Country/Region: India

Jaga Mission

0

Jaga Mission

Mismatches Vulnerable groups Demographic/Urban growth
Policies and regulations National policies Local policies Governance Participatory processes
Financing
Promotion and production Public-private partnerships Favelas/Slums
Ownership and tenure Land ownership Public-private partnerships

Main objectives of the project

The Government of Odisha has set an ambitious goal: to be the first state in India to eradicate informal settlements. To achieve this, they have implemented the innovative Jaga Mission, which aims to upgrade the state's 2,919 existing informal settlements by December 2022, benefiting approximately 1.7 million people. This program is based on a decentralized approach, where associations of residents of these settlements work closely with public authorities to carry out the necessary improvements. The municipal government allocates 25 percent of its budgets to finance the works, while the rest of the funding comes mainly from Odisha state funds.

Date

  • 2017: Implementation

Stakeholders

  • Housing & Urban Development Department, Government of Odisha

Location

Continent: Asia
Country/Region: India

Description

In the eastern Indian state of Odisha, more than 1.7 million people, approximately 25 percent of the state's total population, reside in urban informal settlements and slums. The inhabitants of these areas face extremely precarious conditions, with a lack of access to basic services such as running water, electricity and sewerage, as well as the absence of property rights and public resources. This situation creates a cycle of poverty and marginalization, exposing residents to the risk of disease, evictions and the loss of their homes, especially affecting vulnerable groups such as women, migrants and people of certain castes.

Since 2017, the state's Mission Jaga and Mission for Adequate Habitat programs in Odisha have joined an innovative effort to title land and upgrade informal settlements, with the aim of drastically improving living conditions and promoting social equality for those in urban poverty.

The program is based on the principle that all families living in informal settlements in Odisha must obtain on-site land rights to access public housing subsidies and avoid evictions. Land rights certificates are inheritable and eligible for mortgages, but cannot be sold to prevent gentrification. To date, land rights have been granted to 125,000 residents of informal settlements, including women who can acquire them through co-ownership.

Once informal settlements are mapped and land rights are granted, residents' associations are established to oversee housing and infrastructure improvements. These associations have inclusive representation, where 50 percent of members must be women or other marginalized groups. Formally recognized as partners in project governance, these associations have control over the implementation of improvements and access to funds through a special bank account.

Community participation is central to the project, with residents, including women, hired to carry out community improvements without the intervention of private contractors. Local associations oversee the work and set standards of control, ensuring fair wages that help improve family incomes.

Mission Jaga has an innovative financing system that leverages funds from various government departments to maximize investments, avoiding the creation of separate budget lines. In addition, a legal provision was established that sets aside 25 percent of a city's budget for improvements in informal settlements, a unique approach compared to other programs that often rely on external development institutions.

The program has been implemented in 2,919 informal settlements in 114 cities in Odisha, with notable progress in upgrading 585 settlements and complete eradication in eight cities between September 2020 and May 2022. This effort, considered one of the largest land titling and informal settlement upgrading projects in India and the world, continues to expand throughout the state thanks to a mentoring model that has proven effective in training and guiding new cities in the process of upgrading their informal settlements.

Links

Authors:

CSCAE Consejo Superior de los Colegios de Arquitectos de España
World Habitat

Kamgaar Putala resettlement: from a slum to cooperative housing

0

Kamgaar Putala resettlement: from a slum to cooperative housing

Mismatches Location Financing Vulnerable groups Climate change
Policies and regulations National policies Local policies Planning Evictions
Promotion and production Participatory processes Self-management Cooperatives Favelas/Slums
Ownership and tenure Shared ownership Land ownership

Main objectives of the project

In the city of Pune, 176 impoverished squatters residing along the riverside seized upon a devastating flood crisis as a catalyst to terminate their prolonged existence in perilous and unsanitary conditions along the banks of the Mutha River. Collaborating with a local non-governmental organization (NGO) named Shelter Associates, they mobilized their efforts, initiated savings, conducted a comprehensive community survey, scouted for alternative land options, and eventually identified a new parcel of land where they obtained authorization to establish their own secure cooperative housing. With robust support from their partnering NGO, the municipal government, and a state-level social housing subsidy scheme, they embarked on the development of their new permanent housing option, ensuring improved living conditions and security for themselves.

Date

  • 2003: Construction

Stakeholders

  • Promotor: Shelter Associates
  • Promotor: Baandhani
  • Pune Municipal Corporation
  • National Slum Dwellers Federation (India)
  • Mahila Milan

Location

Continent: Asia
Country/Region: India, Pune

Description

In Indian cities, informal settlements often occupy hazardous and unsuitable land, rendering them highly susceptible to various natural disasters such as floods, earthquakes, landslides, and epidemics. Coupled with challenges like overcrowding, tenure insecurity, lack of basic services, and pervasive poverty, these settlements face compounded vulnerabilities. Kamgaar Putala, a substantial riverside settlement situated along the Mutha River in Pune, stands as one of the city's oldest informal settlements. During the monsoon season, the rising water levels in the river frequently inundate the settlement's makeshift huts, causing significant hardships for its residents. In 1997, Pune encountered one of its most severe floods since 1961, severely impacting Kamgaar Putala and five other riverside slums. The calamity submerged 379 houses for a duration of fifteen days, with 150 houses being completely destroyed. Concurrently, the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) had initiated plans to widen the Sangam Bridge, adjacent to Kamgaar Putala, a project poised to displace a substantial portion of the riverside community. In light of these successive adversities, the prospect of residents continuing to inhabit Kamgaar Putala appeared increasingly untenable.

Meanwhile, the State Government had been exerting pressure on the PMC to devise a resettlement plan for individuals affected by disasters and development projects within the city. Consequently, in 1998, a year post-floods, the PMC enlisted the assistance of Shelter Associates (SA), a local NGO, to conduct detailed surveys across six riverside slums to ascertain the number of households directly impacted by the floods. Notably, this survey was conducted by the slum dwellers themselves, facilitated by Mahila Milan women's savings collectives, the National Slum Dwellers Federation, and the Mumbai-based NGO SPARC, rather than by professionals. The survey served as a pivotal platform for SA to initiate dialogue between the affected communities and city authorities, fostering collaborative efforts to formulate a resettlement strategy.

Throughout the survey process, SA and Mahila Milan organized meetings with residents, encouraging their engagement in federation activities. Residents were motivated to establish crisis savings groups to prepare for future relocations. Subsequently, Shelter Associates pursued the project independently and played a pivotal role in the formation of a new federation of the poor in Kamgaar Putala, named Baandhani, symbolizing unity in the local Marathi language. Consisting of 160 families, Baandhani collectively advocated for relocation to a safer locale away from the river, aspiring for secure homeownership.

Crisis savings groups were established, numerous meetings were convened, and community issues were deliberated upon. Concurrently, the women of Baandhani initiated housing savings groups to accumulate funds for down payments on housing loans. Negotiations to identify a relocation site commenced in 2003, alongside the development of resettlement strategies by Baandhani.

As land search and negotiations progressed, Shelter Associates and Baandhani collaborated to enhance living conditions in Kamgaar Putala post-floods. In 1999, when the PMC promoted vermiculture and composting to enhance waste management, Baandhani and SA enthusiastically embraced these ideas, implementing composting and vermiculture initiatives in Kamgaar Putala and other slums with PMC support. These community-managed environmental endeavors not only garnered praise from city authorities but also served as income-generating activities for women's savings groups, thereby elevating the profile of community collectives in poor settlements.

Regarding the new housing scheme, a survey of the old riverside slum in Kamgaar Putala revealed that approximately 93% of families were structure owners, possessing documentation attesting to their residence in the slum for at least 23 years, which rendered them legally eligible for state-supported resettlement post-floods. To formalize their relocation, the Kamgaar Putala community opted to organize themselves into four groups, each consisting of 40-45 families, and formally register as cooperative housing societies. These cooperative housing societies would then become legal lease-holders of the new land in Hadapsar, overseeing housing loans and repayments. Although the four cooperative housing societies were registered in January 2003, the PMC's progress in finalizing formal lease contracts with the four cooperatives has been sluggish. Nonetheless, the construction of new housing in Hadapsar was completed, and residents began occupying their flats in 2005. However, as of May 2020, the formal lease agreements for the land remained pending, and families had yet to receive ownership documents for their apartments.

