CHAPTER-5 URBANISATION AND THEIR SLUMS: A...

108

CHAPTER-5

URBANISATION AND THEIR SLUMS: A STUDY OF SLUM ENVIRONMENT OF THE FOUR SLUM LOCALITIES IN

BELGAUM CITY

5.1. INTRODUCTION

Urbanization is basically influenced by the incidence of poverty and

underemployment and seasonal unemployment of rural people. They migrate to urban

areas in search of regular employment and settle down in urban areas where living

conditions are better and cost of living is low. This leads to growth of slums in urban

areas and slums exhibit conditions of poor housing, lack of sanitation facilities, etc. The

migrants largely belong to socially backward communities and caste groups. The study

covers 200 respondents in the four selected slum localities in the urban study area of

Belgaum city. It has made an analysis of the slum environment and the social

conditions of the respondents in the study area of Belgaum City.

The discussions in this core chapter of the thesis are focused on the analysis of the data

pertaining to the slum environment of the four slum localities in Belgaum city covered

by the field survey. The four slum areas include parts of Anagol, Malaprabhanagar,

Ambedkarnagar, and Old Gandhinagar. The field survey in this part of the study relates

to….

• The poverty level of the respondent families in the slum areas indicated by the

APL and BPL status and their respective percentage in the total number of

respondent families.

• Social groups of respondent families based on caste affiliations.

• Housing, drainage and sanitation conditions of respondents’ families.

• Migration status of respondents.

• House ownership and house facilities relating to Kitchen, Bathroom, Living

rooms, and Latrine.

• Household possessions of respondent families viz; Electricity, Telephone, TV

and Cable connections, Refrigerators, Vehicles, Furniture, LPG stoves, etc.

109

5.2 BACKGROUND STUDY OF SLUM ENVIRONMENT OF THE FOUR

SLUM LOCALITIES IN BELGAUM CITY

HOUSEHOLD DETAILS OF RESPONDENT SLUM DWELLERS:

The discussions on these and other related aspects of the slum environment in

the four urban areas of Belgaum City have been supported by the empirical evidences

provided in appropriate tables. Inferences and conclusions have been provided based on

the data obtained through the field survey.

The household details of the respondent slum dwellers in the four slum in

Belgaum city provide some significant trends relating to the family size, age, education,

marital status, family occupation, etc.

Family size of the respondents:

The study has revealed that the family size of the majority of 172 respondents

(86%) was of 1 to5 members. The family size of a smaller number of 28 respondents

(14%) was of 6 and more members. Thus the majority of the families of the respondent

residents of the four slums in Belgaum had an optimum size of members.

Table: 5.1.Distribution of respondents according to area and Family size.

Family size

Notified slums Non-Notified slums Total % Chi-square

p-value

Anagol % Malaprabha

Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old GandhiN

agar

%

1-5 44 88.0 40 80.0 45 90.0 43 86.0 172 86.0 2.3256 0.50765

6+ 6 12.0 10 20.0 5 10.0 7 14.0 28 14.0

Total 50 100 50 100 50 100 50 100 200 100 Source: Field Survey.

Average family size of the respondents:

Area wise analysis about the family size indicates that the mean size of the

families in Anagol was 4.2, Malaprabha Nagar 4.3, Ambedkar Nagar 3.9, and in Old

Gandhi Nagar the mean family size was 3.9.

Table: 5.2.Average family size by areas. Summary Anagol Malaprabha Nagar Ambedkar Nagar Old GandhiNagar Total F-value P-value

Mean 4.2 4.3 3.9 3.9 4.1 0.7277 0.5366 SD 1.2 1.6 1.4 1.6 1.5 Source: Field Survey.

110

Age wise distribution of family members of respondent slum dwellers:

The average age of the family members of the respondent slum dwellers in

Anagol was 26.10 years, Malaprabha Nagar 27.12 years, Ambedkar Nagar 25.49 years

and in Old Gandhi Nagar the average age of the family members was 26.69 years. The

overall average age of the family members of the respondent slum dwellers was 26.36

years.

Table: 5.3.Average age of family members by areas.

Summary Anagol Malaprabha Nagar Ambedkar Nagar Old GandhiNagar Total

Mean 26.10 27.12 25.49 26.69 26.36

SD 15.66 15.82 15.29 14.98 15.43

Source: Field Survey.

Age Groups of family members of respondents:

The total number of the family members of the respondent slum dwellers in

Belgaum city was 814, of which 127 members (15.60%) belonged to less than 10 years

of age. Locality wise, the number of family members varied from 25 in Old Gandhi

Nagar to 37 in Anagol. A total number of 215 family members (26.41%) belonged to

11-20 years of age. The number varied between 51 in Anagol and 56 in Ambedkar

Nagar. There were 197 family members of the respondents (24.20%) who belonged to

the age group of 21-30 years. The number varied from 45 in Ambedkar Nagar to 54 in

Old Gandhi Nagar. A total number of 105 family members (12.90%) belonged to the

age group of 31-40 years. The number varied from 23 in Ambedkar Nagar to 29 in

Anagol. Family members totaling 104 (12.90%) belonged to 41-50 years of age and a

small number of 66 family members (8.11%) of the respondents belonged to more than

51 years of age.

111

Table: 5.4.Distribution of respondents according to area and age groups of family members.

Age groups

Notified slums Non-Notified slums

Total % Anagol % Malaprabha

Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old GandhiNa

gar

%

<10yrs 37 29.13 33 25.98 32 25.20 25 19.69 127 15.60

11-20yrs 51 23.72 55 25.58 56 26.05 53 24.65 215 26.41

21-30yrs 49 24.87 49 24.87 45 22.84 54 27.41 197 24.20

31-40yrs 29 27.62 28 26.67 23 21.90 25 23.81 105 12.90

41-50yrs 24 23.08 29 27.88 27 25.96 24 23.08 104 12.78

51+yrs 19 28.79 19 28.79 13 19.70 15 22.73 66 8.11

Total 209 25.68 213 26.17 196 24.08 196 24.08 814 100.0 Source: Field Survey

Educational status of family members of respondents:

It is significant to find from the field survey that a large number of 260 family

members of the respondents (31.94%) are illiterate. Locality wise, the number of

illiterates varied from 53 in Old Gandhi Nagar to 82 in Anagol. Majority of 272 family

members (33.42%) had only primary education. The number varied from 65 in Anagol

to 72 in Malaprabha Nagar. A substantial number of 226 family members (27.76%) had

secondary education. The number ranged between 45 each in Anagol and Ambedkar

Nagar to 74 in Malaprabha Nagar. A lesser number of 39 family members (4.79%) had

degree level education with the number ranging between 7 in Malaprabha Nagar and 11

each in Anagol and Ambedkar Nagar. There were 8 family members with just

LKG/UKG level of education and another 8 family members with other level of

education. There was 1 family member in Malaprabha Nagar who had PUC level of

education.

