1. Introduction:
1.1 Who are Pavement Dwellers.
1.2 Who are SPARC, Mahila Milan and National Slum Dwellers Federation.
1.3 What is the historical linkages between issues that affect pavement Dwellers and the alliance.
1.4 The Pavement Dweller's Survey in 1985, some information about that.
1.5 Some brief glimpses what the alliance has been doing since.
2. The strategy.
2.1 The need to develop a baseline database.
2.2 Backdrop of the Slum Redevelopment Program on issues of pavement dwellers
2.3 The role that the alliance believes it has played.
2.4 The crisis of demolition and reactions and interpretation about them
2.5 Explorations of working in partnership with the state.
2.6 The steps which occurred and their implications.
2.7 Resources for the project: contributions.
3. The Enumeration methodology.
3.1 Counting pavement settlements.: Developing the profile
3.2 The Household survey.
3.3 the process of participation from communities: choices and their rationale
3.4 issue of locating Ids and other proofs.
3.5 House numbering
3.6 House lists and its implications for negotiations.
3.7 Making choices to continue involvement
3.8 Video documentation
3.9 ID cards
3.10 Joining Mahila Milan: Savings, protections and learning to negotiate.
4. Dialogue with the State;
4.1 Dealing with issue of demolition
4.2 Involvement of the Slum Commissioner
4.3 Dialogue with the Municipality department of housing and SRA
4.4 Ward level committees.
4.5 Exploring housing options through SRA.
4.6 Some problems and anticipated difficulties:
5. Data analysis:
5.1 Three levels of data base
5.2 Development of database and its updating: moving away from government deadlines and fiats.
5.3 Some future choices and options.
5.4 MAHILA Milan demands on the government about land.
Conclusion:
The first report "WE the Invisible" attempted to demonstrate that it was possible to COUNT pavement dwellers. It also sought to systematically bring to the attention of the city and its decision makers the real facts about who pavement dwellers in the city of Mumbai were, why had they come here, what they did in the city and what their situation was. It was our hope that this would dispel the myths that pavement dwellers were drug addicts, thieves and transient people who the city had to be afraid of .
The study fulfilled these aspirations, and went beyond that to give us some broad insights about how we should fashion our work with poor communities other than pavement dwellers as well. So today although we work with a wide spectrum of communities in Mumbai and many other cities in India, the work that we do with pavement dwellers is our CRUCIBLE. It constantly teaches us new perspectives, and gifts us new skills.
The Study created a path for us to interact with communities, with other NGOs and the State through "data" which was acceptable and a common language. It changed the tenor of our presentation. Now we stated facts and the facts spoke for themselves. The quantification of people and their problems were not value judgments and allowed everyone to make their opinions. We did not have to passionately speak on behalf of people.
As this information began to spread new paths for partnerships opened up, and while on one hand communities came up to find out more about the study and examine what could be the follow up, so did the various organizations of the state.
While it would be an over statement of fact that enumeration mobilized everyone that participated what actually happens is that the census or enumeration first of all defined a universe. You know what is the constituency. There is no need to conjecture. The dialogue between the communities, households and the organizations undertaking the survey make each actor aware of the other party’s existence. In any changing situation, few come forward to experiment with what is offered by change, most wait and watch and some reject change outright. We began with those ready to participate, kept informing others about what was happening, and welcomed any group which sought to come in. Such a process helps activist to include everyone but at a pace acceptable to the community. Pragmatically speaking it also reduces initial tension of dealing with large numbers while experimentation begins.
Over the last decade we have been able to articulate with increasing clarity our views about change. When we held a press conference releasing We the invisible, we were asked " so now you know, what is the solution" … and we replied, …. We don’t know today what is the solution, We know more about what we don’t want to do!
What we have learnt is that communities of the poor especially women in these poor communities are a huge storehouse of information about community strategies for survival. These resources are priceless and developmental interventions must treat these with respect, build on them and around them That requires keeping these women and their collectives in the center the change or solution seeking process.