The new land, spanning 5,053 square meters in the industrial suburb of Hadapsar, approximately 8 kilometers away from the original riverside slum, had been designated in Pune's development plan for "Economically Weaker Section" (EWS) resettlement housing. Under the government's VAMBAY Scheme, utilizing MHADA grant funding, the resettlement project was successfully completed and fully occupied, mitigating concerns of eviction for members of the four cooperative housing societies.

The architects at Shelter Associates collaborated with the Kamgaar Putala community to design the layout and buildings, resulting in 176 apartments. Contrary to the prevalent notion in India that high-density housing for the poor necessitates high-rise blocks, the project in Hadapsar showcased a low-rise, high-density housing solution devoid of elevators, which proved conducive for low-income families. The housing complex in Hadapsar featured two-story blocks, each housing eight apartments, arranged around a central courtyard. The design incorporated smaller courtyards facilitating access to ground floor apartments and staircases leading to upper-floor units, providing ample play spaces for children and ensuring adequate daylight and ventilation in each unit.

The apartment unit's size and design were meticulously tailored by Shelter Associates to meet budget constraints, with each unit spanning 200 square feet, divided into two 10x10 feet bays. Each unit comprised a toilet, bathing area, kitchen, and multipurpose living-dining-sleeping area. Notably, one bay featured a higher ceiling height, accommodating the construction of an internal loft for additional space in the future. With the inclusion of the loft, the total living area per apartment amounted to 300 square feet.

Despite initial challenges, the success of the Kamgaar Putala resettlement project is evident from the fact that after sixteen years, not a single resident has opted to sell their property and relocate. Residents' active involvement in all facets of the project planning and implementation engendered several intangible impacts. Notably, a profound sense of ownership has permeated the community, as residents perceive their homes as both a financial and spiritual investment. Moreover, the project fostered a cohesive sense of community, bolstered by active social networks. The apartment design prioritized privacy while fostering spaces for neighborly interaction, a feature often lacking in high-rise slum rehabilitation schemes. Lastly, the provision of solid, flood-proof housing has not only engendered a newfound sense of security but has also significantly improved residents' health and well-being.

What is worth mentioning is how the project took a natural disaster as an opportunity to go from an informal settlement, without proper urbanization, to guaranteeing a democratic social housing option, led by the residents. Also of the role of women, who led the savings for the project and its implementation.

Links

Authors:

CSCAE Consejo Superior de los Colegios de Arquitectos de España

314 Houses in Bhuj - Bhimrao Nagar, Ramdev Nagar & GIDC Resettlement

0

314 Houses in Bhuj - Bhimrao Nagar, Ramdev Nagar & GIDC Resettlement

Mismatches Location Security Diversity Vulnerable groups
Policies and regulations National policies Local policies Public-private initiatives Participatory processes
Financing Supply subsidies Upstream financing Public-private collaboration
Promotion and production Public-private partnerships Participatory processes Self-management Self-promotion Self-construction Cooperatives Favelas/Slums
Ownership and tenure Shared ownership Land ownership

Main objectives of the project

In contrast to conventional slum redevelopment programs in India, which typically rely on contractors and allocate housing units to individual families without community involvement, this groundbreaking initiative in Bhuj demonstrates an alternative approach utilizing government subsidies. In these three projects, community members themselves played a central role in planning and constructing the new housing, supported by thoughtful design interventions that augmented existing social dynamics and leveraged local knowledge for sustainable living in the region's hot climate.

Date

  • 2021: Construction
  • 2010: En proceso

Stakeholders

  • Bhuj Municipal Corporation
  • Hunnarshala Foundation
  • Kutch Mahila Vikas Sangathan (KMVS)
  • Sakhi Sangini
  • Rajiv Awas Yojana (RAY)
  • Arid Communities and Technologies (ACT)
  • K-Link Foundation

Location

Continent: Asia
Country/Region: Bhuj, India

Description

Bhuj, a historic city in Gujarat, India's westernmost state, has served as the administrative center of Kutch District since 1947. Situated in a region prone to extreme heat, droughts, earthquakes, and cyclones, Bhuj faced a significant setback when it was nearly flattened by an earthquake in January 2001, causing the loss of 7,000 lives and leaving thousands homeless. Within Bhuj, there exist 76 slum settlements, accommodating approximately one-third of the city's population, yet residents lack secure land tenure. These slums, organized along religious and caste lines, often originated from land allocated to lower-caste communities in exchange for services rendered to the city by historical authorities. Despite their ancestral land rights, most residents are still regarded as squatters on public land since Indian independence in 1947.

In 2010, a pivotal change began with Sakhi Sangini, a federation of women's self-help groups, conducting Bhuj's first comprehensive survey of slums. Recognizing challenges in drinking water supply and housing, Sakhi Sangini, along with Kutch Mahila Vikas Sangathan (KMVS) and Hunnarshala, initiated projects to address these issues with modest donor funding. This initiative evolved into the Homes in the City program, aiming to improve housing, sanitation, water supply, waste management, and livelihoods. Although successful in empowering 120 vulnerable families to upgrade or rebuild their homes using low-interest loans and technical support, the program faced limitations due to insufficient funds. The introduction of the Rajiv Awas Yojana (RAY) Program provided a promising solution. Unlike typical government slum redevelopment schemes led by contractors and developers, RAY aimed for a different approach, acknowledging Bhuj's unique circumstances.

Recognizing the importance of outdoor spaces and community cohesion, a study conducted by students from the Center for Environmental Planning and Technology (CEPT) in Ahmedabad highlighted that most families in Bhuj's slums occupied 60-80 square meters of land. This finding emphasized the need for a participatory, community-driven housing reconstruction pilot. As a result, a comprehensive plan was devised, involving 314 households across three slum areas. Each household was allocated 65-square meter plots with full infrastructure and permanent land tenure, ensuring community involvement and satisfaction. This broke with how the public sector usually works. Rather than making high-rise buildings made by private promoters, the subsidies were given directly to residents, building community housing.

The initial focus was on Bhimrao Nagar, housing 42 families from the Marwada community, bestowed the land by the king of Bhuj. Out of these, 37 families opted to reconstruct their homes on the same site. Remarkably, five houses in Bhimrao Nagar, constructed with durable materials and in good condition, were exempt from rebuilding. Instead, they were integrated into the project, receiving equivalent tenure rights and infrastructure subsidies as the others.

Following Bhimrao Nagar, attention turned to Ramdev Nagar, an ancient settlement occupied by impoverished families for decades, spanning multiple generations. The dilapidated houses, constructed from tarpaulins, plastic sheets, mud, and cement blocks, highlighted the urgent need for redevelopment. All 116 houses in Ramdev Nagar were slated for reconstruction. Notably, five structurally sound houses in Ramdev Nagar were spared from demolition, included in the project, and granted the same benefits.

Lastly, the GIDC Resettlement site emerged as a temporary refuge following the 2001 earthquake's devastation. Among the 300 shelters in GIDC, 156 were earmarked for rebuilding in the initial phase of the RAY program.

Bhuj distinguished itself by embracing the RAY program through a community-driven approach, a rarity in Indian municipalities. The 314 slum families participating in the pilot project received subsidies directly from the local government, enabling them to collectively construct their homes. Facilitated by members of the Sakhi Sangini women's savings federation and supported by the NGO Kutch Mahila Vikas Sangatan, extensive consultations were conducted across the implementing communities to ensure clarity on the terms, subsidies, and operations of the RAY program. Ultimately, unanimous agreement was reached among the families in the three pilot communities to partake in the scheme.

Prior to the project's commencement, residents in all three communities lacked legal tenure status, relegating them to the status of squatters on public land. Technically, the land they occupied, spanning several generations in some cases, fell under the jurisdiction of the Central Government's Revenue Department. With the approval of the RAY project, the land was formally transferred to the Bhuj municipal government under a 99-year lease. Upon completion of the project, the 314 families involved will receive individual allotment certificates for their 65 square meter land plots, effectively granting them ownership of their dwellings. However, as per the RAY program's stipulations, families are prohibited from selling or transferring their land or houses for a period of 15 years following occupancy.

In each of the three settlements, the inception of the project marked the formation of slum committees. This step was pivotal as it signified the communities' transition from informality to formal inclusion within the legal framework. Those assuming roles in these committees underwent regular training and sensitization sessions facilitated by the women's savings federation and KMVS. These sessions covered a range of topics, including social, physical, and financial aspects crucial for collectively managing both the housing project and the resulting residences. The comprehensive redevelopment of all three communities entailed the creation of new layouts, houses, and infrastructure. The design process was collaborative and participatory, involving a series of workshops where architects engaged with community members, particularly women, to explore the strengths and weaknesses of their previous settlements and devise plans for their replacements. The layout designs underwent continuous refinement and adjustment, with finalization occurring only upon unanimous approval from all families across the three settlements.

