R & R in Urban Centres

7/29/2019 R & R in Urban Centres

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/r-r-in-urban-centres 1/3

commentary

february 7, 2009 EPW Economic & Political Weekly20

No Rod Spared, No Child Spoiled

Today’s technology o rule is essentially

related to the banality o morals. It might

even be enabled, it is at least sustained, by

the granting o a moral debate, issues o

moral equivalence, justication and what

not, when it comes to security and the car-

pet bombing o the most densely populatedarea o the world by a liberal democracy.

Closer than the Warsaw Ghetto, perhaps,

we might think o the Balkans as another

enabling event. But be that as it may, it

seems to me that the question is no longer

a moral one. It is no longer whether or not

one can justiy or indeed, regret or con-

demn such actions, beore, during or ater

the act. Twenty years later even. Morality

is an enduring but banal condition or

worse. It is, however, very much part andparcel o the technology o rule we live

under, buttressing the political climate and

reinorcing the security apparatus that is

our religion (others, I am told, might have

a dierent set o apparatuses). Athens and

Jerusalem (and yes, Paris, London, and

Washington DC). In the passage I men-

tioned above, Freud, and I, in his wake,

called it religion (but it should make us

rethinking what we mean by that term). In

the US and in Europe, or better and or worse, the banality o morals ensures (bet-

ter, what justies and condemns) that in

Gaza, no rod is spared, no child spoiled.

This article is based on eld research

conducted among the project-aected persons

at several project/resettlement sites in the

author’s capacity as a short-term consultant

with the Inspection Panel o the World Bank

(2005) and later as an independent researcher.

The views expressed are her own.

Renu Modi ([email protected]) is withthe Centre or Arican Studies, University o

Mumbai.

Resettlement and Rehabilitationin Urban Centres

Renu Modi

The World Bank’s policy on

involuntary resettlement carries

a heavy rural bias as does the

Indian drat rehabilitation and

resettlement policy. The

Maharashtra government’s

policy on the relocation and

rehabilitation o those displacedby the Mumbai Urban Transport

Project (partly nanced by the

World Bank) is thereore

signicant since it has evolved

over the past ew years in

response to the protests about its

initial inadequacies. The lessons

learnt rom its implementation

are relevant not only or large

inrastructure projects in densely

populated urban areas in India but

also in other parts o the world.

“

M akhmal ki chaddar pe ye tat ka

paiband kyon?” (why is there a

rag patchwork on a velvet

sheet?) asked Abdul Karim, who has been

displaced by the Mumbai Urban Transport

Project (MUTP). He was reerring (at a

stakeholders’ meeting) to the poor qual-

ity o tenements constructed at the Moti-

lal Nehru Nagar, a resettlement site at the

Bandra Kurla Complex, the city’s mostexpensive business district. Karim’s

expression sums up very succinctly the

dissatisaction in some sections o the

project displaced about the resettlement

and rehabilitation (R&R ) component o

the World Bank-nanced MUTP. The case

study o MUTP highlights the tenuous

relationship among economic growth,

inrastructure development, displace-

ment and issues o social equity in the

current context o globalisation that

Mumbai exemplies.

The MUTP comprises three segments:

(i) the upgradation o the railway trans-

port system, improvement and widening

o two highways, (ii) the Santacruz-

Chembur Link Road (SCLR ) and the

Jogeshwari-Vikhroli Link Road (JVLR ) to

augment east-west connectivity in the

city, and (iii) the R&R component that

involves the resettlement o about 20,000

project-aected households (PAHs) or an

estimated 1,20,000 persons displaced by the project.1 Several inrastructure deve-

lopment projects have redened the

existing land use patterns in the city like

the Mumbai Urban Inrastructure Project

(MUIP), the Mass Rapid Transit System

(MRTS) or Metro Rail Project, the Airport

Modernisation Project and the MUTP. The

displacement due to the MUTP is the largest

urban displacement caused by a project

undertaken with the help o the World

Bank in India. Though the projects vary in

their nature and scope, they all involve

the massive displacement o those in the

“right o way” (RoW). The commercial and

residential structures displaced by all the

above-mentioned projects are being relo-

cated at about 33 R&R sites scattered

across the city. In the years ahead, planned

development and the consequent displace-

ment will necessitate R&R on an enormousscale, as Mumbai is projected to become

the second-most populous city in the

world, with 25 million inhabitants by 2020!