112

Table: 5.5. Distribution of respondents according to area and educational qualifications of family members.

Educations

Notified slums Non-Notified slums

Total % Anagol % Malaprabha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old GandhiN

agar

%

Illiterates 82 31.54 56 21.54 69 26.54 53 20.38 260 31.94

LKG/UKG 3 37.50 1 12.50 2 25.00 2 25.00 8 0.98

Primary 65 23.90 72 26.47 68 25.00 67 24.63 272 33.42

Secondary 45 19.91 74 32.74 45 19.91 62 27.43 226 27.76

PUC 0 0.00 1 100.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.12

Degree 11 28.21 7 17.95 11 28.21 10 25.64 39 4.79

Others 3 37.50 2 25.00 1 12.50 2 25.00 8 0.98

Total 209 25.68 213 26.17 196 24.08 196 24.08 814 100.00

Source: Field Survey

Marital status of family members of respondents of slum areas:

It is found from field survey that majority of 402 family members of

respondents (49.39%) were married. The number ranged from 91 in Ambedkar Nagar

to 111 in Malaprabha Nagar. Further 142 family members (17.44%) were unmarried.

The number varied from 34 in Ambedkar Nagar to 37 in Old Gandhi Nagar. It was

found that 270 family members (33.17%) were children and others. The number varied

from 62 in Old Gandhi Nagar to 71 in Ambedkar Nagar. The following table provides

the details.

Table: 5.6.Distribution of respondents according to area and marital status of family members

Marital status

Notified slums Non-Notified slums Total % Anagol % Malapr

abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old GandhiNag

ar

%

Married 103 25.62 111 27.61 91 22.64 97 24.13 402 49.39

Unmarried 36 25.35 35 24.65 34 23.94 37 26.06 142 17.44

Children and others

70 25.93 67 24.81 71 26.30 62 22.96 270 33.17


Occupational distribution of family members:

Occupational distribution of family members of the respondent slum dwellers in

Belgaum city indicates that large numbers of 308 family members (37.84%) are

occupied on a regular basis. The number varied from 62 in Ambedkar Nagar to 92 in

113

Malaprabha Nagar. A lesser number of 139 family members (17.08%) are involved as

casual workers. Their number varied from 32 in Anagol to 37 in Ambedkar Nagar.

Majority of 367 family members (45.09%) did nothing (no work). Their number varied

from 85 in Malaprabha Nagar to 97 in Ambedkar Nagar.

Table: 5.7.Occupational Distributions of Family Members.

Nature of work Notified slums Non-Notified slums Total %

Anagol % Malaprabha Nagar

% Ambedkar Nagar

% Old GandhiN

agar

%

Regular 81 26.30 92 29.87 62 20.13 73 23.70 308 37.84

Casual 32 23.02 36 25.90 37 26.62 34 24.46 139 17.08

None 96 26.16 85 23.16 97 26.43 89 24.25 367 45.09


Average number of days of work by family members:

The average number of working days of family members in the four slum areas

of Belgaum city was 18.36 days a month. The number of working days varied from a

minimum of 17.44 days in Old Gandhi Nagar to 19.67 days in Anagol.

Table: 5.8.Average of no of days of work of family members by areas.


Mean 19.67 17.84 18.56 17.44 18.36

SD 12.28 10.91 10.96 11.09 11.32 Source: Field Survey.

Average wages per month of family members of respondents:

The average monthly wages of family members of the respondent slum dwellers

of Belgaum city was Rs. 2493.61. The area wise monthly wages were Rs. 2550.89 for

family members in Anagol, Rs.2449.61 in Malaprabha Nagar, Rs.2558.59 in

Ambedkarnagar and Rs.2426.17 in Old Gandhi Nagar.

Table: 5.9.Average ages per month of family members by areas


Mean 2550.89 2449.61 2558.59 2426.17 2493.61

SD 2061.78 2742.26 2043.34 1960.74 2246.15 Source: Field Survey.

114

Distribution of respondents according to area and ration card category in Belgaum city: The study covered a total number of 200 respondent residents in four residential

areas of Anagol and Malaprabha Nagar in the notified slums and Ambedkar Nagar and

Old Gandhi Nagar in non-notified slum areas of Belgaum city each area consisting of

50 respondents categorized under APL and BPL income groups. The distribution of the

respondents based on the ration card category indicates that majority of the respondents

in all the four slum areas, accounting for more than two percent of the total, belonged to

the lower income groups holding ration cards under the category of BPL(below poverty

line). the total number of BPL ration card holders in the four slum areas was 148

accounting for 74%of the total while the total number of those holding ration cards

under the APL (above poverty line) category averaged 52 constituting 26% of the total.

There is a greater representation of respondents belonging to BPL category as the slum

areas obviously are inhabited by economically weaker section of the society.

Table: 5.10. Distribution of respondents according to area and ration card category in Belgaum city

Ration card category

Notified slums Non-Notified slums Total %


% Ambedkar Nagar

% Old GandhiN

agar

%

APL 12 24.0 14 28.0 15 30.0 11 22.0 52 26.0

BPL 38 76.0 36 72.0 35 70.0 39 78.0 148 74.0

Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0

Chi-square= 1.0403, df=3, p=0.79170 Source: Field Survey.

Out of a total of 200 respondents, 52 respondents have APL cards and 148

respondents have BPL cards. Out of 52 respondents have APL cards, in which 24%

belongs to Anagol, 28% belongs to Malaprabha nagar, 30% belongs to

Amabedkarnagar and 22% belongs to Old Gandhinagar. However, out of a 148

respondents with BPL cards, in which 76% belongs to Anagol, 72% belongs to

Malaprabha nagar, 70% belongs to Amabedkarnagar and 78% belongs to Old

Gandhinagar. Therefore, the chi-square test of significance clearly showed that, there

is no significant difference observed between four slums with respect status of rations

cards (chi-square=1.0403, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance.