The final layout plans for all three communities in Bhuj were carefully crafted to align with typical settlement patterns found in both rural and urban areas. Emphasizing communal living, houses were organized in clusters around common open spaces, fostering social interactions and providing safe areas for children to play. Beyond housing and basic amenities, the redevelopment plans aimed to enhance overall quality of life by incorporating social and community facilities such as community centers, shops, day-care centers, and health clinics.

Environmental sustainability was a key consideration, with efforts made to retain existing trees and introduce more greenery to increase shade coverage. Basic infrastructure services like metered municipal electricity and water connections were provided to each house, supplemented by innovative "green" solutions such as rainwater harvesting systems and localized water treatment. Additionally, street lights powered by solar panels ensured well-lit common areas at night.

Unlike traditional government-led redevelopment programs, the 314 Houses project in Bhuj stands out for its community-driven approach. By directly empowering residents with subsidies from the RAY Program, they were able to construct their own homes, showcasing the expertise of skilled artisans within the slum communities. This participatory model not only resulted in faster and cost-effective construction but also demonstrated the ability of communities to design and build housing more effectively than conventional government interventions.

Links

Authors:

CSCAE Consejo Superior de los Colegios de Arquitectos de España

Empowering marginalised women through home ownership

0

Empowering marginalised women through home ownership

Mismatches Vulnerable groups Gender
Policies and regulations National policies
Urban Design Inclusion Equity Participatory processes
Promotion and production Public promotion Self-promotion

Main objectives of the project

Women with disabilities and from disadvantaged social groups in rural Andhra Pradesh, India are now claiming their right to land and housing with access to self-help groups, technical support and building grants.

This project works with vulnerable and marginalised women from some of the poorest communities in India. These women are supported to gain the deeds to land and housing in their names, so they can escape poverty and raise their social status.

Once they formally own the land people take part in building their own homes. They are also encouraged to take more of an active role in their community, as every village sets up a committee to oversee the building work taking place there. At least half of all committee members must be female, encouraging gender equality and social inclusion. Since the programme began in 1996 land and homes have been provided for over 60,000 households.

Date

  • 2017:

Stakeholders

  • Promotor: World Habitat

Location

Country/Region: India

Description

Project Description

The programme helps people from low-income communities become homeowners in the district of Anantapur and surrounding areas in the state of Andhra Pradesh. The main groups supported by the programme are members of the Dalit castes (this term refers to the lowest castes in the traditional Indian caste system), scheduled castes and tribes (these are castes and tribes officially designated as disadvantaged by the Indian government) and people with disabilities in these communities. Rural Development Trust is particularly focused on supporting and empowering women.

It does this through providing women with a part self-build programme to help them build their own house. It helps them with formalising ownership of the land, and provides specialist skills such as masonry and carpentry. Women and their families are expected to contribute about 150 days labour to the building work on their own houses as well as communal buildings such as schools and community centres. The philosophy of the programme is that becoming a homeowner improves women’s social status and helps them out of poverty. The project ensures that the benefit is long term. Homes cannot be mortgaged or sold for a minimum period of 25 years after construction.

The project currently operates in 3,589 villages. By March 2015, 61,895 houses had been built including 2,661 for people with disabilities. From 2015-2016, there were 5,303 houses built in total. This included 82 for people with disabilities, 400 in collaboration with the government, and 2,496 for people of the Chenchu tribe of the Srilailam area. This is an indigenous group, considered a scheduled tribe, living in dense forest areas. To date, approximately 380,000 family members have benefited. The programme is ongoing and expanding.

Aims and Objectives

The Community Habitat Programme sits within the wider mission of the organisation, which is about building the capacity of disadvantaged communities through holistic development. It is part of a range of programmes designed to support this mission which include education (the provision of schools catering for special educational needs and activities to support culture and sport); health and affordable healthcare via the provision of hospitals; self-help groups including training and savings groups; targeted working with tribes; and ecology initiatives to support farmers (including water harvesting and introducing alternative energy).

The Rural Development Trust recognises housing is central to ensuring a better quality of life. The main aim of the Community Habitat Programme is to provide permanent housing for marginalised people living in poverty in rural India. They aim to improve people’s living conditions by:

  • Improving access to education, healthcare and other facilities through better infrastructure.
  • Empowering women by supporting them to own their home.
  • Promoting equality of marginalised groups by providing access to secure housing.
  • Improving resilience to natural disasters.
  • Ensuring families have easy access to water to improve sanitation and hygiene.

Context

The Indian population is still predominately rural. According to the World Bank 67% of the population lived in rural areas in 2016. According to the National Family Health Survey, concluded by the Indian government, only 19% of the rural population lives in pucca (strong) houses, while the remaining live in kaccha (weak) and semi-pucca houses with mud walls and thatched roofs. Eighty-seven per cent of homes in the villages do not have toilet facilities. Cooking is usually done inside the house under inadequate ventilation with biomass such as dried cow-dung, fire wood, dry weeds or crop residue

According to the 2011 census, about 45% of people in the state of Andhra Pradesh live in one room houses. Sixty-three per cent of these homes house families of four or more. There are massive fluctuations in the cost of construction materials and they are not always available. This means that low-income people cannot afford the cost of a home and depend on government housing. Distances to rural areas and poor roads mean that information, funds and materials are not always easily available. This means that villagers are left vulnerable and unable to access government schemes they are eligible for. Rural Development Trust acts as an intermediary by bringing all stakeholders together to ensure that rural communities are in a position to get the support they need.

According to RDT, Anantapur district has long been a difficult place to live in. It is a land-locked district with patchy rainfall and an arid landscape. Large farm-holders have long enjoyed a feudal hold over lower-caste tenant farmers. Bonded labour is common (this is a form of slavery created by indebtedness repaid by labour or services).

Key Features

The programme is part of a vast range of activities to help people living in poverty in rural areas who are disadvantaged. Women in particular are empowered and supported to become the owners of a plot of land. Rural Development Trust then helps them build a house on that plot. To be eligible for housing families must be permanent residents of the village, not have a permanent home, and already own a plot of land (or have an ownership right that can be formalised) and be involved in community groups. People who are not currently living in government owned housing are prioritised.

Not all of the households the programme helps are existing landowners. If there are government programmes that allocate plots to people, the programme helps them through this process. For example, they supported households in accessing land through the Indira Awaas Yogana programme by the Ministry of Rural Development. If land has not been allocated, the Rural Development Trust supports and encourages collective action through self-help groups, helping marginalised women to assert their right to housing.

For those families that already own land the programme helps women with the formalities of amending the deeds into the women’s name.

The houses consist of two rooms and a veranda. They are designed to be functional, structurally safe and fit for purpose. All have an electricity supply, and are designed to be well ventilated. For water, Rural Development Trust constructs wells in villages which don’t already have them or where they are not working. Homes in flood prone areas are built on a plinth so that they are at less risk of being flooded.

People with disabilities are a priority for housing as they are considered the most vulnerable amongst all communities. Homes are designed specifically to meet their needs. A ramp with a bathroom and toilet is provided due to limited mobility for fetching water. A village must have a Vikalangula Sangham (a collective group for people with disabilities) to be able to qualify for disability-specific housing. The Sangham nominates people who are eligible for the programme.

Rural Development Trust staff members are responsible for ensuring the success of the project. They make sure that families take part in building work to understand the value of their home and create a sense of ownership. They teach the community that providing homes in a village is part of a wider commitment to improve living standards for vulnerable groups. They also encourage women to join Sanghams (collectives) to become more integrated in the community.

After people have been selected to be part of the programme, they are divided into sub-groups of five to ten families. This speeds up the construction process as people can help each other, and also creates a healthy competition between groups. The work carried out by families includes clearing sites and digging foundations. They are also included in selecting masons and choosing locally available materials such as metal, stone and wood. Costs are finalised with Rural Development Trust staff to ensure financial transparency and accountability.

Where ever possible, construction work is carried out in partnership with government. Government agencies provide infrastructure such as water, electricity and road improvements to coincide with construction of new houses built by the Rural Development Trust.

What impact has it had?