This strategy for rehabilitation that we recommend has emerged from such a process, and is owned and managed by women living on pavements. They are a "zinda misal" or participatory design and planning"
In the work that we have done of enumerating informal settlements, we have begun to see the difference between a survey which produces numbers which remain "stagnant" and a vibrant and dynamic data base. By and large the state has undertaken the former with a view of containment. By that we mean that once the survey is done, it becomes "final" . The state resources subsequently are based on that list. While one can ague many reasons why that is not a good mechanism through which to deliver developmental resources, what is also negates is the dynamic of how cities grow and function.
Once the inter linkages between where people work, and stay, land use and management is made along with what is happening of the periphery of that city planners can get a very good idea of which kind of migration will occur. In the past the state and the city has been in denial of reality.. that business, markets and godown brought in unskilled labour, and if you did not pay them enough, and they had no place to stay they would squat where they found it convenient.
The conditions for pavement encroachments in the city are over as more and more business move away from the city. Pavement dwellers themselves have lived over a generation in these places, and when in discussion accept that their location does not allow their investment in housing to consolidate. They stay in a vicious cycle of refurbishing their small shacks with plastic each monsoon, but cannot build with brick and mortar as they know that will attack demolition. A planned and secure alternative will allow that consolidation provided the initial problems they will have to face are addressed.
The data base hopes to create information about such communities, and to make it available to everyone involved the process.
So for instance the Municipality, the state. NGOs communities all know about this information. When land is available in a particular ward, there is a profile of who can move there. There is also no conjecturing of So many pavement dwellers! Communities too can now calculate how much land they need for rehabilitation and can suggest various areas of the state and especially to SRA and BMC.
In these last 50 years of Independence we have many powerful policies which have sought to right grievous wrongs. Unfortunately most of them have stayed on paper. Through the SRA we now have the possibility to begin the process of ensuring rehabilitation for pavement dwellers. Without being either naïve or cynical, we seek alliance with a wide range of stakeholder to begin demonstrating that this policy can be put into practice. Using the survey we hope to create preparedness in communities to start a pipeline of communities who will demand from the state for action, and will be listened to because they too will be contributing to solving the problem of the city.
While we all feel change occurs very slowly, no one can deny that things have changed in the last ten years. The city of Mumbai is awakening to its oneness and the formal and informal city find that they have to interact with each other. As the city and the state divest themselves of their many roles, communities and non profit organizations are coming forward to take on some of these roles, and demanding a stronger participation of the state on issues of equity and social and economic justice.
Pavement Dwellers are people who literally reside on the pavements or sidewalks of the city. Unlike other squatter who chose to live on vacant pieces of land, and later got known as "slum dwellers" people who reside live on the pavement on which they build tent time structures which use the dimensions of the pavement to determine the width the depth of the unit.
Since pavements are "owned " by the municipality, the debate about what to do with pavement dwellers has essentially been with the residents of the city and its municipality. By and large the right to reside on the pavement is not acceptable in the same manner as the right of slum dwellers to reside on lands they have squatted on because, unlike those lands, these properties belong to the "public" for the use of pedestrians.
Society for the promotion of Area Resource Centers (SPARC) is a NGO set up in 1984 by professionals working on urban issues who saw the limitations for NGO institutions which delivered services but did not seek to intervene in the causal factors which constantly impoverished the poor and provided them no access to city based resources. The founders of SPARC sought to use this organization as an exploration tool to seek practices among professionals which would create partnerships with the communities of the poor and strengthen them to dialogue with the state on issues of equity. At that time, SPARC had not yet begun to work with National Slum Dwellers Federation, and instead began to work in a "ward of the city E WARD where large numbers of pavement dwellers resided The logic of beginning to work among pavement dwellers was that these were the poorest and most vulnerable in the city and if we could begin with them, then working with other better off settlements was easier.
