230
CHAPTER - 5 CIVIC AMENITIES AND HEALTH HAZARDS (A) URBAN BORN INSECTS : Insects and related arthropods of importance in the urban environment are broadly covered under the auspices of urban entomology. Most arthropods in human environments go unno- ticed. However, some species post significant problems because they directly affect the health of humans or their domesticated animals, attack human structures, foods, goods, materials, or plants that adorn urban settings. A relatively small number of insect species have been intentionally introduced into the urban environment. Examples include the gupsy moth, Lymantria dispar that was intentionally introduced into Massachustts in 1868. It is highly probable also that the Asian Lady Beetle, Harmonia axyridis, was intentionally introduced in 1980s. Many pest species have been accidentally introduced with human commerce and travel. Some invasive species have adapted themselves to disturbed human habitats and have rapidly spread world wide via commerce and human travel. The German cockroach Blattella germanica, is an excellent example of such a species. It is rarely found outdoors, preferring heated and controlled environments typically associated with human food preparation. Probably native to Eastern Asia, it spread

CIVIC AMENITIES AND HEALTH HAZARDS - Shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/34204/9/09_chapter 5.pdf · that the Asian Lady Beetle, Harmonia axyridis, was intentionally

  • Upload
    lythien

  • View
    215

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

CHAPTER - 5

CIVIC AMENITIES ANDHEALTH HAZARDS

(A) URBAN BORN INSECTS :

Insects and related arthropods of importance in the urban

environment are broadly covered under the auspices of urban

entomology. Most arthropods in human environments go unno-

ticed. However, some species post significant problems because

they directly affect the health of humans or their domesticated

animals, attack human structures, foods, goods, materials, or plants

that adorn urban settings.

A relatively small number of insect species have been

intentionally introduced into the urban environment. Examples

include the gupsy moth, Lymantria dispar that was intentionally

introduced into Massachustts in 1868. It is highly probable also

that the Asian Lady Beetle, Harmonia axyridis, was intentionally

introduced in 1980s. Many pest species have been accidentally

introduced with human commerce and travel. Some invasive

species have adapted themselves to disturbed human habitats and

have rapidly spread world wide via commerce and human travel.

The German cockroach Blattella germanica, is an excellent

example of such a species. It is rarely found outdoors, preferring

heated and controlled environments typically associated with

human food preparation. Probably native to Eastern Asia, it spread

143

throughout the Eastern Mediterranean Region by Greek or

Phoenician Vessels. It remained in Southern Russia until after the

Thirty years war (1618-1648) spreading into Europe and finally

becoming established in restaurants and other food handling

establishments in the rapid modernization of China.

With the increasing rate of urbanization in NCT Delhi,

problems associated with arthropod pests in urban centers will

continue to grow. In 1951, about 14.37 lac people (82.4%) lived

in urban areas. At the turn of the twenty-first century, this had

increased to greater than 129 lac people (93.18%) in Delhi. By

the year 2021, it is estimated that there will be greater than 230

lac people living in urban areas. The most dramatic increases in

urbanization and challenges in Delhi will occur in development;

the complex of urban invasive species will likely spread to these

urban centers, or attain the problem status now associated with

more developed countries. Many of these countries and develop-

ing urban centres exist in areas endemic to arthropod vector

borne diseases such as malaria, dengue, encephalitis, yellow fe-

ver, and plague the importance of urban and medical entomology

in tropical urban centers will increase in the future.

The urban environment in NCT Delhi is a complex of

habitats developed by human from natural sites. Houses, villages,

towns, cities, buildings, roads and other features that characterize

the urban environment in Delhi have gradually and irrecoverably

changed the landscape of natural and agricultural areas. As a part

144

of this change, some habitats and their associated plants and

animal communities were eliminated, while others were expanded

and new ones were created. Many of the new habitats were

intentional - parks, waterways, street trees, turf grass, food stores

but some were consequential- standing water in road side ditches,

garbage and landfill sites near residential neighbourhoods, the

underground sewer and storm drain network in urban and

suburban areas of Delhi. They all provided habitats for a select

group of insects and other arthropods, some of which attained

pest status.

Local conditions, climate, and available resources deter-

mine the distribution of some arthropods in the urban environ-

ment of Delhi, and for some species their abundance is limited.

Other species are broadly adapted to the resources and harbor-

ages in and around buildings, and these are cosmopolitan in their

distribution and pest status. Stable habitats with resources and

conditions suitable for long-term survival support reservoir popu-

lations of pest species, and from these habitats individuals or

groups move or are transported to establish infestations in

unstable or temporary habitats.