Overall the programme has provided 67,189 people from poor rural communities with permanent shelter. It has also leveraged the opportunities provided by the Swachh Bharat Mission[1] to build 6,116 individual household latrines. This work will continue and enable Rural Development Trust to provide a further 40,000 bathrooms with toilets.

In total, Rural Development Trust have built 2,661 homes built for people with disabilities. Since 2006, seven projects have been undertaken to help communities being displaced or affected because of dam or road construction. These projects include ensuring the communities are properly connected to infrastructure and services like power and water.

In their 2015-16 annual report for the Habitat Programme the Trust reported 5,303 homes were built:

  • 4,821 houses for women in disadvantaged rural communities, including 2,496 for the Chenchu tribal of the Srilailam area.
  • 82 houses for people with disabilities.
  • 400 houses by drawing funding from government programmes.

The work of the Rural Development Trust has generated substantial broader impacts to help many marginalised and disadvantaged groups out of poverty[2].

[1] The Swachh Bharat mission was launched by the Government of India in October 2014. The objectives of Swachh Bharat are to clean the streets, roads and infrastructure of the country’s cities and towns, and to reduce or eliminate open defecation through the construction of individual, cluster and community toilets. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swachh_Bharat_Abhiyan)

[2] See examples of success stories on the website, http://rdtfvf.org/freedom-us-people/ (how RDT helped members of the Amaragiri chenchu tribe escape bonded labour), http://rdtfvf.org/from-poverty-to-progress/ (how RDT supported a young boy from a poor rural household to qualify as a doctor)

How is it funded?

Rural Development Trust is a charitable foundation that sources most of its income from individual and corporate donations. It sources a large proportion of its fundraising from Spain where the organisation is known as Fundación Vicente Ferrer. There is also a fundraising team based in India to raise money from individuals, public and private organisations. The organisation has a highly effective fundraising operation raising over US$39,000,000 in 2015-16 from grants & donations: 119,923,419 rupees (US$1,858,064) in donations and 2,406,480,420 Rupees (US$37,285,430) in grants.

The organisation decides how many houses it will build each year as part of its annual business planning process. A budget is allocated from the central funds of the organisation to pay for it. Where possible the Trust also builds homes through government housing programmes, coordinating with the relevant departments.

On average, Rural Development Trust constructs 4,000 houses per year using a combination of its own funding and government funding (either attached to programmes guaranteeing access to land, or programmes benefitting scheduled castes or tribes) In 2015-16, 5,303 houses were built with a budget of around 500,000,000 rupees (US$7,723,800) (which is the approximate spending on the programme per year). The average cost of building is 160,000 rupees (US$2,472) per house, including materials and labour, although there are big fluctuations. The labour contributed by residents saves around 30-35% of this cost – therefore the actual costs are of around 105,000 rupees (US$1,630). The community is also directly involved in bargaining and purchasing of materials for building. All financial costs are met by Rural Development Trust and will continue to be in the future.

Why is it innovative?

By campaigning for women’s ownership of land and homes, their work helps empower women in marginalised communities. As well as increasing their social standing in the community, it provides women with a permanent asset and secure home. Every Community Development Committee (CDC), a group of villagers who supervise the housing programme, must have a minimum of 50% female members. This means it is a requirement to have at least an equal number of female voices in charge of local projects.

The Housing Construction Committee is made up of housing representatives and members of CDCs. Its role is to ensure the project is being carried out effectively. To enable them to do this, they receive various forms of training. For example, they are taught about technical specifications and housing design, quality, pricing and storing of construction materials, project cycle management, etc. The approach is designed to be delivered directly to beneficiaries without the need for middlemen. A number of staff members are involved at many different levels. For example, there is a national technical director, directors and engineers at a regional level, team leaders, engineers, accountants and community organisers at a local level. There is a central office which provides overall coordination and support.

During construction there may be a saving on the cost of a specific material due to collective bargaining power. This means the actual expenditure would be less than estimated. This saving can then be put towards the purchase of another item, which may have increased in cost due to massive fluctuations in prices. If there is in fact an overall saving on the estimated cost of the homes, this is reinvested back into the community as a whole.

What is the environmental impact?

When building houses, Rural Development Trust considers the risk of flooding, and the risk of contamination of the local water supply. Water is important both during construction and for the proper maintenance of bathrooms and toilets. An objective of the programme is to end open defecation. In order to achieve this toilets are constructed. The Trust also provides education programmes to support the health of the communities and raise awareness. Ways to reduce water usage have been introduced. These include modern irrigation systems and collecting rainwater.

Locally available materials such as stone and sand are used for building. These have low embodied energy because of shorter transport costs and lower levels of manufacturing. Earth bricks were used previously but these had to be fired and are now no longer used. Now cement bricks are used to avoid this. Residents are encouraged to get solar lamps to generate power. In areas with no electricity these are provided by Rural Development Trust.

Rural Development Trust has built 2,845 homes in areas affected by natural disasters. In these areas, homes are elevated 45cm above the ground to protect against flash floods and from heavy rain in the monsoon season. It also protects homes from snakes and scorpions.

Is it financially sustainable?

Rural Development Trust is a charitable foundation that sources most of its income from individual and corporate donations. It sources a large proportion of its fundraising from Spain where the organisation is known as Fundación Vicente Ferrer. The organisation has a highly effective fundraising operation raising over US$39,000,000 in 2015-16 from grants and donations.

The organisation decides how many houses it will build each year as part of its annual business planning process. A budget is allocated from the central funds of the organisation to pay for it.

Once the houses are built, the model is highly sustainable for the residents. There are no rent or mortgage costs once the home is completed. Some residents have developed skills through the building work, and have become skilled masons through practice. They are now able to make a living from masonry work.

What is the social impact?

Each village has a Community Development Committee (CDC), which is made up of representatives from the village. Each CDC must have a minimum of 50% female members. These groups are involved in selecting families eligible for the housing programme. They help in choosing construction materials and negotiate their cost. They ensure that families take part in the building work, monitor day-to-day progress of construction and resolve any problems. They also regularly update village registers to ensure financial transparency. This means that the CDC is mutually responsible for the success of the housing programme, along with staff.

Structural changes such as these have contributed to better hygiene amongst the wider community

People are encouraged to be involved in the project to create a strong community. It is more likely that people will maintain their community facilities if they feel a strong sense of ownership and pride in the work that has been done.

Barriers

Barriers to delivering homes in rural communities can include:

  • Scarcity of construction materials and high fluctuations costs of materials.
  • Scarcity of skilled workers.Government Policies e.g. in initiatives such as the Indira Awaas Yogana programme, the government pays a small amount of around rupees 40,000 (US$620) after deducting applicable taxes to the beneficiary with the assumption that this is enough to build a house. Nonetheless, given the current market prices, this is largely insufficient (accounts for only about 25% of costs).

Barriers have been overcome by:

  • Encouraging labourers to get employment through the National Employment Guarantee Scheme. The scheme aims to enhance job security in rural areas by providing at least 100 days of paid employment per year to households whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual work.
  • Creating a revolving fund to support women to help them generate income and compensate for the financial shortcomings of government programmes

Lessons Learned

  • The programme has found that house construction alone is insufficient to build the resilience of the community. It has increased its focus on “inclusive growth” in villages which involves construction of more community buildings such as schools, libraries, and school grounds for sports.
  • The programme has changed its approach to bathrooms and toilets in order to overcome open defecation. Previously shared toilets were used, but now houses incorporate their own toilet and bathroom.
  • Traditional toilets proved impractical in areas facing severe water shortages. Rural Development Trust has begun installing dry toilets (a toilet which does not use water to flush but treats waste through composting).
  • Involving residents in construction creates a feeling of ownership and pride.

Evaluation

The Rural Development Trust has an independent Monitoring and Evaluation arm (M&E) which carries out evaluations and impact assessments. Nonetheless, funders also occasionally demand an independent audit of the project.

Evaluation of the project has shown:

  • Housing has enhanced the social status of marginalised communities.
  • Technical expertise has ensured quality housing.
  • A women-centred approach has encouraged women to be involved.
  • There is a feeling of ownership amongst residents.
  • Awareness of sanitation and hygiene has led to proper maintenance of bathrooms and toilets.
  • Water is a key issue in housing and problems with water should be addressed.
  • Housing is a major factor in empowering rural communities.
  • The specific needs of disabled people were addressed in the building design which has provided great improvements in daily living.

