces the challenge of providing affordable houses in urban areas. The housing shortage is estimated to be around 10 lakh, of which 50 per cent is in urban areas. This problem is expected to get worse, as more areas are declared as urban space with the ever-increasing growth of slums. 

State and its slums: Tamil Nadu has the third highest slum population of 57,98,459 individuals in India comprising of 8.04 per cent of the total slum population in the country. The state was also home to 50, 929 houseless families, living without any support roof cover. There were 70.20 per cent good houses, 27.96 per cent liveable houses and 1.85 per cent dilapidated houses in the state. Out of these, 74.55 per cent houses are owned and 23. 37 percent are rented. Nearly 35 per cent of the available housing stocks are temporary and semi-temporary structures. Over 90 per cent of the housing shortage falls under BPL and EWS income category. The incremental housing demand in Chennai, which was 4,13,012 in 2011 has gone go up to 12, 37,482 in 2016. Demand for housing BPL and EWS houses is estimated to increase from 1,23,904 in 2011 to 3,71,245 in 2026. 

This is an alarming picture for a state which is the most urbanised in the country having crossed the 50 per cent threshold. This is because, urbanisation in TN has not adhered to the model of urban development integrating sustainability, equity, welfare and shared prosperity. Policies and practices followed have been ad-hoc, arbitrary, greed-driven and real estate-oriented. Such a predatory and disjointed mode has not been able to meet the threats from unsustainable consumption and production patterns, acute housing shortage, loss of biodiversity, pressure on ecosystems, pollution, natural and man-made disasters and climate change. 

Though housing is an integral part of urbanisation, it is not everything. Urbanisation is basically movement of population from rural to urban areas and the resulting increasing proportion of a population that resides in urban places. It is a two-way process, because it involves not only movement from village to cities and change from agricultural occupation to business, trade, service and profession, but also a change in the migrant’s attitudes, beliefs, values and behaviour patterns. Facilities like education, healthcare, employment avenues, civic facilities and social welfare are reasons attracting people to urban areas. 

Despite the looming tectonic shift towards urban habitat, TN does not have an urban concept, philosophy or political process. Since urbanisation concerns people, their lives and livelihood, it should have a distinct character, culture, ethos and inclusiveness. But unfortunately, in TN, it has become commercial commodification producing and selling built-units (square-foot) to purchasers who can afford to pay. This is the hallmark of today’s technology/globalisation-driven urbanisation, which is exclusive and invasive, keeping majority of citizens away from the ‘development-stream’ and allocating scarce economic and ecological resources to the select few. 

What we need is inclusive ‘urbanism’ wherein the rural and urban ecosystems would converge and complement each other. Informal sector, that contributes over 75 per cent of urban employment, which is now in the periphery of urban planning, should be mainstreamed. Urbanism would leverage the urban facilities and advantages to the full and practice inclusive and shared development. This would help avoid the abominable practice of dumping BPL and EWS housing in marshes and hazardous zones, without any economic/social infrastructure as is being done now. 

Mere housing is not urbanisation. Neither is it ‘smart city’ solutions or real estate promotion. It is much more. It is time GoTN evolves a sustainable policy of urbanisation adopting the philosophy of ‘urbanism’ with proper public consultation and implement it sincerely instead of indulging in patchwork ‘housing/habitat escapades’ in association with foreign aid agencies. 

Otherwise, instead of being a leader in urban life and vibrancy, Tamil Nadu may end up as a laggard. The ball is in the government’s court.