Mahila Milan (MM) which in Hindi for "Women together" was what 600 women from the pavements of E ward called themselves when SPARC began to work with them on issues of housing. While working with Pavement dwellers it had become clear to SPARC that amongst the poorest it was women who created a habitat for the family, managed services for the communities and protected the homes from demolition. The irony of developmental intervention was that when either NGOs or government came in they sought the "male" leader and both the socialization of the women and the community was such that the community "presented" a male who was often the person who came forward to discuss this on everyone’s behalf. SPARC believed that since it was women who managed the process, it made sense to further develop the skills of women as collectives to participate in processes which sought to upgrade human settlements in cities.
National Slum Dwellers Federation,(NSDF) is the federating structure which presently links communities in 21 cities all over India. It was started in 1974 by a group of slum leaders from 10 cities who came together and began to explore the possibilities of federating in order to begin a dialogue with policy makers and inform them about the wishes and aspirations of the poor. Most of the members were men, who had risen to leadership out of eviction experiences where they led the protests against the state demolition activities. Such a leadership now wanted direct dialogue with the state, and were dissatisfied with NGOs attempting to deliver services to their settlements
In 1984, when SPARC began, it sought to focus its work on issues of urban poverty ... in exploring how values of social justice and equity can be translated into practice when dealing with issues related to urban poverty and deprivation. At that time, SPARC had no definitive plans of what it would undertake as its activities. However it had a clear direction from its membership of who it would begin to work with, how it would work with them, and what factors would determine areas of focus.
The exploration would begin by working with the poorest section in the city. Pavement dwellers in Mumbai are the most de franchised and vulnerable, and as a section of community the poorest. SPARC chose to work in the E Ward of Mumbai which has one of the largest population of pavement dwellers. The first area resource center was set up in Meghraj Sethi Marg, and even today that center works mainly on issues affecting pavement dwellers. Women’s collectives on pavement settlements became the source of connection between SPARC staff and communities, and this relationship sought o fulfill two things. One, to examine roles poor women play in community survival, and issues which they prioritized for their survival.
Security of their habitat was the single most crucial issue which women spoke about, followed by the struggle for basic amenities. The constant battle with demolition squads of the Municipality, finding a place to get water, dealing with no toilets and constant fear of children being run over by cars... while trying to find work near home were issues women brought out. As these discussions were on, news about the supreme court Judgment on the Pavement dweller’s case hit the headlines, and based on that, it was increasingly evident that the municipality could increase its attack to remove pavement dwelling from its sidewalks.
This entire issue, the way in which we all addressed, it, the "path" for problem solving that we chose as a result of that crisis, first of all showed us the possibility that professionals and communities could be partners, that despite the fact that a solution was not evident on the horizon, the two sets of people could work together, pool their skills and resource and work towards developing a solution which would, over time seek to resolve this problem. That strategy now informs the work that the alliance (which is what SPARC, Mahila Milan and NSDF call ourselves) in work with other slum communities in Mumbai and other cities all over India. Women who created Mahila Milan, who ran around at that time, form the central leadership of both Mahila Milan and NSDF, and their work and activities inspire a whole movement of the urban poor associated with NSDF.
In July 1995, when news about the Supreme Court Judgment hit the news headlines, it made it clear that while the Supreme court acknowledged that the pavement dwellers were poor migrants who had fled village to avoid starvation, pavements were public property and the Municipality had the right to evict them. Seeking to treat this as a moral victory, the Municipality now had the potential to "clear the pavements" This generated panic among the poor. Networks of NGOs who were working with poor communities, and others sympathetic with their plight also sought to explore what could be done.
IN its discussion with communities, especially the women, it became clear that while women feared demolition what such an activity finally meant was that a structure would be destroyed, only to be rebuilt either on that same spot, or in some other "safer" place. This seemed very different from the perception which was discussed by the Municipality where the issue was of "ridding" the pavements from encroachments. Further, as we explored this process further, more insights emerged. Some of them are:
The point we wish to make here is that while the city sought to "clear" the streets, its "acts" of practice were not leading to that objective.
