Their Story of Coming Together to Work for a Shelter Alternative
By 1990, India will have 25 cities with a population over 5 million each. Today, Bombay is one of the country's largest metro cities with over 9 million people. Half of the city's population lives in slums, of whom 1,500,000 people live on the streets. Most of Bombay's pavement dwellers are migrants who have arrived from underdeveloped rural areas of the country. The migration started about 30 years ago and some families have lived in the same pavement spot for as many years.
Pavements have been the only shelter that these migrant families have known. Their shelter priorities were interwoven closely with survival jobs in the commercial business district in the inner city. E-Ward where we began our work has a high concentration of pavement families and is one of the most congested parts of the city. Here, men worked in petty trades, as labourers in markets, in the docks while women and children were found in petty trading, domestic service jobs and recycling scrap. Majority earners walked to their work places nearby. Pavement dwellers paid indirect taxes, and obtained commercial licenses like everybody else, yet officials were often heard saying "Pavement dwellers are a burden to the city." Official statistics did not acknowledge their economic contribution and were blind to their very existence on the pavement.
Life on the streets meant an everyday struggle for women — in their search for water and use of toilets. Almost a third of a family's daily earnings would sometimes go for paying these amenities. In some pavement clusters, people paid for staying where they were. Government welfare programs were extended to the slums but pavement communities had restricted access to schools, health centres and welfare services. Bank credit was refused. Further, families did not possess documents like ration cards and birth certificates which established their identity in the city.
Shelter on the pavements was a make shift hut - 60 to 100 sq. ft., made of plastic, cloth and supported bamboos. Several times, women recalled, their huts were demolished; often two or three times in a year. Demolition squads from the local government came without any warning or notice. (The Supreme Court Judgment of July 1985 added clout to the official stand - Demolition without prior notice and without an alternative). Each time this occurred, women built and rebuilt their homes. But with each demolition, women realised the growing hostility of the city toward them. They said "our children were born in these huts and yet today we know that we have no future on these pavements." Increasingly the busy streets had become death traps for their children and they had even less space for bathing, washing or sleeping for their families. All encounters with local authorities had spelt demolitions. Protests, demonstrations and political party alignments had resulted in no change for pavement families. In the first year 1985, SPARC involved pavement dwellers in a census which covered 6000 families. Together with people we recorded family information - income, occupation, etc. This information proved valuable in demanding change in policies for pavement dwellers.
Who are we? Why did we come to the city? How do we live and work? were questions that started a process of questions - reflection as women in groups traced aspects of their lives in the inner city areas. In women's' collectives and area committees that SPARC initiated, entire communities were faced with a challenge: Where do we go from here? As women critically reviewed their life and work on the pavements, it became clear that a permanent home of their own, the need to earn their living and a safe environment for their children and families were the most important goals for these women.
The shelter training process organised women first from a pavement cluster of a hundred families and grew to include women''s' collectives belonging to five hundred households in ten clusters in the vicinity.
Through eighteen months, women came together in groups every week to meet, discuss and give shape to their ideas for a resettlement alternative. This essentially began with the recognition that shelter is a process that they would define and create for themselves and their communities. Encouraged by commitment of entire communities, women's collectives developed the idea of a self help community - resettlement. Basic minimum needs of the community: land, survival jobs, land titles, drinking water and toilets had to be planned for. It was decided by women that if the alternative had to benefit the poorest in their communities then all scarce resources had to be shared equally. Shared community space for women's work, welfare and basic amenities, women decided could become the basis of sustained cooperation in all areas of life. Several internal agreements emerged as collectives gained confidence to act on behalf of their communities. Shared land titles and preventing re-sale of dwellings in the new settlement was one such example.
The first step in creation of shelter awareness was an important one. Entire communities of women and men went about identifying vacant land in the city. On identification of sites and often at these land sites, women evaluated how feasible the location was to provide for and sustain their survival needs and community requirements.
Next, we began a critical review of public housing policies. Together, we met with city authorities, housing experts, town planners and voluntary agencies. We visited slums and other housing schemes as well as project sites and services. After this preparation the women started to lay out the site and design the actual houses. Basic facilities such as water, electricity, toilets and drainage would be shared. The community plan had to include opportunities for earning a living, a creche, a pre-school, and health and community centre. In February of 1987 we had an exhibition with life-size prototypes of the houses designed by the women. Over a thousand pavement and slum dwellers from all over came to see the models and discuss their community aspirations.
After the initial shelter awareness training, the women initiated a masonry training program, a savings-cum-credit society and a material and labour bank. Women have already formed a housing cooperative to manage money, material and labour for house construction. Women from 500 families have opened housing savings accounts. They hope to contribute up to 20 percent of the estimated cost of their houses. This amounts to 6,000 to 8,000 rupees ($600 to $800 U.S. dollars). A committee was struck to investigate potential public resources; another one to liaise with the authorities. The settlement will be developed along the lines of a cooperative. Under the Urban Land Ceiling Act, the state government can acquire land for public housing. We are lobbying the Central Ministry of Urban Development, since the provincial governments tend to focus more on rural issues. At this point, however, the government is yet unwilling to provide the land and building funds.
We at SPARC see the Mahila Milan, a women's union formed to implement the shelter program as one of the most significant achievements. It is interesting that a strong women's collective has emerged as a trainer and catalyst for other women and as alternative leadership within the pavement community. Already a core group of 50 to 60 "graduates" from our training program are teaching women from other areas to start their own redevelopment projects. Only a process such as this, not the Supreme Court rulings and forced evictions, will solve the problems of the pavement dwellers. Women have realised that working for change in their lives, has brought them together. They understand today that negotiating for land is part of a long political process. This recognition has meant tremendous solidarity and belief in their organisational strength. For women, there is no turning back.
Source: SPARC, 52 Miami Apartments, Bhulabhai Desai Road, Bombay 400 028 India