115

Figure-5.1Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and ration card category.

24.0

76.0

28.0

72.0

30.0

70.0

22.0

78.0

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.0

100.0

Perc

enat

ge

Anagol Malaprabha Nagar Ambedkar Nagar Old GandhiNagar

Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and ration card category

APL BPL

Source: Table-5.10

Distribution of respondent according to area and social group:

The following table-5.11 provides the details of the social groups of the

respondents. The schedule caste residents accounted for the highest average number of

77 (38.5%) among the 200 selected respondents in the four residential areas of

Belgaum city. Area wise, they accounted for 34% and 38% in notified slums of Anagol

and Malaprabha Nagar respectively. In the non-notified slums, respondents belonging

to SC caste group accounted for 46% and 36% in Ambedkar Nagar and Old Gandhi

Nagar respectively. The respondents belonging to scheduled tribe (ST) and other

backward class (OBC) social groups accounted for 20% each. The respondents

belonging to other social groups were slightly more at 21.5% of the total. Area wise,

the number of respondents belonging to SC social group was maximum at 46% in

Ambedkar Nagar under non-notified slums area followed by 38% in Malaprabha Nagar

under notified slums and 36% in Old Gandhi Nagar under non-notified slums. Resident

respondents of scheduled caste and scheduled tribe social groups constituted 20% of the

total in the four areas under notified and non-notified slum areas of Belgaum city. The

number of respondents belonging to other social groups constituted 21% of the total in

the four areas covered by the city in the two slum areas. However, it is significant to

116

find that maximum number of respondents (78.5%) in two different types of slum areas

belonged to the social backward communities of SC, ST and OBC.

Table: 5.11. Distribution of respondents according to area and social group in Belgaum City.

Social group


abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old GandhiN

agar

%

SC 17 34.0 19 38.0 23 46.0 18 36.0 77 38.5

ST 4 8.0 10 20.0 11 22.0 15 30.0 40 20.0

OBC 8 16.0 14 28.0 8 16.0 10 20.0 40 20.0

Others 21 42.0 7 14.0 8 16.0 7 14.0 43 21.5

Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0 Chi-square= 22.7716, df=9, p=0.0067*

Source: Field Survey. Note: *p<0.05.

Figure-5.2 Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and social group

34.0

8.0

16.0

42.038.0

20.0

28.0

14.0

46.0

22.0

16.0 16.0

36.0

30.0

20.0

14.0

0.05.0

10.015.020.025.030.035.040.045.050.0

Perc

enat

ge


Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and social group

SC ST OBC Others

Source: table-5.11

Housing condition of respondents:

The study has revealed that majority of 118 respondent residents in the two

slum areas consisting the four localities in Belgaum city constituting 59% lived in

Pucca houses, of which majority of them lived in Malaprabha Nagar (32) in notified

slum area and in Old Gandhi Nagar area (36) in non-notified slum area of Belgaum

city. A total number of 82 respondents constituting 41% of the total lived in Kaccha

117

houses in the four localities in notified and non-notified slum areas of the city. Among

them, relatively more number of them lived in Anagol (23) in notified slums and

Ambedkar nagar (27) in non-notified slums. Out of a total of 200 respondents, 118

respondents have Pucca houses and 82 respondents have Kaccha houses. Out of 118

respondents having Pucca houses, 54% belongs to Anagol, 64% belonged to

Malaprabha nagar, 46% belonged to Amabedkar nagar and 72% belonged to Old

Gandhinagar. However, out of 82 respondents having Kaccha houses, 46% belonged to

Anagol, 36% belonged to Malaprabha nagar, 54% belonged to Amabedkar nagar and

28% belonged to Old Gandhinagar. Therefore, the chi-square test of significance

clearly showed that, there is a significant difference was observed between four slums

with respect to the status of nature of houses (chi-square=8.0208, p<0.05) at 5% level

of significance.

Table: 5.12 Distribution of respondents according to area and nature of house in Belgaum City.

Nature of house


abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old GandhiN

agar

%

Pucca 27 54.0 32 64.0 23 46.0 36 72.0 118 59.0

Kaccha 23 46.0 18 36.0 27 54.0 14 28.0 82 41.0

Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0 Chi-square= 8.0208, df=3, p=0.04562*

Source: Field Survey. Note: *p<0.05

Figure-5.3 Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and nature of house

54.046.0

64.0

36.046.0

54.0

72.0

28.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

Perc

enat

ge


Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and nature of house

Pucca Kaccha

Source: table-5.12

118

Drainage facility in the slum areas:

Slum dwellers are forced to live in most unhygienic environment without the

basic sanitation facilities. Despite various schemes for slum clearance and provision of

modern facilities, the residents of slum areas live in unhygienic conditions. The basic

need for minimum drainage facility has been denied to the residents of the slum areas

in Belgaum city. Large number of 64 respondent slum dwellers in the city constituting

32% indicated absence of drainage facility in their areas. A good number of 29

respondents (14.5%) mentioned about the blocked conditions of drainage in their areas

while maximum number of 107 respondents (53.5%) indicated free flowing type of

drainage without proper outlets. This appalling condition creates an environment of

infectious diseases and causes greater health hazards. Slums are the breeding grounds

for mosquitoes and the resultant diseases caused by them. The two slum areas covering

four localities present a picture of highly unhygienic and unhealthy conditions in the

growing city of Belgaum.

Table: 5.13. Distribution of respondents according to area and drainage status in Belgaum City

Drainage status


abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old GandhiN

agar

%

Not available

14 28.0 19 38.0 16 32.0 15 30.0 64 32.0

Blocked 3 6.0 2 4.0 1 2.0 23 46.0 29 14.5 Free flowing

33 66.0 29 58.0 33 66.0 12 24.0 107 53.5

Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0


119

Figure-5.4 Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and drainage status in Belgaum city

28.0

6.0

66.0

38.0

4.0

58.0

32.0

2.0

66.0

30.0

46.0

24.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

Perc

enat

ge


Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and drainage status

Not available Blocked Free flowing

Source: table-5.13 Garbage status in the slum areas:

The following table-5.14 provides poor sanitation and hygienic conditions in the

slim areas in Belgaum city. It has been further deteriorated by the spread of garbage in

those areas in addition to the highly unsatisfactory drainage conditions mentioned

earlier. A substantial number of 88 respondents, in the notified and non-notified slum

areas constituting 44% of the total, have mentioned about the garbage spread in their

areas. However, majority of 112 respondents (56%) did not mention about the garbage

in their areas and there is need for proper action regarding the removal of the garbage

by the authorities of the Municipal City Corporation of Belgaum who are mainly

responsible for maintaining sanitation in the city areas.