Further, since there were rumors growing everyday about what government would do, SPARC began to set up meetings with various officials to find out what was the real fact and what was heresy. Here again a strange paradox emerged. Government officials were themselves unclear what was to happen next. For instance, if demolition were to take place, did the city know how many people resided on which street? Was there any data base on this? No there was none, we examined every statistic which was quoted, and each was a deduced figure. Imageries of who were pavement dwellers, why were they in the city, what did they do there, none of these questions had any coherent answers, Instead there were imageries of a floating population which could not be counted, of drug addicts and thieves waiting to rob everyone else.... all imageries to strengthen the argument that the streets need to be swept clean and Mumbai be rid of this menace.
With an idea of actually setting up an information system, we then went to many research organizations to find out if studies had been done. What we found was studies with small samples undertaken over two decades.... And researchers we met clearly advising us to let go of the possibility of taking on any such census. This more than anything else, urged us to do a survey ourselves. Since it was already mid July of 1995, the decision was to undertake a survey of the three arterial roads, and E ward as the area for the study. We the Invisible is the report of that study, it was completed in a period of two and a half months, and released in a press conference mid October 1985.
What it showed clearly was that
The report was a data base to develop an informed debate of what the city and the government proposed to do about the pavement dwellers in the city.
About 5000 copies were printed, and since then we have reprinted this publication twice. It was widely distributed, and formed the basis of discussion between the alliance and the various government departments for the next three years. What those discussions indicated was that pavement dwellers were indeed invisible. Since they were not "included" in the vulnerable groups ... say like slum dwellers, they were not eligible for any schemes, by default they were not even given ration cards. By and large what was clear was that the phenomenon was a "no mans land" . Slum communities were not interested in dealing with pavement dwellers issues, politicians were not interested much in this group, and most NGOs did not consider them a constituency" to work with. The battle through demolition with the corporation made pavement dwellers a group many charitable or philanthropic organizations treat like a lost cause as getting something done to improve their situation was seen as a lost cause.
This created a stronger sense of commitment of SPARC to work with pavement dwellers issues. Since secure habitat was the most focused demand of the communities of pavement dwellers, that because the agenda for exploration for SPARC. The founders and staff of the organization were clear then as they are now, that solutions to this problem will not come easily, but that unless someone invested a full commitment to address this issue, nothing would happen. To date, the resolution of the housing crisis of the pavement dwellers remains a central area of concern for the poor.
it became very clear that there were to be no major demolition in the city, and the crisis dissipated. It created the opportunity for women’s collectives and SPARC staff to begin a serious examination of how they were going to address the basic security issue. Clearly neither had much knowledge and background in this field. SPARC staff had absolutely no knowledge about housing at that time, and most women who resided on the pavements had rarely moved away from the place of residence and work. Explorations to seek this insight from others in the city and country quickly came to a stand still, as no one had spent much time on this aspect of pavement dwellers lives. Most interventions had been around either campaigns to halt demolition or around strengthening the claims of pavement dwellers to reside near work.
participating in this exploration emerged from a self selection process. SPARC had been in touch with over 75 settlements through the survey, clearly the ones who sought to deepen this relationship were communities with whom the staff had worked in another capacity when they worked in a nearby organization before starting SPARC. It probably had to do with faith that the staff would stay with them through the process. From the beginning it was a partnership of exploration. SPARC neither had knowledge or resources to GIVE anyone anything... what they made a commitment to was to participate through a process of exploration of why pavement dwellers could never get a house, so that any strategy to seek one is based on this and secondly, that if by some twist of fate pavement dwellers did get a land entitlement, what kind of housing was possible, and what preparations poor communities needed to do for this purpose.
and this joint venture is what attracted NSDF to seek participation in this partnership. Over the last ten years since, women pavement dwellers from Byculla form the core trainers for a movement of the urban poor, who in turn, have joined the struggle of pavement dwellers for being recognized as a group which must have rights to the same entitlements as other poor communities in cities.