Recognition

Rural Development Trust has received numerous awards for its housing programme, as well as for its integrated approach to development. Many of the awards cover the wider work of the organisation. Some examples of recognition of this programme are:

  • Member of the Government of Andhra Pradesh – NGO Coordinating Committee for Rural and Urban Development.
  • ‘Population Control Board’ Award by the State of Andhra Pradesh for the quality work done in Rural Development Trust hospitals.
  • Member of the Commission for the Eradication of Poverty, Government of Andhra Pradesh.

Transfer

Rural Development Trust has significantly scaled up the programme from its early beginnings. Its output is increasing each year. The programme has already reached over 3,500 villages in two states of India. They are working to expand their coverage further.

Although there is no direct transfer to other organisations, the programme would like to create a network with other research organisations or non-governmental organisations working on similar housing projects. It would like to share its experience of cost-effective housing with others.

Links

Authors:

World Habitat

Bringing light and air to homes in informal settlements

0

Bringing light and air to homes in informal settlements

Mismatches Security Functional adequacy Vulnerable groups
Policies and regulations Local policies Regulation Governance
Urban Design Quality Liveability Inclusion Equity
Promotion and production Transformation and adaptation Favelas/Slums

Main objectives of the project

Date

  • 2017:

Stakeholders

Location

Continent: Asia
City: Ahmedabad
Country/Region: Ahmedabad, India

Description

For many poorer women living in informal settlements in India, the home is not just a place to live but also a place of work. Homes in Indian informal settlements are deep, long and arranged in rows backing onto each other. This means that there is no natural light or ventilation from three sides. Even in the middle of the day the rear part of the house remains dark and gets very hot. Most people solve this problem with electric lights and fans. However the electricity is expensive and electrical appliances generate their own heat. This problem is recognised by the Mahila Housing Trust, a non-governmental organisation which is part of the Self Employed Women’s Association; a movement which itself emerged out of the Textile Labour Association, a trade union established by Mahatma Ghandi in 1918.

The Mahila Housing Trust work to mobilise its members. The Trust supports communities to organise, working at grass-roots level and supporting dialogue to influence government policies. Their goal is to make homes and the wider living environment more suitable for women to live and work in. This includes projects to upgrade water and sanitation, build roads, develop low-income housing and improve security of land tenure. The organisation works in rural and urban areas across India, Nepal and Bangladesh focussing particularly on areas where there is little other support from government or NGOs.

“Ujasiyu”, an innovation developed by the Mahila Housing Trust to improve working conditions for self-employed women in India, is a simple dormer window that can be fitted to the roof allowing natural light and ventilation into homes in informal settlements. The window is made of fibreglass and is moulded to fit onto the shape of corrugated steel, which almost all roofs are made out of. The window itself is made of translucent plastic. This prevents glare and diffuses the light so that it illuminates the whole room rather than creating a shaft of light. The plastic is moulded into a hump with an opening at the bottom to allow air to circulate. The gap is covered with gauze to prevent insects and other animals from getting in.

Residents buy the dormer window (Ujasiyu) with the help of low cost loans which are offered by both the Mahila Housing Trust and SEWA Bank (cooperative bank that specialises in providing affordable finance to low-income self-employed women). Many families are able to pay back the loans within a year, through their earnings and the energy savings they make by having the window. Interventions were introduced in the state of Gujarat (West India) and are being implemented at various scales across the country in the states of Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Jharkhand, Delhi and Rajasthan.

In this project the housing trust partnered with Yatin Pandya, an Indian architect who runs Footprints E.A.R.T.H – an architecture and environment consultancy company. He offered technical support in the project development. The Solar Energy and Light Company (SELCO), an Indian social enterprise working on solar power solutions also offered technical support and sector knowledge.

Ujasiyu focuses on vulnerable households where women both live and work as part of the informal economy. The women who benefit from the improvements carry out unskilled work such as embroidery and rolling bidis (a type of cigarette). Improved lighting and ventilation means that they can comfortably use the home for this work (increasing their productivity) as well as for leisure time. Children can also spend more time in the house doing schoolwork due to the increased light. Better ventilation and less smoke also helps to improve health issues such as breathing problems and asthma. Cost savings are made as less electricity is used due to increased natural light.

The project has a community-led component with households helping to implement the new products and provide feedback for future improvements. Awareness of energy efficiency and the benefits of ventilated homes has increased as beneficiaries share their experiences with the wider community. As part of the wider work of Mahila Housing Trust, Ujasiyu is promoted to residents alongside other solutions which reduce energy use, including energy efficient light fittings and cooking stoves.

So far Mahila Housing Trust and SEWA Bank have helped:

  • 635 households to improve ventilation by installing Ujasiyu dormer windows.
  • 18,050 households to reduce lighting costs by installing energy efficient light fittings.
  • 2,647 households to improve cooking facilities with energy efficient cooking stoves.

Aims and Objectives

The main aim of the project is to provide natural daylight and ventilation in dark and dingy houses throughout informal settlements in urban India using community-led design.

Its objectives are to:

  • Ensure community conversations and voices contribute to the design of adaptations.
  • Design, manufacture and fit dormer windows (selected by communities as the most effective option) for lighting and ventilation.
  • Empower households in informal settlements to access loans that they can afford.
  • Educate residents in informal settlements about energy efficiency and home improvements.

A longer-term aim of the programme is to transfer the project to more communities across India so that more households can benefit from the interventions.

Context

Women make up 28% of the labour force in India[1]. Among working women, an estimated 93% are in informal employment, earning a living through their own labour or small businesses[2]. The nature of their employment makes it difficult for them to access ‘official’ state support, and financial services like credit and pensions. The Self-Employed Women’s Association was formed as a Trade Union, gaining recognition from the government in 1972. Since it began, the association has developed as a movement to improve the lives of its members through joining together to fight for things like workers protection, fair pay, and to develop solutions to improve living standards. The Self-Employed Women’s Association spread into a wide range of sister organisations to achieve its objectives[3]. These include the SEWA Bank, a cooperative bank which uses contributions from its members to offer credit to self-employed women; and the Mahila Housing Trust, founded to improve housing and living conditions for poor women in informal employment. These two organisations are lead partners in Ujasiyu on community involvement.

The need for interventions in informal settlements results from the rapid population growth experienced in cities across India. Most have struggled to keep up with this growth, and much of the population lacks access to basic infrastructure like housing, transportation and services. Nearly half the population in urban India are accommodated in informal settlements. Homes are densely packed, often very small, and built with temporary materials. A lack of natural light and air makes houses dark, dingy and stiflingly hot. This affects residents’ mental and physical health, as well as their ability to carry out day to day tasks in the home. Even in broad daylight many families are forced to use artificial lighting, and poor ventilation means fans are needed leading to high electricity bills. These issues are particularly negative for women who are more likely than men to be in the home during the day. Ujasiyu was developed in an ‘Innovation Centre for the Poor’, an initiative by Mahila Housing Trust and SEWA Bank to find simple interventions to improve the quality of life in the communities where their members live and work.

[1] International Labour Organisation, 2016

[2] Self Employed Women’s Association, http://www.sewa.org/

[3] http://www.sewa.org/Sister_Organization.asp

Key Features

Ujasiyu was developed in an Innovation Centre for the Poor, where prototype adaptations to improve lighting and ventilation were tested and selected by the community.

The dormer window was chosen as the best solution after the testing of five different prototypes which were developed with local knowledge and mounted in initial volunteer’s homes. These prototypes were as follows:

  1. Raising the roof sheet: allowing roofing to be raised to let air into the building.
  2. Sliding Window: Cutting the roof around 60cm and introducing a sliding window for ventilation.
  3. Square Skylight: Introducing a square raised skylight (of 30cm in the roof)
  4. Dormer Window: Adding a Dormer window of around 30cm to 60cm height, by cutting a small part of the roof.
  5. Waste Plastic Bottle Insert: Cutting the roof equal to the diameter of the waste plastic bottle. On inserting the bottle, the sun light illuminates through plastic thereby lighting the interior spaces.

After the success of the Dormer window adaptation based on volunteer feedback this was chosen to be rolled out at scale. In the pilot stage, these were provided free of charge and electricity savings were monitored for three months to understand the savings.

The main motivation behind Ujasiyu is to make homes comfortable spaces where women can carry out informal home-based work more easily. For women in informal settlements this is essential so that they can support their family and gain some financial independence in the home. A more comfortable working environment is not only healthier and more comfortable it also increases productivity. Along with savings in electricity this increases people’s income. It also benefits the family more widely in that children can study in the home improving educational success.