Table: 5.14. Distribution of respondents according to area and garbage status in Belgaum City

Garbage status


abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old GandhiN

agar

%

Found around

25 50.0 19 38.0 21 42.0 23 46.0 88 44.0

Not found 25 50.0 31 62.0 29 58.0 27 54.0 112 56.0 Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0

Chi-square= 1.6233, d f=3, p=0.65410 Source: Field Survey.

120

Figure: 5.5 Percentage distributions of respondents according to area and

garbage status:

50.0 50.0

38.0

62.0

42.0

58.0

46.0

54.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

Perc

enat

ge


Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and garbage status

Found around Not found

Source: table-5.14

House cleanliness__ Responses of residents:

Maintenance of cleanliness in the houses seems to have been ignored as

majority of 105 respondents accounting for 52.5% mentioned that they had not

maintained cleanliness in their houses. Locality wise, there is almost unanimity among

the selected respondents in the four localities covered by the study. However,

substantial number of 95 respondents constituting 47.5% asserted that they had

maintained cleanliness in their homes. Here again, almost an identical number of

respondents in the four localities indicated similar responses about cleanliness. The

responses indicate that there is need for creating awareness among the slum dwellers

about the importance of maintaining cleanliness in their houses. Municipal authorities

and voluntary organizations should work towards creating awareness among the

residents regarding the significance of maintaining cleanliness.

121

Table: 5.15. Distribution of respondents according to area and cleanliness of house

in Belgaum City Cleanliness of house


abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old GandhiN

agar

%

Clean 21 42.0 24 48.0 24 48.0 26 52.0 95 47.5

Not clean 29 58.0 26 52.0 26 52.0 24 48.0 105 52.5

Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0


Figure-5.6 percentage distribution of respondents according to area and

cleanliness of house

42.0

58.0

48.0

52.048.0

52.0 52.048.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Perc

enat

ge


Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and cleanliness of house

Clean Not clean

Source: table-5.15

Noise level in the slum areas of Belgaum city:

Environmental pollution is caused by high intensity noise created by vehicular

traffic and movement of people. Slums are populated with overcrowding of people in

small and unhealthy residences. These cause air pollution and create health hazards

particularly for pregnant women, children and old age people who are largely home

found during day and night. The noise pollution is considered as ‘moderate’ according

to the majority of 135 respondent residents of slum areas accounting for 67.5% of the

total. The noise pollution is considered as ‘high’ by 42 respondents (21%) while the

noise pollution is deemed ‘low’ according to 23 respondents (11.5%). The locality wise

122

response of the selected residents of the four localities is largely similar to the overall

average of responses.

Table: 5.16. Distribution of respondents according to area and noise level in

Belgaum City. Noise level Notified slums Non-Notified slums Total %


% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old GandhiN

agar

%

Low 5 10.0 6 12.0 6 12.0 6 12.0 23 11.5

Medium 37 74.0 39 78.0 28 56.0 31 62.0 135 67.5

High 8 16.0 5 10.0 16 32.0 13 26.0 42 21.0

Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0


Figure-5.7 percentage distribution of respondents according to area and noise

levels.

10.0

74.0

16.012.0

78.0

10.0 12.0

56.0

32.0

12.0

62.0

26.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Perc

enat

ge


Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and noice levels

Low Medium High

Source: table-5.16

5.3. MIGRATION DETAILS

Migration status of respondents:

Migrants coming to the city and residing in the four slum areas selected

constituted a substantial number of 90 accounting for 45% of the total while non-

migrant respondents constituted a majority of 110 representing 55% of the total

123

respondents of 200 from both the notified and non-notified slums. Migration to city

areas has been a common feature as there is a surplus manpower in the rural areas

where agricultural employment is seasonal. Hence the surplus labour in the rural areas

migrates to cities and finds slums as the suitable areas for their accommodation at lower

cost compared to non-slum areas.

Table: 5.17. Distribution of respondents according to area and migration status in Belgaum City Migration status


abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old Gandhi Nagar

%

Yes 22 44.0 19 38.0 27 54.0 22 44.0 90 45.0 No 28 56.0 31 62.0 23 46.0 28 56.0 110 55.0 Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0


Figure-5.8 Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and migration status

44.0

56.0

38.0

62.0

54.0

46.0 44.0

56.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Perc

enat

ge


Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and migration status

Yes No

Source: table-5.17

124

Purpose of migration:

Majority of 36 respondents (40%) had migrated to the city for earning their

livelihood from cooli work (porter) in the urban areas. Another 33 respondents

(36.67%) had migrated to the city for doing job work. A small number of 13

respondents (14.44%) had migrated to Belgaum city for business purpose. Other

reasons had compelled 8 respondents (8.89%) to migrate to the city. Thus employment

seeking in urban areas had attracted migrants in larger number to the city. Similar

reasons had compelled migrants to settle in slum areas of the city.

Table: 5.18. Distribution of respondents according to area and purpose of migration in Belgaum City

Purpose of migration


abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old Gandhi Nagar

%

Job 8 36.36 5 26.32 12 44.44 8 36.36 33 36.67 Cooli 9 40.91 8 42.11 10 37.04 9 40.91 36 40.00 Business 3 13.64 3 15.79 3 11.11 4 18.18 13 14.44 Others 2 9.09 3 15.79 2 7.41 1 4.55 8 8.89 Total 22 100.0 19 100.0 27 100.0 22 100.0 90 100.0


Figure-5.9 Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and purpose

of migration

36.4

40.9

13.69.1

26.3

42.1

15.8 15.8

44.4

37.0

11.17.4

36.4

40.9

18.2

4.6

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

Perc

enat

ge


Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and purpose of migration

Job Cooli Business Others

Source: table-5.18

125

Status of house ownership/shelter of the respondents:

Majority of 107 respondents (53.5%) lived in their own houses despite being

poor and residing in slums. Locality wise, a lesser number of respondents were found

living in their own houses in Ambedkar Nagar compared to those in other three

localities. However a substantial number of 90 respondents (45.0%) lived in rented

houses. Relatively more number of respondents (29) in Ambedkar Nagar lived in rented

houses compared to those in other three localities. A handful of 3 respondents (1.5%) in

the notified slums of Anagol (1) and Malaprabha Nagar (2) lived in lease/ other type of

houses.