The United Nations Fund or Population

Activities (UNFPa) report says that o the

our crore slum population in India, 25%

lives in Mumbai. The “...poor people will

make up a large part o uture urban

growth and preparing or an urban uture

requires, at a minimum, respecting the

rights o the poor”, it adds.2

This article limits itsel to the MUTP and

attempts to critically assess the Maha-

rashtra government’s R&R policy. The

tenements or rehousing the displaced

have been procured partly through the

unique private-public partnership (PPP)

model under which a stock o housing has

been provided by real estate developers at

resettlement sites in lieu o lucrative incen-

tives such as the Floor Space Index (FSI)

and tradable Transer Development Right

(TDR ) granted to the builders. The rest o the tenements have been purchased

directly rom the Maharashtra Housing



commentary

Economic & Political Weekly EPW february 7, 2009 21

and Area Development Authority (MHADA)

by the Mumbai Metropolitan Region

Development Authority (MMRDA), which

is the nodal agency responsible or the

R&R o project-aected households in

all the transport development projects

mentioned earlier.

The MUTP exemplies the daunting task that urban planners ace in the process o

constructing/improving the existing net-

work o roads, railways, airport acilities

that run through existing human settle-

ments and require the acquisition o large

tracts o land. At present, the acquisition

o land or the above-mentioned projects

will result in displacement that requires

the R&R o about 1,36,000 PAHs. (Accord-

ing to the MMRDA web site and personal

interviews with the ocials and displaced

persons the numbers o the project-

aected stand at: 35,000 MUIP+20,000

MUTP, 80,000 due to airport modernisa-

tion, and about 1,000 due to the Andheri-

Ghatkopar-Versova segment o the MRTS.)

It is estimated that the magnitude o dis-

placement will increase as soon as the

other eight segments o the MRTS and

other development projects on the anvil

are given the required clearances and

implemented.

At present there is no comprehensiveR&R policy regarding displacement in the

urban context drawn up either by the

World Bank or by the central government.

I we read paragraphs 11 and 13 (b) o the

Operational Policies and Bank Procedures

(OP /BP), 4 December 2001, the rural bias

o the World Bank policy o involuntary

resettlement is evident.3 In India, the

resettlement and rehabilitation policy

(2007) drawn up by the Ministry o Rural

Development is yet to receive Parliament’s

approval. In any case it details R&R provi-

sions, mainly in the rural context. The

Maharashtra government’s R&R policy or

urban displacement in general and or the

MUTP in particular has evolved over the

past ew years, mainly since 2005 in

response to several actors. These include

the increased awareness o the complexi-

ties o the process by the implementing

agency (the MMRDA), people’s protests

against inadequacies in the R&R policy,

the involvement o the Inspection Panelo the World Bank and the withdrawal

o unding in early March 2006 that

ollowed the release o the panel’s investi-

gation report.

The Inspection Panel and MUTP

The Inspection Panel investigated the

complaints o our main requesters in the

“right o the way” o the SCLR and the

JVLR . These were the United Shop Owners Association, Kurla West (SCLR ), the

Hanuman Welare Society, Gazi Nagar

(SCLR ), the Bharati Nagar Association,

Chembur (SCLR ), and the Ekta Wyapari

Jan Seva Sangh, Bharekar Wadi (JVLR ).

These requesters claimed that the

World Bank saeguards on involuntary

resettlement would result in the loss o

livelihoods and harm those displaced. In

the Investigation Report (January 2006)

the panel stated unequivocally that the

World Bank saeguards on involuntary

resettlement applicable to the MUTP had

been violated. It expressed concern, inter

alia that “the lack o sucient analysis

and consideration o many risks o reset-

tlement may be at the root o problems

acing the people aected by the Project”

and that the World Bank ailed to recog-

nise and incorporate in the project prepa-

ration and implementation the substan-

tial dierences between the rail and the

road component and overlooked the actthat many o the PAPs are middle income

shopkeepers.