and with slum groups indicates that resolving the problems of habitat for the poor can be a win win situation for cities and the government. Cities in the 1990s, are like entitles in themselves who are the focus of investment attractions in a global economic order. Creating a safe and secure and strong community is a crucial part of creating the foundation for asset creation in cities and ensuring basic equity to all citizens. Therefore while on the one hand, state policies in land, finance and development norms need to accommodate this process, communities of the poor also need to be organized so that they have managerial, financial and technical expertise to participate as "partners" and not beneficiaries in any solution. Past attempts to develop solutions for the poor without their participation have only led to wastage and scarce resources going to the wrong groups of the cities.
capacity to create strong and vibrant organizations of the poor who can participate in solutions, contribute managerial, skills and human resources inputs which have the potential for making solutions economically viable and sustainable. They also have the potential for moving on in scale.
By and large poor are under counted. There is not much rigor or professionalism in maintaining information systems about poor communities. Further since no one really challenges statistics produced about poor communities, this area of information remains in need of improved systems and standards. Further, information gathering about the poor is often when there is a crisis and some numbers need to be presented in order substantiate some action taken up by the state. The poor or the organizations working with them rarely have skills and resources to counter the claims made, and information goes unchallenged. Working with poor communities in general has shown us that a good data base is essential both for discussion with policy makers and planners as well as for the community.
Most information gathered as a data base, becomes the basis for entitlements. For example, in 1971, the Government of Maharahstra undertook a slum survey. All settlements listed in that settlement got recognized, and have gradually begun to get amenities. However no pavement slum was included, and many slums got left out. With no mechanisms to update slums, nor any redress to develop systems to bring in those missed out, chances of getting left our are greater.
By and large there are two major flaws in this process of inquiry. One is that if you ignore the problem will go away. Slums and pavement settlements have been ignored for very long time. No amenities and services given to them, hoping the difficulties will push people away. What this action has done is increased disparities between those parts of the city services by the corporation and those it does not look at to a point where the sheer size of the un-serviced part of the city now affects the rest, and the delay has made universalizing amenities that much more difficult and expensive. Not to mention the other problems of health, morbidity and environmental degradation.
The second flaw emerges from the belief that you can attract investment and finance but not migrants. In what is both a local and global phenomenon , people move to better opportunities. No longer are national, city let alone area "borders" sacrosanct or able to curb people seeking to improve their lives. Instead, what is essential is for government authorities, to develop more sensitive systems of anticipating growth and planning spatially for it. Yet with all increased usage of technology and systems development, this area remains one in which a lot needs to be learnt.
In the case of pavement dwellers, 4 decades of non recognition, have made them a minuscule yet separate category by the sheer fact that they as a sub group of the poor do not have any claims on the policies of government at state and central government or at city level. So for instance, an urban ICDS project cannot link to pavement dwellers as they are not a "recognized" category. Similarly Pavement Dwellers cannot have access to NRY or SEPUP loans and training schemes. Until SPARC like many other NGOs began to push for ration cards for pavement dwellers, pavement dwellers could not get this as a matter of routine. They would need to bribe someone to get a card.
If one examined why this entitlement ( any of the above) was denied to pavement dwellers it was simply because they were not listed as a group who were entitled. Inquiries in the planning commission of India indicated that it was assumed they were a part of the "slum" group. Yet with no separate mention in any policy document, no separate numerical analysis undertaken for any reasons, and only sample studies being undertaken occasionally, this issue of having a data base on the most poor and vulnerable group in the city remains unplanned as far as government systems are concerned. Therefore it has been a activity waiting to occur for SPARC to undertake the creation of a data base on pavement dwellers in Mumbai.
In the last ten years, there has been a growing acceptance of such insights and the challenge was not should pavement dwellers have access to resources any longer as much as how should the back log be managed.