Table: 5.19. Distribution of respondents according to area and status of house in

Belgaum city

Status of house


abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old Gandhi Nagar

%

Own 29 58.0 30 60.0 21 42.0 27 54.0 107 53.5

Rented 20 40.0 18 36.0 29 58.0 23 46.0 90 45.0

Leased & others

1 2.0 2 4.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 1.5

Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0 Source: Field Survey.

Figure-5.10 percentage distribution of respondents according to area and status of house

58.0

40.0

2.0

60.0

36.0

4.0

42.0

58.0

0.0

54.0

46.0

0.00.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Perc

enat

ge


Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and status of house

Own Rented Leased & others

Source: table-5.19

126

Average house rent per month:

The respondents residing in rented houses have been paying an average rent per

month ranging from a minimum of Rs.1013.89 in Malaprabha Nagar and maximum of

Rs.1952.17 in Anagol of notified slums. Similarly, the average rent per month paid by

respondents in non-notified slums ranged from a minimum of Rs.1212.50 in Old

Gandhi Nagar to a maximum of Rs.1376.67 in Ambedkar Nagar. From the results of

the above table, it can be seen that, the average rent paid per month in Ambedkar nagar

(1376.67±679.85) is higher followed by Old GandhiNagar (1212.50±509.10), Anagol

(1052.17±685.81) and Malaprabha Nagar (1013.89±416.15).

Table: 5. 20.Average rent paid per month in Belgaum city Notified slums Non-Notified slums

Anagol Malaprabha Nagar

Ambedkar Nagar Old Gandhi Nagar

Total

Average rent 1052.17 1013.89 1376.67 1212.50 1187.89

SD rent 685.81 416.15 679.85 509.10 607.65

Source: Field Survey

Figure-5.11 Comparison of different slum areas with average rent paid per month

1052.17 1013.89

1376.671212.50

0.00

300.00

600.00

900.00

1200.00

1500.00

Mea

n va

lue


Figure: Comparison of different slum areas with average rent paid per month

Source: table-5.20

127

Floor area, No of rooms, No. of windows and value of building:

1. Floor area of respondents’ house varied from a minimum of 457.08 Sq.ft in

Malaprabha slum area to a maximum of 512.80 Sq.ft in Old Gandhi Nagar.

The average floor area for the four localities was 483.75 Sq.ft.

2. The number of rooms varied between 2.20 in old Gandhi Nagar to 2.60 in

Anagol. The average was 2.38 for the four slum localities.

3. The number of windows of the respondent slum residents varied from 1.42

in Malaprabha Nagar to 2.40 in Ambedkar Nagar. The average number of

windows was 2.70 for the four localities.

4. The value of buildings of the respondents varied from a minimum of Rs.98,

400 in Ambedkar Nagar to a maximum of Rs.2, 23,448 in Malaprabha

Nagar. The average value of the buildings/houses of the respondents in the

four slum localities was Rs.2, 52,627.

Table: 5.21. Comparison of four areas with respect to floor area, no of room, no of windows, and value of building in Belgaum city.

Conditions Summary Anagol Malaprabha Nagar

Ambedkar Nagar

Old Gandhi Nagar

Total F-value P-value

Floor area Mean 457.95 457.08 503.00 512.80 483.75 0.5169 0.6711 SD 258.34 288.64 287.74 292.98 281.85 No of rooms Mean 2.60 2.44 2.26 2.20 2.38 1.9910 0.1166 SD 1.01 0.73 0.90 0.97 0.92 No of window Mean 2.10 1.42 2.40 2.28 2.07 4.2346 0.0063* SD 1.66 0.72 1.68 1.46 1.48 Value of building Mean 1246875 223448 98400 105617 252627 4.1492 0.0075* SD 3675450 146952 149807 128838 1245165 Source: Field Survey. *p<0.05

From the results of the above table, it can be seen that,

1. No significant difference was observed between four slums with respect to

average floor area (F=0.5169, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. It means

that, the average floor area in four slums is similar.

2. No significant difference was observed between four slums with respect to

average number of rooms (F=1.9910, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. It

means, the average number of rooms in four slums is similar.

3. A significant difference was observed between four slums with respect to

average number of windows in their houses (F=4.2346, p<0.05) at 5% level of

128

significance. It means, the average number of windows in their houses in four

slums is different. In another words, average number of windows in their houses

in Ambedkar nagar area had a significant higher as compared to other areas

4. A significant difference was observed between four slums with respect to

average value of the houses (F=4.1492, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. It

means that, the average value of building of their house in four slums is

different. In another words, the average value of building of their house in

Anagol area had a significant higher as compared to other areas.

Figure-5.12. Comparison of different areas with average value of building of their

house

1246875.00

223448.00

98400.00105617.00

0.00

200000.00

400000.00

600000.00

800000.00

1000000.00

1200000.00

Mea

n va

lue


Figure: Comparison of different areas with average value of building of their house

Source: table-5.21 Separate kitchen in the house of respondents:

The responses of the sample residents of the four localities in Belgaum city

have been detailed in the following table-5.22. Living conditions of slum dwellers are

unhygienic without even a separate kitchen. Common rooms are used for kitchen with

the smoke creating air pollution and health hazards for the family members. Such

practices are common in slum areas where houses are too small without independent

kitchen facility. The study has revealed that majority of 104 respondents (52%) in the

two slum areas did not have separate kitchen and a substantial number of 94

respondents had separate kitchen. Majority of respondents in notified slums of Anagol

and Malaprabha Nagar had separate kitchens while majority of respondents in non-

129

notified slum areas of Ambedkar Nagar and Old Gandhi Nagar did not have separate

kitchens in their houses.

Table: 5.22. Distribution of respondents according to area and separate kitchen in

Belgaum City. Separate kitchen


abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old Gandhi Nagar

%

Yes 26 52.0 27 54.0 21 42.0 22 44.0 96 48.0 No 24 48.0 23 46.0 29 58.0 28 56.0 104 52.0 Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0

Chi-square= 2.0833,df=3, p=0.5553 Source: Field Survey.

