Hazards Centre

why we do it?

Like all urban centers, Delhi is a conglomeration of people who migrate from different parts of the country in search of better opportunities. But there are some among these who can never claim their right over the city. These are the poor migrants, people who provide essential labor services to the city, whether in homes, industries and commercial sectors, but whose own needs and services are never acknowledged by policy and planning regimes. They seldom get any legitimate access to basic amenities such as affordable housing. Consequently they have to access it by means that are deemed ‘illegal’. In fact most of what they do for survival in an otherwise cold city is seen as illegitimate in many ways, whether it is sleeping on pavements, or building temporary structures, plying a rickshaw, vending, hawking, or begging.

The slums that they build, and the work they do is viewed as a problem, not so much as to what is faced by people experiencing it, but more as to how it offends the sights, smells and sensibilities of the privileged citizens. And this problem is dealt not with provision of what is lacking, but by acting oblivious to their existence, or removing them out of sight. So they don’t clamour for a stake in focal city space, so they can stay on the fringes and come for our work.

Rights of the urban poor have always been violated, but trends in this course have sharpened in the last decade and more. With LPG adoption, urban India has undergone critical transformation. Most importantly, it has fuelled up a privileged, consumerist class, which seeks from the west notions of sanitized, orderly, world-class urban spaces, and thus their value-systems permeate to directions of law and policy. Until 1990, legislation and policies put forward by the governments of the day recognised the prevalent social and economic inequalities in urban society and made provisions for ameliorative action. Thus the Urban Land Ceiling Act, the National Slum Policy, and urban plans were designed to protect and advance the interests of the urban poor. However, since 1995 there has been a dramatic turnaround in governance.

Some Acts have been repealed, policies have been reversed, and the minimum norms for basic urban services to the poor have been significantly lowered. Often the transformation has been led by the courts that have been articulating a strong middle-class view of the city and how it should look like in a globalised economy. Consequently, the poor are increasingly being marginalized, ignored, and even criminalised. Evictions have become the order of the day. Employment opportunities are being cut down, with moves such as industrial relocation, CNG conversion. Cities are geared to become exclusive elite conclaves. Where there is enough space for malls and multiplexes, and none so for housing the poor, enough space for expressways, flyovers and metro but none for the cycle and the rickshaw, and where there are enough services but only for those who can afford to ‘purchase’ them.

In such a scenario it becomes necessary as also challenging to resurrect the voices of the poor. To talk about their stake in a city they essentially build and run. To struggle for their space in discourse of urban development. To realize their right to a dignified life that includes at the minimum, secure and decent habitats, adequate basic services and productive livelihoods.

It is this that we try to strive for at Hazards Centre. On the whole, our work is driven by notions of sustainability and equitable utilization of space and resources for all. We oppose all such models of city development, which deliver to the aspirations of a few at serious neglect of the needs of the majority. A preview of the some of the conceptual questions we raise:

a. What is meant by the much-publicized ‘world-class city’, even mentioned by the draft Delhi Masterplan 2021? On what basis are cities like Singapore , London and Shanghai being propagated as model cities for development of Delhi ?

b. In some public presentations DDA implied “world-class” city as meaning international tourism, sports, and conferences, raising thus a question whether city development means provision of exclusive facilities for some or basic facilities of all?

c. How is it that there is enough space in Delhi for recreational avenues such as malls and multiplexes and but very little for housing for the middle class or the poor? What happened to the low-cost housing that the DDA was supposed to build?

d. Private sector participation is being planned in virtually all sectors, including land acquisition, housing, power generation, water supply and sanitation, health, transport, education, and even governance. On what basis has it been claimed that private sector delivery of services will be of greater benefit to the citizen?

e. Why there is shortage of water and electricity in the city, even though there is enough supply for present population needs?

f. Why are the water privatization plans being made in such a non-transparent and non-participant manner? What is the evidence that privatization of electricity and transport in the city has enhanced factors of cost and efficiency?

g. Why is the metro seen as a panacea for all problems of public transport? Why is so little investment going in other public and non motorized systems? Why are there no plans for cyclists and pedestrians?