A wider culture of energy savings and home improvement has been developed through the work of the project to engage with the local community in discussions about the possibility of improving homes and participating directly.

The project is a collaboration between:

  • Mahila Housing Trust – Initial partner in setting up the project (with SEWA Bank). Worked with communities to develop dormer window product. Also provides some small loans.
  • Footprints E.A.R.T.H – Architect Yatin Pandya provided free technical assistance to the project
  • SEWA Bank – The bank provided loans to beneficiary households who wanted the installations
  • The Solar Energy and Light Company (SELCO) – Completed energy surveys to find out energy savings made as a result of the interventions and provided sector knowledge

What impact has it had?

Firstly, the project ensures that families live in healthier homes with access to natural light and air, improving both physical and mental health. In addition to healthier homes it has enabled families to save between 30-50% on their energy bills through having to use lights less often in daytime hours. These cost savings allow families to spend money on other needs such as education, as well as to accumulate savings and pensions. The new healthier homes have allowed many women who work from home to improve the effectiveness of their businesses and increase their income. The adaptations have also created better study environments for children in the home. Ujasiyu also has a positive environmental impact in the use of less energy.

Ujasiyu as a product is still developing and adapting. The dormer window is currently installed in 635 homes and work is underway to address the challenges of differences between building types. The wider work of the Mahila Housing Trust to promote energy saving has enabled over 17,000 households across informal settlements in seven states to benefit from one or more interventions (the total number of installations stands at 21,332). With a range of options and affordable credit, households can choose to install a single intervention even if they cannot afford to have all three (cooking, lighting and ventilation) at the same time. Currently about 20 per cent of families have been able to benefit from more than one installation. The project is working on reducing the costs of Ujasiyu further so that the product can be accessed by an even greater number of households.

Although the project has not directly impacted any policy changes it has changed the attitudes of residents enabling them to take ownership of their right to a comfortable home. It has also increased community awareness and education on energy saving and the use of simple interventions to create healthier homes.

How is it funded?

Initial set up costs were covered by international donor funding. Mahila Housing Trust worked with SEWA Bank to develop relationships with beneficiaries. This included setting up the ‘Innovation Centre for the poor’ where the project was planned and social surveys were carried out to understand people’s needs. Some fundraising was done to increase the funds available for start-up. In addition, initial design and technical support were offered for free by the architect Yatin Pandya through his practice, Footprints E.A.R.T.H. Once a family becomes involved in the project it is up to them to fund the housing improvements. They can do this through taking out loans from the SEWA Bank. The ventilation units cost each family 5,000 Rupees (approximately US$80). Instalments and interest are kept affordable in line with the bank’s cooperative principles.

The fact that improvements ensure 30-50% savings in electricity bills per month means that families can make savings into the cooperative bank and pay off loans quickly, often within a year. The ventilation units are produced locally to minimise costs. They are now sold under a private company called MHT Awaas SEWA Private Limited which was registered by the Mahila Housing Trust in 2013.

Why is it innovative?

The project is innovative in three ways: the product itself, the way in which it was developed and the focus on women.

The dormer window is the key innovation of this project. Although there are other projects (notably the 2015 World Habitat Award winner – Liter of Light) that solve the problem of poorly lit houses in informal settlements, the dormer window in this project is specifically designed for the needs of homes in India and provides ventilation as well as light.

The project’s home improvements were developed through a community-led ‘innovation centre’. The project did not begin until conversations with residents were undertaken so that their needs could be fully understood. Other approaches may focus on moving people from inadequate housing in informal settlements, instead of trying to ensure houses are more liveable in their community. The Ujasiyu product allows people to remain in their community, making it a more sensitive design innovation.

The focus on women in informal settlements is another innovative factor. Providing improvements to homes, the main workplace for many women, empowers them to earn increased incomes. Because conditions in their homes are improved and comfort is increased throughout the day and night, women are also given more control over the type and amount of work they do. The focus on women in informal employment, within informal settlements is also innovative. The collaboration with SEWA Bank means that the families can access affordable credit and not become burdened with debts from unregulated moneylenders, or be left out of the lending system all together because of lack of collateral.

What is the environmental impact?

The project works to improve current homes rather than building new ones, which saves energy and material use through the construction of new buildings.

The project reduces the amount of energy used in homes and therefore their environmental impact. Specific adaptations had specific environmental impacts. Residents who have had the dormer window installed have reported energy savings of up to 50%.

The use of locally available materials for adaptations also reduces the carbon footprint of the project.

Is it financially sustainable?

Initially adaptations (improvements to cooking, lighting and ventilation) were subsidised through grants. Once the effectiveness of the interventions was more widely known and understood, the project developed into a social enterprise. Families who want to install one or more adaptations are expected to raise their own funding. Soft loans are provided to interested households by the SEWA Bank. Costs are payable in instalments and are repaid within a year. The savings made on energy bills generate enough savings to cover the repayments. After repayment, the benefits to households will continue for the long term, enabling them to improve their income and standard of living.

Despite the potential savings, the cost of loan instalments has limited some of the poorest families from being able to access Ujasiyu products. Work is underway to lower costs so that the approach can be offered to a wider range of households.

What is the social impact?

The work of Mahila Housing Trust empowers women to be able to fulfil their right to a comfortable and healthy home. Their involvement in the project’s development and the ongoing discussions which occur once the improvements are in place mean women are partners not just voiceless beneficiaries.

The Ujasiyu dormer window improves the air quality in the homes which are cooler and no longer smoke filled (smoke can leave through the ventilation dormer) and are naturally lit. This reduces negative health impacts such as breathing problems, and improves mental health as people live in less dingy spaces. Entire families are able to spend more time inside on both work and leisure.

For women who work in the home, better light, ventilation and reduced smoke from cooking stoves has improved productivity and increased income. Families who have benefitted from Ujasiyu have more disposable income to save, and pay for things like children’s education.

Barriers

The main challenge so far has been that differences in local construction and local bylaws meant each city and state needed different size sheets to go with the dormer window installation. For example, in the city of Surat in Gujarat, homes needed much larger sheets. These needed to be developed cost effectively to maintain the affordability for the families in need. In some homes, a waste bottle roofing solution was implemented where a plastic bottle was fitted into the roof which the sun would shine onto and illuminate the inside rooms. This was less effective than the dormer window but was used where it was not possible to install dormers.

In some states, production and application has slowed down due to increasing manufacturing costs. This should be overcome if the project develops its own manufacturing centre.

A further challenge has been promoting the improvements and convincing residents that they work, so they are happy to take out the loans to pay for the solutions. Residents were also not used to their opinions being sought in projects like this. The project is currently being promoted by word of mouth and through communication between the project implementers and the local population.

Lessons Learned

As the project was implemented in states which differ in their physical context, ventilation adaptations had to be redesigned to suit the local context. Finding local manufacturers who could produce products in a cost-effective manner is an issue in some locations. To overcome this, the project aims to set up local manufacturing centres. This new expansion is still at initial planning stage. The Ujasiyu project also hopes to diversify the products they offer to provide a wider range of practical solutions to improve ventilation and natural lighting.

Evaluation

The project has not been formally evaluated yet anecdotally the product has been seen as a positive innovation amongst beneficiaries.

Recognition

The project has hosted various international visitors including representatives from Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Misereor Foundation, Care Foundation (Dhaka), Millennium Alliance along with FICCI, Womanity Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation.

Transfer

The Mahila Housing Trust’s work to improve working conditions in the home through reduced energy costs has scaled up from impacting 140 houses at the pilot stage to now 21,332 lighting, cooking, and ventilation installations in 7 states of India: Gujarat, Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Odisha, Rajasthan and Jharkhand.

Work on transferring and scaling up the Ujasiyu dormer window product is continuing, and has also inspired further work led by the Mahila Housing Trust to produce modular roofing made out of paper waste and coconut husk for informal settlements. In 2016 this innovation won the ‘Urban Labs Innovation Challenge: Delhi’ an award organised by the University of Chicago and the Delhi Government in response to its success in bringing down indoor temperatures improving living conditions. The project has so far been implemented at a pilot stage in three informal settlements in Delhi around new sustainable innovations such as solar powered lights and solar eco-cooler.