Figure-13 percentage distribution of respondents according to area and status of

separate Kitchen

52.048.0

54.046.0

42.0

58.0

44.0

56.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Perc

enat

ge


Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and status of separate kitchen

Yes No

Source: table-5.22

Separate bathroom facility in the respondents’ houses:

The facility of a separate bathroom in the residences has been affirmed by

majority 106 respondents (53%) in the two slum areas (notified and non-notified)

comprising four slum localities of Anagol, Malaprabha Nagar, Ambedkar Nagar and

Old Gandhi Nagar in Belgaum city. However a substantial number of 94 respondents

(47%) mentioned that they did not have separate bathrooms in their residences.

Separate bathroom is necessary in maintaining cleanliness and hygienic responses.

130

Table: 5.23. Distribution of respondents according to area and separate bathroom in Belgaum city

Separate bathroom


abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old Gandhi Nagar

%

Yes 25 50.0 31 62.0 20 40.0 30 60.0 106 53.0 No 25 50.0 19 38.0 30 60.0 20 40.0 94 47.0 Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0


Figure-5.14 percentage distribution of respondents according to area and status of

separate bathroom

50.0 50.0

62.0

38.0 40.0

60.0 60.0

40.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Perc

enat

ge


Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and status of separate bathroom

Yes No

Source: table-5.23

Separate latrine in the residences of respondents:

Despite the efforts made by the government at the state and the central levels

many residents in urban as well as rural areas do not have separate latrines. Use of

common latrines or going out for open defecation has been widely practiced in both

urban and rural areas. This indicates lack of awareness about sanitation, hygiene and

healthy living among the people, particularly those belonging to socially backward

groups and those living in slum areas. A substantial number of 87 respondents (43.5%)

did not have separate latrines attached to their houses. However, majority of 113

respondents (56.5%) did have separate latrines in their residences. The number of

resident respondents indicating the availability of latrines and those mentioning non-

availability latrines is largely similar in both notified slums and non-notified slums.

131

Table: 5.24.Distribution of respondents according to area and separate latrine

Separate latrine

Notified slums Non-Notified slums Total %


% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old Gandhi Nagar

%

Yes 30 60.0 27 54.0 30 60.0 26 52.0 113 56.5

No 20 40.0 23 46.0 20 40.0 24 48.0 87 43.5

Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0

Chi-square= 1.0368, df=3, p=0.7921


Figure-5.15 Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and status of separate latrine

60.0

40.0

54.046.0

60.0

40.0

52.048.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Perc

enat

ge


Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and status of separate latrine

Yes No

Source: table-5.24

Type of latrine in the residences of respondents:

Majority of 86 respondents (76.1%) in the two types of slums covering four

localities in Belgaum city have indicated that they have squatting type of latrines in

their residences. These types of latrines are common among traditional Indian families.

However a good number of 27 respondents (23.9%) had western type of latrines in their

residences.

132

Table: 5.25. if yes for separate latrine…. Separate latrine


abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old Gandhi Nagar

%

Western 8 26.7 9 33.3 2 6.7 8 30.8 27 23.9

Squatting 22 73.3 18 66.7 28 93.3 18 69.2 86 76.1

Total 30 100.0 27 100.0 30 100.0 26 100.0 113 100.0


Table: 5.26. Number of separate latrine…. Nature Notified slums Non-Notified slums Total %


% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old Gandhi Nagar

%

Open 8 26.7 9 33.3 2 6.7 8 30.8 27 23.9

Public 22 73.3 18 66.7 28 93.3 18 69.2 86 76.1

Total 30 100.0 27 100.0 30 100.0 26 100.0 113 100.0


According to the above table the study reveals that majority of 86 respondents

(76.1%) used public latrines while 27 respondents (23.9%) used practiced open

defecation.

Number of persons sharing Public latrines:

Only one person in the family shared the public latrine according to majority of

71 respondents (62.8%). And in case of 42 respondents (37.2%) two members of their

families shared the public latrines.

Table: 5.27. if yes for Public latrine use, how many sharing… Members sharing..


abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old Gandhi Nagar

%

One 18 60.0 14 51.9 18 60.0 21 80.8 71 62.8

Two 12 40.0 13 48.1 12 40.0 5 19.2 42 37.2

Total 30 100.0 27 100.0 30 100.0 26 100.0 113 100.0


133

Payment made for using public latrines:

According to table-5.28, majority of 37 respondents who used public latrines

(90.2%) did not make any payment for using the public latrine. However, a small

number of 4 respondents (9.8%) did make payment for using public latrines.

Table: 5.28. If yes use public latrine, are you paying… Paying Notified slums Non-Notified slums Total %


% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old Gandhi Nagar

%

Yes 1 9.1 2 20.0 1 9.1 0 0.0 4 9.8

No 10 90.9 8 80.0 10 90.9 9 100.0 37 90.2

Total 11 100.0 10 100.0 11 100.0 9 100.0 41 100.0


5.4. HOUSEHOLD POSESSIONS:

Household possessions of slum dwellers in Belgaum city:

House hold possessions indicate the living standards of the families belonging

to different social groups. The economic status and the level of income determine the

level of facilities available to the persons and families. The slum dwellers in the study

area have possessed many of the modern facilities enjoyed by average income groups

in the society. The study has revealed some significant facts about the household

possessions of the respondent residents of the slums in Belgaum city.

However, from the following table it is encouraging to find 84.5% of the

respondents have facility of electricity. However, it is also disappointing to find that

15.5% of the slum dwellers in the four localities do not have the facility of electricity.

This indicates the low level of living standards as they are unable to avail most

essential needs in the modern society.

1. A large numbers of respondents constituting 86.5% do not possess telephone

facility. A small number of 13.5% could afford to possess telephones in their

homes.

134

2. It is quite encouraging to find that majority of 79.5% of the respondents possess

cell phones (mobiles) while a small number of slum residents (20.5%) do not

possess this modern communication facility.

3. It is found that despite their general level of poverty these slum residents

accounting for 57% of the total respondents possess TV sets while 43% of them

do not have this modern communication and entertainment equipment.

4. Cable connection for varied channels of Television has been made use of by

50% of the TV owners while the other 50% do not possess the facility. A very

small number of 7.5% of the respondent residents of the study areas possess the

modern equipment of computer.

5. Refrigerators are possessed by only 11% of the respondents, while 89% could

not afford the luxury of refrigerator.

6. Bicycles are owned by a large majority of 63.5% of the respondents.

7. A good number of respondents accounting for 26% possess two wheeler/ three

wheeler vehicles for their transport requirement. A majority of 74% could not

own this facility.

8. Large majority of 74% possess chairs while only 52.5% could own tables.

9. A substantial number of 40.5% of the respondents possess cots while majority

of 59.5% do not have this comfort equipment.

10. It is encouraging to find that majority of 65.5% of the respondents own the

modern kitchen facility of mixer/grinder.

11. A substantial number of 47.5% possess fans in their residences.

12. A small number of 15.5% of the respondents possess LPG/cylinders and stoves

while majority of 84.5% do not have this cooking facility.

13. Other household facilities are owned by 33.5% of the respondent residents of

the four slum localities in Belgaum city.

135

Table-5.29. Good level of living standard for a majority of the residents is slum areas in Belgaum city

Notified slums Non-Notified slums Total % Chi- square

p-value Anagol % Malapra

bha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old Gandhi Nagar

%

IV.iii Electricity Yes 45 90.0 44 88.0 42 84.0 38 76.0 169 84.5 4.3902 0.2223

No 5 10.0 6 12.0 8 16.0 12 24.0 31 15.5

IV.iv Telephone Yes 6 12.0 2 4.0 9 18.0 10 20.0 27 13.5 7.6464 0.0539

No 44 88.0 48 96.0 41 82.0 40 80.0 173 86.5

IV.v Cell Phone (Mobile) Yes 35 70.0 40 80.0 41 82.0 43 86.0 159 79.5 4.2645 0.2343

No 15 30.0 10 20.0 9 18.0 7 14.0 41 20.5

IV.vii TV Yes 30 60.0 26 52.0 34 68.0 24 48.0 114 57.0 4.8144 0.1859

No 20 40.0 24 48.0 16 32.0 26 52.0 86 43.0

IV.vii Cable Connection Yes 24 48.0 26 52.0 24 48.0 26 52.0 100 50.0 0.3200 0.9562

No 26 52.0 24 48.0 26 52.0 24 48.0 100 50.0

IV.viii Computer Yes 4 8.0 1 2.0 7 14.0 3 6.0 15 7.5 5.4054 0.1444

No 46 92.0 49 98.0 43 86.0 47 94.0 185 92.5

IV.ix Refrigerator Yes 5 10.0 2 4.0 9 18.0 6 12.0 22 11.0 5.1073 0.1641

No 45 90.0 48 96.0 41 82.0 44 88.0 178 89.0

IV.x Bicycles Yes 25 50.0 31 62.0 33 66.0 38 76.0 127 63.5 7.4857 0.0580

No 25 50.0 19 38.0 17 34.0 12 24.0 73 36.5

IV.xi Two/Three Wheeler Yes 11 22.0 8 16.0 18 36.0 15 30.0 52 26.0 6.0291 0.1102

No 39 78.0 42 84.0 32 64.0 35 70.0 148 74.0

IV.xii Chairs Yes 30 60.0 37 74.0 38 76.0 43 86.0 148 74.0 8.9397 0.0301*

No 20 40.0 13 26.0 12 24.0 7 14.0 52 26.0

IV.xiii Tables

Yes 20 40.0 24 48.0 27 54.0 34 68.0 105 52.5 8.4010 0.0384*

No 30 60.0 26 52.0 23 46.0 16 32.0 95 47.5

IV.xvi Cots Yes 30 60.0 27 54.0 12 24.0 12 24.0 81 40.5 22.969 0.0000*

No 20 40.0 23 46.0 38 76.0 38 76.0 119 59.5

IV.xvii Mixer/Grinder Yes 30 60.0 26 52.0 38 76.0 37 74.0 131 65.5 8.7399 0.0330*

No 20 40.0 24 48.0 12 24.0 13 26.0 69 34.5

IV.xviii Fans

Yes 10 20.0 10 20.0 38 76.0 37 74.0 95 47.5 60.691 0.0000*

No 40 80.0 40 80.0 12 24.0 13 26.0 105 52.5

IV.xix LPG/Stove/ Cylinder Yes 15 30.0 10 20.0 6 12.0 0 0.0 31 15.5 18.438 0.0004*

No 35 70.0 40 80.0 44 88.0 50 100. 169 84.5

IV.xx Others

Yes 11 22.0 15 30.0 21 42.0 20 40.0 67 33.5 5.8130 0.1211

No 39 78.0 35 70.0 29 58.0 30 60.0 133 66.5

Total 50 100. 50 100. 50 100. 50 100. 200 100.

Source: Field Survey. *p<0.05

136

5.5. DRINKING WATER FACILITY

Sources of drinking water in slum areas of Belgaum city:

Public taps have been the major source of drinking water both in notified and

non-notified slum localities in the city of Belgaum. Majority of 109 respondent slum

dwellers in the four localities constituting 54.5% have mentioned that public taps have

been the source of drinking water. A substantial number of 64 respondents accounting

for 32% of the total had their private taps for obtaining drinking water. Bore wells were

used for getting drinking water by 21 respondents (10.5%) in the two slum areas. Other

sources of drinking water were used by a small number of 6 respondents (3%). The

responses indicate dependence on public taps for drinking water by larger number of

slum dwellers in the city.

Table: 5.30. Distribution of respondents according to area and sources of drinking water

Sources of drinking water


abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old Gandhi Nagar

%

Private tap 21 42.0 13 26.0 13 26.0 17 34.0 64 32.0 Public tap 29 58.0 35 70.0 24 48.0 21 42.0 109 54.5 Bore well 0 0.0 0 0.0 11 22.0 10 20.0 21 10.5 Others 0 0.0 2 4.0 2 4.0 2 4.0 6 3.0 Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0

Chi-square= 29.9834, d f=9, p=0.0004 Source: Field Survey.

Distance between home and source of water:

The average distance between the source of water and the homes of the

respondent slum dwellers was 26.4 mtrs. The distance varied from a minimum of 21.4

meters in Old Gandhinagar to a maximum of 40.7 mtrs. in Malaprabhanagar. The

distance for fetching water from the source is not much and hence water is available

within easy reach for the households in the slum areas of the city. A significant

difference was observed between respondents belonging to different slum areas with

respect to average distance travel area (F=3.4905, p<0.05) at 55 level of significance.

It means that, the respondents belonging to Malaprabha Nagar slum area have

significant higher average distance travel area as compared to other slum areas.

137

Table: 5.31 Area and average distance from source of water. Anagol Malaprabha

Nagar Ambedkar

Nagar Old Gandhi

Nagar Total F-value P-value

Mean 31.0 40.7 24.4 21.4 26.4 3.4905 0.0175* SD 34.4 45.8 7.3 12.8 23.3


Adequacy of water supply in the slum areas of Belgaum City:

Supply of water in the slum areas covered by the study has been found adequate

by majority of 162 respondent slum dwellers (81%) in the four slum localities of

Belgaum. The positive responses regarding the adequacy of water supply ranged from a

minimum of 76% in Anagol to a maximum of 84% in Old Gandhi Nagar areas.

However, a small number of 38 respondents (19%) found the supply inadequate.

Table: 5.32. Distribution of respondents according to area and adequacy of water supply…

Adequate Notified slums Non-Notified slums Total % Anagol % Malapr

abha Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old Gandhi Nagar

%

Yes 38 76.0 41 82.0 41 82.0 42 84.0 162 81.0 No 12 24.0 9 18.0 9 18.0 8 16.0 38 19.0 Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0 Source: Field Survey.

Quality of Water Supplied in Slum areas:

Majority of 100 respondents (50%) in the four localities of the two slum areas

have affirmed that the quality of water supplied wad good. A substantial number of 77

respondents (38.5%) however were not inclined to express their opinion either way

which implied that they are not exactly happy about the quality of water supplied in

their areas. A small number of 23 respondents (11.5%) affirmed that the quality of

water supplied in their areas was not good.

Table: 5.33. Distribution of respondents according to area and water quality. Quality Notified slums Non-Notified slums Total %

Anagol % Malaprabha

Nagar

% Ambedkar

Nagar

% Old Gandhi Nagar

%

Good 24 48.0 29 58.0 23 46.0 24 48.0 100 50.0 Not good 7 14.0 5 10.0 7 14.0 4 8.0 23 11.5 Can’t say 19 38.0 16 32.0 20 40.0 22 44.0 77 38.5 Total 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 50 100.0 200 100.0

Chi-square= 3.0285, d f=6, p=0.8053, NS Source: Field Survey.

138

Figure-5.16 Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and quality

of water

48.0

14.0

38.0

58.0

10.0

32.0

46.0

14.0

40.0

48.0

8.0

44.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Perc

enat

ge


Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and quality of water

Good Not good Can't say

Source: table-5.33

Average Quantity of water used:

The study has revealed that the average quantity of water used by the

respondents in the four localities of the two slum areas in Belgaum city was 95.7 litrs.

Locality wise the average quantity of water used by the respondents varied from a

minimum of 79.3 liters in Old Gandhinagar to a maximum of 16.9 litrs in Ambedkar

Nagar. A significant difference was observed between respondents belonging to

different slum areas with respect to average quantity of water purchased (F=2.7992,

p<0.05) at 55 level of significance. It means that, the respondents belong to Ambedkar

Nagar slum area have significant higher average quantity of water purchased as

compared to other slum areas.

Table: 5.34.Area and average quantity of water purchased Anagol Malaprabha

Nagar Ambedkar

Nagar Old Gandhi


Mean 106.2 80.0 116.9 79.3 95.7 2.7992 0.0413* SD 92.0 37.6 116.5 38.2 80.3


139

Figure-5.17 Comparison of different slums areas with average quantity of water purchased

106.20

80.00

116.90

79.30

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

120.00

Mea

n va

lue


Figure: Comparison of different slum areas with average quality of water purchased

Source: table-5.34

Expenditure on water by respondents in the slum areas of Belgaum City:

The average expenditure on water per month by the respondent residents of the

four slum localities in Belgaum City was Rs. 102.63. The expenditure on water per

month ranged from a minimum of Rs. 79.30 in Old Gandhinagar to a maximum of Rs.

148.67 in Malaprabha nagar. The expenditure on water by the respondent residents in

notified slum areas of Anagol and Malaprabhanagar was much more then in non-

notified slum areas of Ambedkarnagar and Old Gandhinagar. A significant difference

was observed between respondents belonging to different slum areas with respect to

average expenditure on water (F=5.7769, p<0.05) at 55 level of significance. It means,

the respondents belonging to Malaprabha Nagar slum area have significantly higher

average expenditure on water as compared to other slum areas.

Table: 5.35. Area and average expenditure on water Anagol Malaprabha

Nagar Ambedkar

Nagar Old Gandhi


Mean 137.81 148.67 30.71 29.75 102.63 5.7769 0.0014*

SD 48.22 198.40 8.52 9.53 121.34


140

5.6 CONCLUSION:

Urbanization is basically influenced by the incidence of poverty and

underemployment and seasonal unemployment of rural people. The study covered a

total number of 200 respondent residents in four residential areas of Anagol and

Malaprabha Nagar in the notified slums and Ambedkar Nagar and old Gandhi Nagar in

non-notified slum areas of Belgaum city each area consisting of 50 respondents

categorized under APL and BPL income groups. The study focused on the analysis of

the data pertaining to the slum environment of the four slum localities in Belgaum city

covered by the field survey. The majority of the families of the respondent residents of

the four slums in Belgaum had an optimum size of members. The distribution of the

respondents based on the ration card category indicates that majority of the respondents

in all the four slum areas, accounting for more than two percent of the total, belonged to

the lower income groups holding ration cards under the category of BPL(below poverty

line). the total number of BPL ration card holders in the four slum areas was 148

accounting for 74 per cent of the total while the total number of those holding ration

cards under the APL (above poverty line) category averaged 52 constituting 26 per cent

of the total. There is a greater representation of respondents belonging to BPL category

as the slum areas obviously are inhabited by economically weaker section of the

society.

The majority of 112 respondents (56 per cent) did not mention about the garbage in

their areas and there is need for proper action regarding the removal of the garbage by

the authorities of the municipal city corporation of Belgaum who are mainly

responsible for maintaining sanitation in the city areas. Thus employment seeking in

urban areas had attracted migrants in larger number to the city. Similar reasons had

compelled migrants to settle in slum areas of the city. The study has revealed that

majority of 86 respondents (76.1 per cent) used public latrines while 27 respondents

(23.9 per cent) used practiced open defecation. The respondents belong to Ambedkar

Nagar slum area have significant higher average quantity of water purchased as

compared to other slum areas.

CHAPTER-5 URBANISATION AND THEIR SLUMS: A...

Documents

Transcript of CHAPTER-5 URBANISATION AND THEIR SLUMS: A...