The federations of pavement dwellers working within the alliance are of the opinion, that residing on the pavement is not a good long term solution either for the city or the community. However it needs to be acknowledged that poor communities cannot just be uprooted and moved anywhere convenient for the planners and without preparation, as it will be a unsustainable solution. Communities will drift back to cities, squat in another place, and their present fragile economic situation would be destroyed impoverishing them even more. Also, state resources invested in such a solution would also be destroyed. Therefore for the last 7 years, Mahila Milan has carefully crafted a resettlement policy which is possible for them, and which they have agreed to demonstrate as and when the state gives them land to move. (See project in annex for plans for Milan Nagar)
These strategies have been incorporated in the urban resettlement policy developed by a task force under Mr. Sukhtankar set up in 1994-95 by the government of Maharshtra especially for the MUTP II project.
The Slum Redevelopment program is an attempt to create a solution for the city’s housing problems by creating housing stock for the slum dwellers while creating units for housing for the market starved for real estate. Given the unnatural high prices for accommodating, the scheme envisaged that land given to the developer (an this could be the community, an NGO or the builders and construction companies) would give present slum residents houses free while selling the additional space to cover costs of housing provided free to the slum dwellers. The scheme assumes that the price would remain more than twice the price of construction per sq. meter in very crude terms.
After its taking over power in Maharshtra the Shiv Sena_ BJP government set up the committee under Mr. Afzalpurkarwhich sought to create a policy which would develop this concept, examine the other laws which would need to be modified in order to make this strategy work, and come up with a report . This report, now known as the Azfalpurkar committee report has sought to work out in fair amount of detail this strategy. It was later passed by the cabinet and in the House.
One of the recommendations of the committee was to set up a separate authority which would focus primarily on the subject of slums, and would have the powers to arbitrate on this issue. Its importance to the government is clear by the fact that the Chief Minister presides over the Committee which manages the SRA.
SPARC has been a participant in the development of this report. Many of the government officials in the committee have worked with SPARC, Mahila Milan and NSDF in the past, and for that reason, invited the Director of SPARC to be a member of the Committee. If analyzed the contributions of the alliance in this process have been:
Unless a city level process sought to address the problem of pavement dwellers, no solution would be possible. Therefore by estimating that 15% of all informal settlements (and this would include, settlements on railways land, those on the fringes of the airport, and pavement dwellers), would require to under resettlement, the calculations of the scheme sought to create a policy framework which would accommodate such a possibility.
Since there was another committee, the Sukhtankar Committee developing a strategy for resettlement simultaneously, and there were many members including SPARC who were on both the committees, it was envisaged that the two world try and work to resolve this problem. However what is essential to acknowledge is that many good policies never get enacted into practice. What these processes were doing was setting up the policy framework, while the challenge of getting them actually operational remains a separate issue. Nevertheless, in an area where for 5 devised there was silence, the fact that pavement dwellers were specifically included is worth a mention.
Demotions of pavement dwellings is a process which is routine at the ward level by the Municipal Corporation. Periods such as time before monsoons, or when senior political leaders talk about new encroachments give out "signals" for renewed activity among the ward demolition squad. In 1996 soon after the announcement that pavement dwellers were to be included in the SRD program ( see the attached # Document no:) a GR. was issued. This stated that all settlements where residents had a 1.1.95 election id card would be treated as part of the scheme. That means that their homes can no longer be demolished.
However the demolition continued. Several NGOs and legal aid organizations took the state government to court on violations of their own commitments. The alliance took another route. One which was similar to the one which it took many years ago at the time of the first survey. It sought meetings with various policy makers and senior officials of the Municipality and the state government. Through letters (see sample # Doc no) a series of meetings were arranged in which we explored the possibility for an NGO like SPARC to develop data base of all pavement settlements in Mumbai.
The idea behind this strategy was very simple yet profound. Communities of pavement dwellers have never really been counted comprehensively. This would be something that would need repeated detailed work of several years. Yet, unless each and every community living on the pavement actually began to dialogue with the external environment, began to put together documentation staking a claim on future possible resettlement, the chances would be that they would be left out. So the plan was to create through the first round of data collection at least 75% of information about pavement settlements in the city and extended suburbs. Then undertake a household survey to create list of names, and begin within as many community a move towards putting together information about themselves. It is anticipated that as communities develop their internal organizations, they were in a better position to work with their ward officials and SRA to locate potential places for resettlement, in the long term, and resolve issues of demolition in the short run.
Having established the logic of the strategy, the alliance then sought meetings with the Municipal commissioner and additional Municipal commissioner to strengthen the possibility of such a dialogue to promote working together. IN the various meetings with Mr. Gokhle and Mr. Ramani, we began to find out that the Municipal corporation was very serious about not allowing more encroachments. When the pavement dweller’s federation stated that if communities had assurances that they would not be demolished, they in turn would make that commitment to the municipality.
The experience of Mahila Milan and its working relationship with E ward officials was stated as an example. Mahila Milan has made a detailed list of houses, and house numbers, and the ward officials and Mahila Milan Committees went and did a joint scrutiny. After that houses which were numbers and had boards stating how many houses counted were put up, and since then there were to be no demolition. This was felt to be a satisfactory process, and one which sought both the communities and the officials to behave in a collaborative manner rather than in a confrontational way.
With over 20 wards all over the city, the chances were that such a process wouldn’t occur automatically, but the idea was to initiate it anyway, using the general strategy of NGOs to take the city to court as a back drop to create a possible alternative of collaborative activity. On several occasions, we were informed that ward officials were informed about the survey by the senior officials, and several have immediately sought appointments with SPARC for joint survey. One of the possible side outcome would be for the communities and the officials to work on other issues which affect environment, health, education etc. But for the moment, this was something which would occur over the years.
The following steps were taken. They are explained in detailed manner in the next section.
The slums on pavements were counted
Slums were numbered and households counted in detail.
Households which agreed to be surveyed were canvassed.
Communities were informed about the GR. and informed of what to do in case of a demolition.
Communities were advised about how to create their own documentation and begin a detailed lists of various types first to counter demolition, and later use this for purposes of resettlement.
As many ward offices as were willing to participate were met, and some joint surveys were made
Communities were escorted to various ward officials and stepped into the offices for the first time
Joint surveys were done, and phone numbers and contacts exchanges.
The leadership from the Mahila Milan and Pavement Dwellers federation now began to visit slums wherever possible and began to also meet communities in their office in Byculla, sharing with then what they have learnt in the last few years, encouraging them to save, to look after documentation and to begin to develop a local leadership collective where women had a presence so that long term activities could be initiated.
The data base is set to develop information at three levels:
It is our hope that the work of the last year will encourage the communities and the municipality to treat this data base as something which is useful to them. As people who use this process in our work with informal settlements, we are aware that the process takes time. Communities have always found themselves to be victims of someone else’s mistakes, and never having any grievances redress. Through this process we hope to demonstrate that regardless of whether people have documentation or not... making choices about what to do with the issue of pavement dwellers requires figures for both communities and policy makers. AS we move into 50 years of independence, let this be one more symbol of trasformative behavior where the use of modern technology to update statistics is used for actively to find solutions rather than to treat it as a problem which is avoided in the hope that it will vanish.
Expanding what communities of the poor can do;
Linking communities with ward officials for planning SRA
Linking communities to Mahila Milan and its savings and loans process, or encouraging others to take up similar activities.
Using resources the city wastes in senseless demolitions to plan joint activities to keep ward clean, provide basic amenities and so on, while people await their turn to get rehabilitated.
Demonstrating that communities who are treated as good citizens can place their own settlements and ensure encroachments do not increase, or get commercial in return of not being demolished.
Mahila Milan in Byculla has offered
In this first draft there are no findings included, as it is an internal publication which is being circulated for discussion while data analysis and finds are being prepares.