Links

Authors:

World Habitat

50,000 Houses for War Victims

0

50,000 Houses for War Victims

Mismatches Functional adequacy Services
Financing Demand subsidies Sustainable development financing Progressive financing Public-private collaboration
Urban Design Urban fabrics Services and infrastructure Inclusion
Promotion and production Participatory processes Self-management

Main objectives of the project

This project has provided humanitarian and financial support to help communities displaced as a result of the Sri Lankan civil war to rebuild their homes. The target is to fund and build 50,000 houses, for an estimated total of 225,000 people. The majority of the houses, 44,000 are self-build, 4,000 will be built by plantation workers, while only 1,000 are to be built by contractors.

Date

  • 2016:

Stakeholders

  • Promotor: World Habitat

Location

Continent: Asia
City: Ahmedabad
Country/Region: Ahmedabad, India

Description

Project Description

Following the prolonged civil war in Sri Lanka from 1983 to 2009, the Government of India took the decision to provide humanitarian and financial support to the Government and people of Sri Lanka to help them recover from the trauma of war. In total, the Government of India is supporting a number of self-help housing rehabilitation/development programmes costing over USD $240 million. Some of this funding is a grant, for example the funding for the 50,000 Houses of War Victims project, and some takes the form of long-term loan assistance.

For this project financial assistance and organisational support has been provided to help internally displaced people to construct their own homes. The target is to fund and build 50,000 houses, for an estimated total of 225,000 people. The majority of the houses, 44,000 are self-build, 4,000 will be built by plantation workers. One thousand houses were constructed by commercial contractors before the owner driven approach was introduced as a more suitable solution. The focus on self-build is designed to give people a real say in their own housing solutions.

The programme focuses on internally displaced people in dispersed, rural areas of Northern, Eastern, Central and Uva provinces of Sri Lanka. The basis of the programme is that people are enabled to return to land and property which they owned and lived in prior to the war. In effect, this means that some families are moving back to the area they left in 2009 or before. 

The houses that are developed are on average 550 ft2 in size, so relatively large compared to those often built as part of rehabilitation projects. The home owners are able to make decisions on the design, materials used, size of the house and whether they wish to add in their own savings or loans to include specific features or make the house larger.

Since the construction work started in 2012, forty-five thousand, two hundred houses of the 50,000 target have been completed. The houses are built on existing sites in villages or new sites provided by the Government of Sri Lanka.

Aims and Objectives

The main aim of the project is to deliver homes for internally displaced people in a quick and sustainable way. These people are the direct victims of the conflict: those who lost homes, property, assets, family members, livelihoods, income and social networks. The other beneficiaries are the plantation workers living in poor housing and environmental conditions for whom 4,000 houses are being constructed.

Though this project is confined to the provision of houses, it has laid a foundation for a people-sensitive and community-driven approach to development. Housing is the crucial first phase in a long-term rehabilitation process that must be eventually followed up by:

  • economic rehabilitation of the families who lost assets, jobs and means of livelihood;
  • rebuilding physical/social infrastructure and economic base of the area lost in the war;
  • rebuilding people, communities and social networks that suffered ruptured relations, shaken confidence, internal divisions and trust deficit and have seen much violence.The delivery of the phases beyond the house-building lie with the Sri Lankan government and the people of Sri Lanka but this project’s contribution is to develop a receptive climate for participative development action which supports future developments.

Context

The Sri Lankan civil war lasted 26 years and left large numbers of houses and public infrastructure damaged or destroyed. Around 160,000 houses were affected in the Northern Province alone. After such a long conflict, community life was shattered with networks and relationships broken down. The economy and governance structures were in crisis. Displaced families returning to their places of origin were housed in temporary shelters, constructed by the Sri Lankan Government, humanitarian agencies or families themselves. Families survived with minimal security and scant protection from the elements. People were living in widely dispersed sites, many in forests with poor road connectivity, no electricity or other services.

This project is working in the districts of Jaffna, Kilinochchi, Mullaithivu, Vavuniya and Mannar in the North and Batticaloa and Trincomalee districts in the East, which were areas of considerable conflict during the war and the most severely affected in terms of human and material losses: houses, physical and social infrastructure, transport, industry, commerce, business establishments, jobs and livelihoods were either destroyed or severely damaged.

Key Features

The focus on self-build housing changed the complexion of the reconstruction process and has planted seeds for people-led recovery.

Adopting an owner-driven approach meant:

  • putting owners in charge of house building instead of contractors;
  • handing over funds and decision making to individual families;
  • entrusting the delivery of the programme to people who are vulnerable (internally displaced people) and who had not recently had experience of being empowered to make decisions. This meant changing ways of working, setting aside apprehensions about shattered communities and discounting arguments that the families and communities would leave houses either incomplete or spend money elsewhere or construct poor housing. The role of the organisations supporting the implementation of the project was key in this regard as they were working with the communities at a local level. Empowering people with responsibility, decision making, money management and giving them a lead role in steering their own development process has enhanced their confidence and self-worth. The impact of this culture of self-help and dignity is demonstrated in the quality of houses built, their own financial contribution in enlarging houses and in the speed of construction as well as in the confidence they display in meeting other challenges.

The potential beneficiaries applied for inclusion in the project and the severity of need was used to for selecting those who would get involved and prioritised:

  • age (priority for older people);
  • poverty (priority for the poorest);
  • number of dependents (priority for the ones with more children and dependents);
  • women-headed families;
  • physical condition of the head of the family (wounded, disabled).

Both the beneficiary selection and grievance redressal systems involved the entire community, as the approved lists were displayed in public places for everyone’s information and intervention. Debate and discussion around the list and the openness of the system to listen to every view and opinion made the process participatory and democratic.

Besides officers of the Sri Lankan Government the four partner agencies, namely UN-Habitat, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Habitat for Humanity and National Housing Development Authority provide assistance in the identification and selection of the beneficiaries. The project wanted to serve the most severely affected people in the greatest of need.

The key features of the project can be summarised as:

  • Transparent system for beneficiary selection.
  • Re-settlement in the original village or new sites provided by the Government of Sri Lanka and approved by the community.
  • Making available 15 – 20 prototype house designs to select from with required modifications for climate, local traditions and cost effectiveness.
  • A house no smaller than 550 ft2.
  • Construction on self-build basis.
  • Grant of Sri Lankan Rupees (LKR) 550,000 (USD $3,800) per house towards construction costs.
  • Payment in four installments at specific construction stages through electronic transfer.
  • Facilitation through partner agencies for logistical support and technical assistance for speedy, cost effective and good quality construction via logistical support, technical guidance on construction, assistance in material procurement, quality, time and cost monitoring and account keeping.
  • Physical infrastructure and social amenities provided by the Government of Sri Lanka.
  • An effective grievance redressal system.

What impact has it had?

The project is still being completed and therefore it is a little early to expect it to influence policy or institutional change. However, this model of facilitation by partner agencies has been presented to the Government of India as a way to improve owner participation and the quality of construction in the national housing programme for rural communities.

The project goes beyond accepting the conflict/disaster victim communities’ right to housing and rehabilitation. It provides housing and infrastructure and it provides houses that are better and bigger than the minimum size prescribed and does so in a manner that builds community capacity to meet other aspects of full recovery challenge now.

How is it funded?

The Government of India provided a grant of LKR 34.8 million (USD $240 million) for this project.

Phase I for one thousand houses constructed by contractors at a cost of LKR 1.4 million (USD $10 million).

Phase II for the construction and repair of 45,000 houses had an outlay of LKR 33.4 million (USD $240 million) to cover the following:

  • Payment of fees to the four partner agencies.
  • Payment to beneficiaries for construction of a house – Total of LKR 550,000 (USD $4,000) in four instalments, (LKR 100,000 = USD $700; LKR 200,000 = USD $1,400; LKR 200,000 = USD $1,400 and LKR 50,000 = USD $350).
  • Payment to beneficiaries for repairs to houses – Total of LKR 250,000 (USD $1, 700) in three instalments (LKR 100,000 = USD $700; LKR 125,000 = USD $900 and LKR 25,000 = USD $200).

The cost of land, physical infrastructure and social amenities is met by the Government of Sri Lanka

The houses, both repaired and newly constructed, are ownership assets of the 50,000 families and so the costs of maintenance are the responsibility of the owners. The cost of maintenance of the physical and social infrastructure is borne by the Government of Sri Lanka through its departmental or development agencies.

Why is it innovative?

