Policy on Slums,Informal and Squatter Settlements in Pakistan & India (Term Paper Sample)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Inception of informal settlements in the metropolitans of the developing world, especially in the context of secessionism, indicates a progressive and evolutionary economy of an urban setting. However, the persistence of these informal settlements is also a symptom of poverty traps, economic disparity and insecurity, and a faulty regulation of urban planning and its relevant institutional policies with regards to human security. Apart from the faulty institutional regulations, slums, informal and squatter settlements have been shadowed by the liberal economy, making a threat to the fundamental freedoms from fear, wants, and indignity.; the comparative study of the urban policies of Karachi and Mumbai has revealed that the conceptualization of the policy ensuring the welfare of the urban citizens is highly path dependent onto the memory of the urban administrative institutions. Inclusive planning upon the concerns of the provision of affordable housing for the LIGs/LIC (Low-Income Groups/Low-Income Class) has been absent. Measures to tackle the influx of rural migrants for employment, refuge seeking migrants from war and the policy to assimilate these immigrants in the urban setting was not properly conceptualized. Rather visions, schemes, and plans to organize the urban space of Karachi and Mumbai have been imported from different parts of the world, chiefly from the Global North, which has failed to solve Karachi’s and Mumbai’s problem of urban space organization that was supposed to offer a welfare induced environment but has created a disparity among the citizens living in the same vicinity of both the cities.
INTRODUCTION
Neo-liberal free-market policies advocate for minimal government intervention, a necessary condition for the competition leading towards better provision of facilities. However, it does not cater those who are not in an equitable position in the market. They are highly susceptible to exploitation and it threatens the framework of the representative democracy that considers free-markets as one of its pillars. Metropolitans around the world have been equipped with technology today in the 21st century, however the model for fabrication of the modern metropolis or cosmopolis has been on the expense of otherization of LIC (Low-Income Class) who are the inhabitants of the slums, informal and squatter settlements; Historically, the typical inclination of the ‘planned city’ is to leave out the poor (Watson, 2009). Human Security of LIC, from political to socio-economic and health and that of environmental, is compromised and they are subjected to harsh conditions of the city because there exists an unequitable distribution of the rights within the spatial design of the city. It suggests the unplanned development of the planned city.
South Asian metropolitans, Karachi (in Sindh, Pakistan) and Mumbai (in Maharashtra, India), have been selected as the case study for our comparative public policy for welfare have shown similar characteristics in terms of human security under the democratic model of governance. Karachi and Mumbai are also regarded as cosmopolitan cities because of their present diversity. Metropolitans like Karachi and Mumbai have a persisting slum problem. They have a history of colonialism, secessionism, biased bureaucratic institutionalism, and an urge to mimic the western imitation of a global city. Urban Planning in South Asia has been heavily influenced by the colonial empires of the West. Two distinct cultures, that of the Anglo-Indians and of indigenous Indians, had existed within the same geographical region. The disparity between the living standards of the colonizers and colonized existed to such extent that the power holders did not even want the windows of their bungalows in the direction of the slums. The idea has been carried forward into the bureaucracy and governmental institutions of the secession and have continued onto that disparity. Karachi and Mumbai have identical geographical terrain, identical ways in economic functionality, both have seceded from the same global empire which they had been part of till the Partition of 1947. Both the metropolitans have a persevering affair of slums, informal and squatter settlements in space and an affordable housing crisis. Even though the provision of affordable housing and formalization of the informal settlements have been prioritized, the urban policy seems to fail and have unable to fulfil the objective of equitable provision of facilities among the citizens of the same city, especially when these cities are constantly under immense pressure of the influx of rural migrants and refugees and their increasing population.
OVERVIEW
This essay will discuss the policy regarding slums, informal and squatter settlements in Pakistan and India, with knuckling down the cases to Karachi and Mumbai. The aim of this essay is to perceive the concern about the faulty and counter-productive fabrication of a welfare urban policy in the Global South. It will comparatively analyze the two metropolitans for human security by examining the affairs of its population and its administration institutions. Attempt to investigate the welfare of urban policy will be done evaluating historical memories and processes of the institutions and their coordinating functions. Competent urban policy for welfare, defined (for this essay) is:
1 Encapsulated Vision for Urbana
2 Framework for Rules and Regulations for the Vision
3 Provision of Fundamental Amenities to the Citizens of Urbana Without Any Disparity
4 Coordinating and Efficient Administrative Institutions
5 Holistic Approach to Tackle Obstacles
Karachi
Urban slums or katchi abadis in Karachi sprang up after the influx of the refugees and immigrants of the Partition. These settlements abruptly began to grow again after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 which led to the massive influx of Afghans seeking refuge from the war. Apart from these two factors, regular rural-to-urban migration for employment seeking is another factor for its increasing population; pre-independence slums exist as well. These Slums are situated in the peripheries of Karachi; Current population of Karachi is about 18 million and makes up to 72% of the urban population in the Pakistani province of Sindh. There is the Informal Subdivision of Land (ISD) which has notified (regularized with the provision of 99-year-old lease on land) and non-notified (non-regularized land) katchi abadis. Karachi needs 80,000 housing units per year whereas the demand has risen to 120,000 units per year as of 2019 (Hassan, 2019). 42,000 units are supplied by the formal sector, 32,000 by the informal sector and the rest of the demand is fulfilled by the densification of the existing homes. Apart from the housing crisis that continues to enflame the problem of the slums, inhabitants of Karachi are deprived of adequate infrastructure of mass public transport while 92% are personal vehicles consisting of cars and motorcycles.
Projection of Pakistan’s urban population in comparison to Southern Asia and Asia is below:
Mumbai
Chawls and Slums of Mumbai date to British Empire after the upsurge of industries and mills in the 19th century. In post-independence scenario, Mumbai saw an influx of low-skilled labour force into the city. It is estimated that these chawls and slums inhabit 50% of the Mumbai’s population which is about 20 million. Only 5-6 per cent of the households could afford a house in Mumbai. Mumbai has mass transport infrastructure that supports the mobility of its inhabitants especially for the low-income groups.
Karachi and Mumbai had numerous urban plans. KDSP 2020 Vision for Karachi was planned to be implemented but bureaucratic procedures and political influences have rendered that effort fruitless. The Development Plan 2014-2034 for Mumbai aims to develop Mumbai and open new land in the no development zone. The plan is looking short on its objective up till now.
Both Karachi and Mumbai have a problem of slums, informal and squatter settlements for the LIGs, which are unable to afford land. Both the metropolitans are one of the biggest of their own states which function of the neo-liberal model of economy and both have restricted space and land for the city to further develop horizontally.
 
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF OPTIONS
Methodology
Comparative analysis of slums, informal and squatter settlements of Karachi and Mumbai and its welfare policies is based upon the joint method of MSSD (Most Similar Systems Design) and MDSD (Most Different Systems Design). However, the dominant form of analysis will be MDSD since slums, squatter and informal settlements are a phenomenon in both metropolitans and follows a convergent path as indicated by the literature. This will be critical in determining the factors within the policy domain. I will take an inductive approach to the joint method to identify the common independent variable(s) in which can explain the faults and policy challenges unable to eradicate or minimize the slums and the informal housing sector.
The Joint Method of MSSD and MDSD is suitable for analysing and investigating “why the two biggest metropolitans of the Global South, situated in South Asia, in liberal democratic republics have failed to achieve their targets regarding slums, informal and squatter settlements?” Both states of India and Pakistan have adopted noticeable similar ideas, policies, and approaches, keeping in mind that both the states differ ideologically in their inception. India and Pakistan have salient differences in the institutional control variables but similar int...