The rehabilitation o all PAHs is done as

per the Maharashtra government’s R&R

policy drawn up initially in 1997 and

amended later to comply with World Bank

policies and saeguards on involuntary

resettlement. It was accepted by the World

Bank in 2000. For those displaced by vari-

ous state-led displacement projects, the

state government provides ree tenements

o 225 sq eet (residential) and an equiva-

lent area o up to a maximum o 225 sq

eet, ree o cost or commercial structures,

in the “squatter category”. Legal title hold-

ers that orm a very small percentage o

those displaced are entitled to an area cor-

responding to the space acquired or the

project. In addition PAHs are given a one-

time compensation to cover the costs o

shiting, increased travel distance and

contribution towards the Community

Revolving Fund.4

The R&R and the restoration o liveli-

hoods o commercial establishments

especially the middle and large-sized

establishments (with 1,000-2,500 sq eet

and a turnover that runs into several lakhs

o rupees) has been the major challenge

and the most contentious issue. Reloca-

tion to distant R&R sites such as Mankhurd

(M east ward) has been resisted by shop-

keepers who pointed out that the reducedclientele and a drop in sales o certain

products such as marbles, tiles, crockery,

car spares and other high end products

that have little or no demand among the

displaced poor at the R&R sites would

result in a drop in income. The unwilling-

ness/delay in the vacation o their

premises in the RoW o the project has led

to huge cost overruns.

Issues on the Ground

Intensive eld research since 2005 on the

social impact assessment due to displace-

ment caused by the MUTP highlights cer-

tain issues that need to be addressed in

order to evolve a more comprehensive

policy on R&R in the urban context. These

relate to:

Issu f cuff D: In the case o the

MUTP the date o survey is the cuto date

to determine PAHs in the squatter category

(as per the agreement with the WorldBank) and it can be beyond 2000, while

or the other projects it is the date decided

by the government o Maharashtra

(extended rom 1 January 1995 to 1 Janu-

ary 2000). This discrepancy (which orms

the basis or the determination o entitle-

ments) has been a cause o discontent

among PAHs o non-MUTP projects.

allgi f Iguliis: “Windows,

stairs, toilets and even hen coops have

been marked as separate residences in the

Hanuman Nagar chawls”, located along

the Mithi (Times of India, 23 May 2007),

alleged a local corporator. This may be an

available at

Dey & Bose Magazine AgentP.O.Beldubi, Dadpur

Howrah 711 322

West BengalPh: 22198749



commentary

february 7, 2009 EPW Economic & Political Weekly22

exaggerated description o the basic socio-

economic survey (BSES) conducted or

determining the eligible PAHs under the

ongoing projects. However, extra allot-

ments to those with money and muscle

power or those acilitating speedy vaca-

tion o structures in the RoW have been

reported, by those aected by the MUTP as well, though the percentage o such case

is very small.

mulipl cgis f Displs: The

state government’s policy has enumer-

ated two major categories, titled and non-

titled landholders. In act the eld reality

is more complex. For example, there are

tenants under the pagri (ownership) sys-

tem that has been the practice prior to

1947. The tenants have objected to their

categorisation as squatters and the

applicability o the policy meant or

slumdwellers to them.

Piv Pp ows: In many cases

the land records have not been updated.

Owners o private property have objected

to their being clubbed together with the

“squatter category” o slum-dwellers. Sev-

eral o them have gone to court on the issue

o inadequate compensation. Litigations

has delayed the land acquisition processand in turn the project’s implementation.

mulipl agis/mulipl Displ-

s f S PaHs: Some PAHs are

being displaced simultaneously by two

ongoing projects or partially aected by

two dierent projects, or have been dis-

placed earlier by the Municipal Corpora-

tion o Greater Mumbai (MCGM) and are

now displaced or the second time ater a

hiatus o a ew years by the MUIP or the

MUTP. In the case o the MUTP, some o the

PAHs in the Kismet Nagar Area are also

aected by the Mithi River Project that is

being implemented in contiguous areas.

This has created uncertainties about

compensation due to lack o coordination

between the implementing agencies,

mainly the MMRDA and the MCGM.

mulipl alls d rsl: There

are allegations that some o the PAHs have

received more than one allotment in thename o extended amily members (based

on the multiple entries in the BSES). As per

the slum rehabilitation policy, the fats

allotted to PAHs cannot be resold or a

period o 10 years. Impact assessment

studies at various resettlement sites reveal

that several fats have however been sold.

th Ps rli Si: Critics

have labelled the state’s R&R policy as amere rehousing scheme, as little or no

attention has been paid to issues o disrup-

tion o access to schools, hospitals, com-

munity assets, and source o employment

in the new neighbourhoods.

P Quli f r&r Buildigs: The

builders have garnered windalls under

the PPP model, but the quality o construc-

tion is shoddy. Cracks in the walls, leak-

ages and seepages are evidence o poor

monitoring o the quality o construction

and approvals and clearances or the

same. The builder-bureaucrat nexus has

been let o the hook and can no longer be

held accountable as most o these con-

structions are beyond the deect-liability

period (DLP). Though the procurements

under the PPP model is certainly novel it

has severe limitations.

Gv’s rspss ai-

displ Pss: The state govern-ment’s policy probably did not anticipate

the complexities involved at the time o it

being ramed. The political and economic

debate that such protests generated and

the withdrawal o World Bank unding or

the project in March 2006 led to some

rethinking by the government on the R&R

policy. Subsequently, there was a marked

improvement in order to enable resump-

tion o project unding. These changes

were: disclosure o project inormation on

the MMRDA’s web site and at public inor-

mation centres, increased stakeholder par-

ticipation whereby the PAPs were invited to

consultation meetings where their views on

a more suitable R&R could be taken, access

to a grievance redressal procedure, choice

o alternative resettlement sites, option o

monetisation o compensation or certain

categories o MUTP displacees who were

not satised with the existing R&R package.

The World Bank agreed to resume unding

in view o the improvements but subject tothe condition that such concerted eorts to

augment and meet the standards spelt out

on involuntary resettlement in the case o

the MUTP would be continued.

Maharashtra is the only state to have a

comprehensive policy or displacement

and resettlement in the urban context.

The lessons learnt rom the MUTP and the

evolution o the R&R policy in a city

where development projects criss-crossestablished and densely populated human

settlements will be o relevance in the

years ahead, as planned development and

the consequent displacement will necessi-

tate R&R on an enormous scale.

Notes and References

1 For details please reer to Inspection Panel Investi-gation Report, India: Mumbai Urban TransportProject (MUTP) (2006) and related reports athttp://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTINSPECTIONPANEL/0,,contentMDK:2022378

5~pagePK:64129751~piPK:64128378~theSitePK:380794,00.html, accessed on 20 October 2008.

2 The “State o the World Population”, 2007 Reportreleased by the United Nations Population Fundon 27 June 2007, states that the city o Mumbaihas a population o 16 million and a density o 29,650 people/sq km. It states that 37% o the

world’s slum population l ives in India and Chinaand India will be home to our crore-slum popu-lations. The report also predicts that towns andcities in developing countries will comprise 80%o the world population. For details see www.unpa.org/swp accessed 28 Ju ly 2007.

3 Paragraph 11: “...I land is not the preerredoption o the displaced persons, the provision o land would adversely aect the sustainability o a park or protected area, or sucient land is notavailable at a reasonable price, non-land-based

options built around opportunities or employ-ment or sel-employment should be provided inaddition to cash compensation or land and otherassets lost. The lack o adequate land must bedemonstrated and documented to the satisac-tion o the Bank.”

Paragraph 13 (b): “In new resettlement sites orhost communities, inrastructure and public serv-ices are provided as necessary to improve, restore,or maintain accessibility and levels o service orthe displaced persons and host communities.

Alternative or similar resources are provided tocompensate or the loss o access to community resources (such as shing areas, grazing areas,uel, or odder)” (ibid) (http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/PROJECTS/EXTPOLI-CIES/EXTOPMANUAL/0,,contentMDK:20064610~isCURL:Y~pagePK:64141683~piPK:64141620~

theSitePK:502184,00.html4 For details on the R&R entitlement matrix reer

to the implementation manual at http://www.mmrdamumbai.org/docs/Implementation%20manual%20part%20I.pd.

Style Sheet for Authors

While preparing their articles for submission,

contributors are requested to follow epw’s

style sheet.

The style sheet is posted on epw’s web site at

http://epw.in/epw/user/styletocontributors.jsp

It will help immensely for faster processing and

error-free editing if writers follow the guidelines

in style sheet, especially with regard to citation

and preparation of references.

R & R in Urban Centres

Documents

Transcript of R & R in Urban Centres