Self-build construction is not new in Sri Lanka. Houses had been constructed and projects had been implemented using that principle after the 2004 tsunami. What is new and an institutional innovation is the introduction of the partner agency as part of the organisational design for implementation. The facilitation role undertaken by the likes of UN-Habitat, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Habitat for Humanity and the National Housing Development Authority is new to Sri Lanka and the support and direction provided by these organisations has been key to the acceptance of the project by target communities and to the success of the project as a whole.

Innovation within a post conflict rehabilitation context can be expressed as follows:

  • Giving in kind, i.e. facilitation support rather than cash (benefitting families directly instead of Government to Government bilateral aid).
  • Self-build on a large scale programme instead of engaging commercial contractors.
  • Transfer of decision making responsibility to thousands of families.
  • Institutional innovation: conceiving, identifying, hiring, deploying and supervising work and performance of four partner agencies as facilitators, while accepting self-help as a community tradition.
  • The principle of “Building People and Communities while Building Houses” put the emphasis on the process as much as the product.
  • A government programme entrusting decision making to communities challenges custom and practice.
  • Investing in building a development platform while delivering a conventional service.

Though a majority of the home builders have used conventional materials and techniques, some innovations have been introduced by the partner agencies. A visit was arranged to Kerala, Gujarat and Maharashtra in India for staff from partner agencies so that they could see innovative materials, projects and experiments. Fifteen engineers and supervisors participated and tried many options such as rat-trap bonds for masonry; filler slabs for roofs; twin-pit systems instead of conventional soak-pit methods for latrines and cement soil blocks in place of bricks were tried out on experimental basis.

What is the environmental impact?

The choice of materials which are locally produced and available, usable by local craftsmen, easily repairable or replaceable, low cost and requiring low maintenance has been the main philosophy of the project. Home builders have been exposed to alternative materials, construction techniques and explained economic, environmental and social benefits. However, the project has not imposed any material or technique or technology on the home builders and the choice always remains with them.

In terms of the resilience of housing to natural disasters, several factors have been incorporated:

  • The structural design and detailing of the houses makes the structures disaster resilient, especially from cyclones and earthquakes.
  • The participatory process of decision making and construction has raised people’s overall awareness of natural disasters and how to reduce impact (bracing walls against earthquakes and roof anchors to stop roofs blowing off during cyclones).
  • The training of masons has also increased awareness and preparedness.

In addition, some of the partner agencies have developed features which help improve the wider environment. UN-Habitat has raised special funds for tree planting and developed a community supported tree planting program in new settlements.

Is it financially sustainable?

In terms of overall housing need in providing 50,000 houses, this project has met a quarter of the needs of the Sri Lankan people. The additional housing required and also the subsequent phase of this programme (focused on economic development and wider infrastructure) will fall to the Government of Sri Lanka to fund.

To reduce future costs for home owners care has been taken to produce houses of:

  • adequate size therefore reducing further construction costs;
  • safe and strong construction against earthquakes and cyclones;
  • good quality workmanship, materials and specifications;
  • reasonable sized plots of land.

What is the social impact?

The ‘owner-driven’ approach of this project has greater objectives than just the reduction in cost of construction through owner’s unskilled self-help labour contribution. The participatory/consultative approach is meant to see them as ‘owners’ and ’clients’ (as opposed to recipients of grants) and gives them decision making power. It has been noted that the system of self-build and decision making has not only improved the construction of the houses but has played a significant role in restoring people’s self-worth and cultivated a sense of dignity.

Housing is the first and the key input in the long term and multi-faceted rehabilitation and recovery process for the individuals and the communities. In the area of physical rehabilitation and full scale recovery much remains to be done in terms of development of infrastructure – physical and social, for example, the restoration of livelihoods, creation of jobs and employment generation. It is in that context that the social capital built through a participatory house building process will be advantageous. Over a year long process of engagement in decision making, responsibility sharing, problem solving, conflict resolving, finance management, delivering and achieving has left a more determined, confident and responsible individual and citizen.

Barriers

Initially the programme met many barriers:

  • lack of infrastructure facilities in the project areas;
  • restricted sand and timber permits;
  • social factors like alcoholism, divorce and separation;
  • increased costs of materials;
  • periodic inclement weather conditions;
  • lack of motivation for some and time constraint for others.

These barriers have been addressed by the project partners by:

  • working with government departments and suppliers to overcome gaps in infrastructure;
  • ongoing communication with government authorities to speed up the issuing of sand and timber permits;
  • the involvement of communities to address social issues;
  • collective procurement after researching sources;
  • adjusting the time of construction to accommodate the inclement weather;
  • activities to encourage motivation within the beneficiaries.

Lessons Learned

The success of the programme has been attributed to:

  • the attention given to factors such as involvement of beneficiaries in their house construction;
  • timely release of funds to beneficiaries;
  • transparency in beneficiary selection process;
  • the use of encrypted messages for transfer instructions to banks;
  • having an organised system of file handling;
  • regular monitoring of the project;
  • flexibility in adaptation to the ground conditions.

Evaluation

The houses have only recently been occupied and the program is still under implementation so no final assessment has been undertaken. However, a range of indicators have been considered during the development of the programme:

  • level of satisfaction of the users;
  • the sense of ownership they display;
  • the investment they make in extensions/upgrading;
  • evidence of togetherness and collective community action. In addition, there have been no cost escalations and no major delays to the construction process.

Discussions have started with local universities, NGOs, international development agencies and communities to undertake feedback studies on the impact of the owner-driven, self-help approach to construction.

Recognition

This is the first time that this project has been submitted for any award. However, the model has been acknowledged by the development partners in Sri Lanka including Diplomatic/UN Missions, INGOs and the Government of Sri Lanka.

Transfer

The model has already been adopted by the Indian government-owned Housing and Urban Development Corporation’s Committee on Rejuvenation and Strengthening of Building Centres Network, which is examining ways to revitalise the network of building centres in the country in order to support large-scale construction programmes. The approach of confidence building, motivating, initiative-taking and empowering the owners has been adopted for the 4,000 plantation workers’ houses, which are yet to be built. Beneficiaries and plantation companies have endorsed the approach. These houses were originally going to be constructed by contractors.

The positive outcome of the project approach, both in the well-constructed houses and in human terms (i.e. confident, self-respecting, initiative-taking communities) suggests the replication potential, not only in post-disaster reconstruction scenarios but also in normal circumstances where the clients are disadvantaged in some way.

Links

Authors:

World Habitat

Alliances for building capacities and options for the urban poor: experiences from urban Odisha

0

Alliances for building capacities and options for the urban poor: experiences from urban Odisha

Policies and regulations Regulation
Urban Design Equity Participatory processes
Promotion and production Self-management Self-promotion Management and maintenance

Main objectives of the project

The Odisha Alliance is a partnership involving the NGO Urban Development Resource Centre (UDRC), the grassroots women’s organisation Mahila Milan, the Odisha/National Slum Dwellers’ Federation (O/NSDF) and the Society of Promotion of Area Resources Centre (Sparc) – in 225 settlements in five cities of the state of Odisha and in three cities in the state of West Bengal. The Alliance’s project benefits the bottom 30 per cent of the economic pyramid of city dwellers who live in informal settlements, focusing on the community-led development of model houses that are affordable and adapted to local needs, as a basis for negotiating with government actors. These models act as ‘precedents’, demonstrating that slum dwellers can be the agents of their own development, while providing solutions that can be scaled up. The initiative is ongoing with many schemes at different stages of development. Sixty model houses have been built and two government programmes are running, with 400 additional houses currently under construction.

Date

  • 2013: Finalista

Stakeholders

  • Promotor: World Habitat

Location

City: Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation
Country/Region: Bhubaneshwar, India

Description

Links

Authors:

World Habitat

A Report on Sanitation Technologies for Transforming Urban Settlements

0

A Report on Sanitation Technologies for Transforming Urban Settlements

Mismatches
Promotion and production

Main objectives of the project

Date

  • 2022:

Stakeholders

  • Aga Khan Agency for Habitat (AKAH )

Location

Continent: Asia
City: Chhindwara
Country/Region: India

Description

A compendium of proven urban sanitation technical solutions for three different settlement types -suburban ward, transforming rural settlement, and greenfield site- in India.
The study assesses the strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities in urban sanitation technologies in India and provides a decision-making support tool for local administration, community action groups and other stakeholders to identify appropriate technologies for various settlement types. The compendium examines various sanitation systems and technologies and provides a decision framework and standards for planners and implementers. Case studies demonstrate the methodology applied to three different settlement typologies.

Links

Authors: