Institution Building

While the aggregate data on the various types of housing is not readily available, the share of squatter settlements in total housing stock has probably increased from 7.5 per cent in 1981 to 17.5 per cent in 1991. This suggests that of the net increases during the eighties, about a third was absorbed by the squatter settlements. This is more than the numbers of dwelling units constructed by DDA during this period; its share was slightly less than a third in the net addition. The DDA housing supply is estimated at an average 15,000 dwellings per annum.

It is clear from the evidence presented in the table that despite the massive public presence, for most of Delhi’s population, the housing outlook is dismal. Since this market is in the grip of an inefficient public agency which cannot meet demand, the housing shortage continues to worsen.

The housing policies in the past have pursued three main lines of action. The first is the supply of public housing built by the DDA. This, as has been noted, has fallen far short of the anticipated and even ‘registered’ demand. Thus of the 1.75 lakh registrants in the DDA’s registration scheme in 1983, only half have been supplied with housing so far. More importantly, the supply has been skewed far more towards the middle and upper income groups. The overall gap between supply and demand, and the resultant spirals in residential prices have enabled the lucky recipients of DDA housing to reap tremendous unearned increments.

The government policies have priced out most of the poor from the formal housing market, confining them to the slum settlements. In response to this, a three-pronged strategy has been developed to deal with the problems faced by the slum population, involving(i) relocation, (ii) in-situ shelter and environmental upgradation with the necessary restructuring in the layout and (iii) extension of minimum basic community services where neither of the above two approaches are possible. With regard to the first approach, Delhi has probably one the of the largest programmes of resettlement, covering almost 2.5 lakh households. However, unlike in many other states in the country, the second approach of in-situ upgradation has not been favoured; only 3 to 4 slum settlements involving less than 8000 families have been covered. Most of the other remaining clusters are covered under the scheme for provision of basic community services. While considerable resources, amounting to several crores of rupees, are being poured into these settlements, there is a clear lack of an integrated strategy.

In addition to these direct measures, DDA has supplied developed land to cooperatives for private housing development. However, on the whole, the land servicing of DDA has been slow and it effectively leaves out low income groups from exercising these options.

Despite the fact that the recent National Housing Policy has emphasised the move from actual development, towards a facilitative and enabling role for government, nothing much has been done in this regard. In the case of Delhi, there is a need to do more than make statements about meeting the housing shortages through increased supply by public agencies and the makeshift responses to inadequate services in slum settlements. It is necessary to recognize the importance of the private and popular (community and individual households) sectors in providing housing, and support and promote these by removing unnecessary constraints. While many new initiatives are needed, we highlight three important ones below.

1.	Partnerships for land development: Once of the key constraints on the supply side has been the inadequate supply of serviced land in Delhi. Comparative studies of private and public sector supply indicate that the supply is much faster for the former and of course the returns almost three times as much. Thus efforts to aid the private sector in increasing the supply would in the long run help to bridge the supply-demand imbalance and benefit all sections of the society. DDA has already started exploring the potential for such approaches. However, such efforts must be supported by changes in development standards which are more compatible with the demand and preference patterns of consumers, a more integrated approach to infrastructure and land development.

2.	Redensification and filtering: The table clearly highlights that the densities in at least 75 percent of the developed areas (in formal housing as well as in the unauthorized colonies) are very low. Given that the infrastructure has already been made available in these areas there is potential for significant densification. Such a move would also help to distribute services in a more equitable manner, as these areas also have a far better level of services. This requires action on several fronts, including changes in building regulations and by-laws, zoning regulations, rent control legislation, greater amount of freehold tenure to improve access to housing finance etc. It would be worth studying the redevelopment processes already underway in some of the localities in Delhi to evolve such support measures. The filtering process in housing enables the lower income groups to improve their housing situation by occupying the houses vacated by upwardly mobile middle income households. This necessitates improved residential mobility which has generally been found to be constrained in most Indian cities. In Delhi, this has been further constrained by the complexities of tenure as the housing finance companies often do not recognize the power of attorney which has become acceptable in the market for housing transactions.

3.	Integrated development of slums: Over the last several decades, a wide variety of efforts have been made to deal with the poor quality of living environment which prevails in urban slums. The different programmes and schemes have been receiving substantial allocations through plan funds. For example, for 1994-95, the total allocation for these in the State Annual Plan is to the tune of Rs. 100 crores. The cost effectiveness of such massive investments will be enhanced significantly if the different approaches are put in a larger city-level strategic perspective that is at the same time based on the ground realities of specific settlements which tend to vary significantly. It would have to incorporate an understanding of macro possibilities for infrastructure development, as well as relate to the micro slum-level variations, supported by a special city information system oriented to the needs of the poor. More importantly, the trade-offs amongst different alternatives and pricing policies must explicitly consider the resource availability within a definite time frame. Quite often in the past, exaggerated subsidy requirements have inhibited universal access. Instead, the needs is to incorporate community choices through more innovative institutional mechanisms with greater community control over resources.

	While these approaches may not immediately change the housing situation for most Delhi residents, they will certainly help to pave the way towards greater control and choice in their housing decisions.

Dr. Meera Mehta was director of Centre for Environment Planning & Technology in Ahmedabad. She is currently a senior research fellow at the Human Settlement & Management Institute.