PERIDOMESTIC AND DOMESTIC HABITATS :

Within and around buildings, houses, and other urban struc-

tures are habitats that support individuals or populations of plants

and animals. Peridomestic habitats are outside, around the pe-

145

rimeter of structures. They include the external surfaces of

buildings, the ornamental trees, shrubs, and turf grass that

characterize the urban and suburban landscape. Domestic

habitats are indoors and include the plant and animal based

materials in this controlled, anthropogenic environment.

PERIDOMESTIC :

Harborage substrates, food resources, and environmental

conditions of urban landscapes of Delhi generally support a large

numbers. The soil-inhabiting and nesting arthropods in this envi-

ronment include ants that forage indoors and termites that damage

structural wood, ground nest bees and wasps, and occasional or

nuisance pests such as clover mites, millipedes, centipedes, and

springtails. Plant-feeding insects utilize the cultivated urban and

suburban trees and shrubs, and many are aesthetic pests. Blood

feeding mites (chiggers), ticks, mosquitoes and other biting flies

are associated with domestic and feral vertebrates. Species

utilizing building surfaces or perimeter substrates include the

umbrella wasp, hornets, yellow jackets, spiders and scorpions.

Underground sewer and storm drainage pipes provide some

cockroach and rodent species access to urban areas. The garbage

disposal network of collection, sorting, and landfill in Delhi

provide harborage and food for cockroaches, flies, rodents, and

pest birds.

Reservoir populations for many of the pest species estab-

lished in peridomestic habitats are in nearby natural or undis-

146

turbed areas. Woodland tracts and other small or large patches of

green space can support populations of biting flies, wasps and

hornets, ticks, and spiders in Delhi. Here are the populations that

provide the individuals or groups that establish or replenish

infestations in less stable habitats, or re-establish populations

lost to habitat destruction.

DOMESTIC :

Environmental conditions in NCT Delhi indoors are

generally stable and the harborages and food resources are some-

what limited. There may be few species, but those adapted to

specialized resources often occur in large numbers. Stored food,

including packaged whole food and vegetables, organic fabrics

and other materials are the most common harborates and food

resources in the domestic habitat. Directly or indirectly associ-

ated with these are dermestid beetles, flour beetles and moths,

flies and cockroaches. The distribution of domestic products and

similar storage environments has contributed to the cosmopolitan

pest status of many of these insects, in both residential and com-

mercial sites in Delhi. Blood and skin feeding species that breed

indoors are limited, but lice, fleas, bed bugs and mites are medi-

cally important pests for more than one socio-economic level of

society. Insects and other arthropods in the living space are

nuisance pest when they are few and their presence brief, but are

not tolerated when they pose a health treat or persist in large

numbers.

147

Natural habitats and populations for some domestic

species, especially those infesting sored food have been lost. Only

populations in the urban environment in NCT Delhi represent

many of these species or they survive only through their link to

humans (bed bugs, lice). Other indoor pests have reservoir popu-

lations in peridomestic and natural areas. Many of the common

species occur in the nests of bird and rodents and from there

have access to indoor habitats.

INSECT DISPERSAL AND DISTRIBUTION :

International transportation, economic exchange, and

globalization have brought a degree of uniformity to the urban

area around the world, and increased the movement and exchange

of arthropods. The majorities of household and store food pests,

including fruit flies, cockroaches, flour beetles, moths and mites,

have moved with infested commercial goods and now have

cosmopolitan distribution. Peridomestic mosquitoes, subterranean

termites and wood-infesting beetles share the same potential for

widespread distribution. Current distribution records for many

household and structural pests are subject to change with increased

movement of people and materials around the world.

Information on pest identification, biology and habits,

compiled on an international basis, is appropriate for the urban

environment. A global census indicates that nearly 2300 insects

and other arthropods have some level of pest status around the

148

world. Some are only occasional invaders of houses and other

buildings, some are closely associated with the foods, fabrics,

and other aspects of dwellings and others are linked to plants and

animals in domestic and peridomestic habitats. Many of these

species are capable of adapting to the soil conditions, climate

and building construction in other regions of the world, and

becoming established in pest populations. Regional conditions

may after some behaviors, but morphological features and the

basic life cycle will remain unchanged and control strategies are

usually transferable from region to region.

URBAN ECOSYSTEM :

Major ecosystems can be broadly classified as natural,

agricultural and urban. Urban ecosystems are primitive sites where

the interacting plant and animal communities have not been

altered by human activity. There are few, if these in the world

today, and a more practical definition of natural ecosystems might

be undisturbed habitats that have had limited human influence

and retain a portion of their original flora and fauna. An impor-

tant feature of these habitats is the populations of native plants

and animals. These are the reservoir populations of many

species that have adapted to agricultural and urban conditions.

Agricultural and urban ecosystems are defined by their use and

the degree to which their biotic and abiotic features have been

altered by human activity. These ecosystems contain few of the

features that characterize their natural origins; many of the

149

features were built or brought there, or designed by humans.

(B) URBAN SLUMS :

Delhi, capital of India, is home to about 3 million people

living in slums and it is estimated that 45% of its population lives

in unauthorized colonies, jhuggi jhompri (JJ) and urban villages.

As the UNHABITAT definition status a slum household is a group

of individuals living under the same roof in an urban area that

lack one of more of the following :

1. Durable housing of a permanent nature that protects against

extreme climate conditions.

2. Sufficient living space which means not more than three

people sharing the same roof.

3. Easy access to safe water in sufficient amounts at an

affordable price.

4. Access to adequate sanitation in the form of a private or

public toilet shared by a reasonable number of people.

5. Security of tenure that prevents forced evictions.

DEFINING THE ISSUE :

For the purpose of Census of India 2001, Slum areas broadly

constitute :

1. All specified areas notified as “slums” by state / local

government and UT administration under any act.

150

2. All areas recognized as “Slums” by State/local government

and UT administration, which may not have been formally

notified as slum under any act.

3. A compact area with a population of at least 300 or about

60-70 households of poorly built congested tenements, in

unhygienic environment usually with inadequate infrastruc-

ture and lacking in proper sanitation and drinking water

facilities.

The slum areas are those that are notified under the Slum

Improvement and Clearance Areas Act of 1956. Building and/or

areas that are considere to be unfit for human habitation may be

declared as the slum areas under section 3 of the act. As such,

they are considered to be legal structures and are eligible for

benefits under the act. The squatter or JJ cluster settlements on

the other hand are considered as encroachments on public and

private lands. They are, therefore, seen as illegal settlements.

According to the United Nations, the proportion of urban

dwellers living in slums decreased from 47 percent to 37 percent

in the developing world between 1990 and 2005. However, due

to rising population, the number of slum dwellers is rising. One

billion people worldwide live in slums and the figure will likely

to grow to 2 billion by 2030.

As India is urbanizing very fast and along with this, the

slum population is also increasing. India’s urban population is

151

increasing at a faster rate than its total population. With over 575

million people, India will have 41% of its population living in

cities and towns by 2030 from the present level of 286 million

and 28%. However, most of them do not have access to basic

facilities like drinking water and sanitation.

Because of the lack at affordable prices to different

categories of residents, various types of unplanned settlements

have come up in Delhi. According to an estimate, the population

residing in different types of settlements in 2006 was as shown in

Figure - 5.1.

Among the urban poor, the slum dwellers are the poorest.

The very definition of slums points at the acute drinking water

and sanitation crisis for the slum dwellers. A slum in India is

defined as “a cluster inside urban areas without having water and

sanitation access.”

The National Sample Survey Organization Survey conducted

in 2002 found that in 84% of the notified slums the main water

Figure - 5.1

152

source is through tap water supply. But these numbers mask

differences across the states of India. In Bihar none of the slums

get water via the tap.

In Chhattisgarh, Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh less than 35%

of slums get tap water. Nearly 44% of non-notified slums do not

have a drainage system of any type whereas only 15% of notified

slums do not have a drainage system.

A similar picture emerges in the case of latrines. Nearly

half of the non-notified slums do not have a latrine of any type. In

contrast only 17% of notified slums do not have a latrine. How-

ever, the past few years have seen significant improvements in

water and sanitation situation in slums. But, that is not a source of

solace as there is still a vast number of slum dweller to be

provided these basic facilities.

CHARACTERIZING LIFE IN SLUMS :

While studying and assessing the feasibility of any policy

it is imperative that there are certain parameters that would help

breakdown the objectives of the policies. Each of these schemes

must be compared with the current situation for slum dwellers

since from their perspective the next best option is starting a new

slum and living in the same conditions as before and thus, the

aforementioned conditions remain. Benchmarks and weightings

to these parameters must also be set before comparison of the

policy objectives so that the methodology is clear. To clearly

153

identify these parameters an understanding of the current situa-

tion and of life as slums dwellers is required. This situation can

be categorized into physical, legal, social, political and economic

characteristics of living in slums as shown in the Figure 5.2.

As can be seen, the physical characteristics of slum life

include shelter but lack a permanent residence, a house and most

of the times even space. The average population density in a shanty

town in Delhi is 3,00,000 people per square kilometer and an

average dwelling houses 6-8 people, yet measures only 6 ft. by 8

ft. Many slums have no latrine facilities, and those that do have

an average of 1 latrine serving 27 households. 1 water pump is

used by 1000 people on average and more often than not water

flows through these pumps only once a day. These low hygiene

and sanitation facilities lead to unhealthy living conditions in the

slums. This, along with illegally high rates for electricity makes

every basic need for slum dwellers is the close proximity of the

slums to most of the resident’s places of work, thus negating

transport costs or reducing it due to convenient transport stations

close by.

Moving onto the economic characteristics, we discuss prob-

ably the main reason for the existence of slums. As mentioned,

people migrate to Delhi from surrounding areas in an attempt to

find employment and improve their own and the lives of their

families. Many a time, these laborers come from their villages on

a contract but end up staying on in Delhi looking to find more

154

work here rather than in their village. Another common case is

that of those who open their own shop or work station in the slum

and operate out of there, such as the local “dhobi” (laundry man)

or tailor. Also because of lack of useable capital many of these

ventures are remain extremely small scale. From the legal aspect,

most of the slums in Delhi are unauthorized i.e. not recognized

and therefore still an illegal encroachment on state land. Because

of this, there is no security of tenure and hardly any dwellers

invest in their houses. Also, in the case that a slum is partially

recognized by the government, i.e. cases when residents before a

certain date are recognized as licensed owners of the land, there

are many hurdles to be faced by the slum dwellers before they

are finally established owners.

For social characteristics, the fact that there are many fairly

good and affordable schools is an important consideration along

with the scene of community and companionship within the slums.

And lastly, the slum dwellers, because of their large numbers,

are eyed by politicians as vote banks where they make many

promises but no one holds them to it.

POVERTY PROFILE OF DELHI :

The Planning Commission estimates the proportion and

number of poor based on the projection of minimum needs and

effective consumption. Such a projection is based on the norm of

2100 calorie per capita per day consumption for an urban area.

155

The calorie norms are invariably expressed in monetary terms

that change with respect to weighted commodity indices of the

consumer price index.

Figure 5.3 shows that the percentage of people below

poverty line (BPL) stood at 52.23% for Delhi in 1973-74. The

figure has been declining steadily to 27.89% in 1983; 16.03 in

1993-94. The percentage of people below poverty line declined

to 10.02% in 2001. Table 5.1 presents the zone wise BPL

population.

TABLE - 5.1

BELOW POVERTY LINE POPULATION

Year Rural BPL %age to Urban BPL %age topopulation Total population Total(in Lakh) (in Lakh)

1973 1.06 24.44 21.78 52.23 1983 0.44 7.66 17.95 27.89 1987 0.10 1.29 10.15 13.56 1993 0.19 1.19 15.32 16.03 2001 0.07 0.40 11.42 9.42

Source : Economic Survey Report, Govt. of Delhi, Delhi.

Figure 5.3

156

SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE OF POOR :

The socio-economic profile of segment of population

categorized as poor is of strategic importance for both planning

purposes, and for managing the habitat and its environmental

up-gradation and improvement.

However, comprehensive data is not available for the whole

of Delhi, although generalization can be made on the following

parameters based on data available from the few available sur-

veys and studies. It is important to keep in perspective however

that inhabitants of LIG/ EWS areas are not homogenous segment.

(a) Income and Expenditure :

The average total monthly income, per household, ranges

from Rs. 1500-2500 among the poor. The expenditure of these

families is around 5-10% more than their incomes. The per capita

monthly income and expenditure is Rs. 245 & Rs. 423 respec-

tively. Poor households, therefore, are increasingly dependent upon

loans from the local moneylenders. The monthly income of around

25-30% households is above Rs. 1500 and around 45-50% house

holds is below Rs. 1000.

(b) Access to Housing :

Housing is a basic need of the poor. Most of the poor do

not have access to secure land tenure. 85% of the poor are squat-

ters, and are vulnerable to frequent eviction. 6% of the poor live

in rented accommodation and have to pay a substantial portion of

157

their income for rent. Most importantly, such rental quarters do

not have even basic infrastructure facilities. The quality of life

led by these people is extremely poor.

(c) Occupation Profile of Poor :

41% of these families work as casual laborers, as most of

them are unskilled. However, one-third of the poor also work in

the service sector and only 20-25% is self-employed. Therefore,

nearly 52% of the poor households do not have access to a

dependable occupation and secure incomes.

(d) Migration Status and Poor :

The employment opportunities (formal and informal) in

Delhi have attracted migrants from all over the country, particu-

larly from the backward state areas due to regional economic

imbalances. In 1961 the annual migration of low income house-

holds into Delhi were estimated to be around 70,000 and that

number has increased every year making it close to an approxi-

mate net addition of around 4 lakh settlers every year, migrating

from various parts of the country in search of livelihood. This

influx of population has resulted in an increased population of

city, pressure on civic amenities, crime, social imbalances, eco-

nomic exploitation, unplanned growth, deterioration of the city

beautification, culture etc.

(e) Access to Infrastructure :

The infrastructure facilities that have been covered are water

158

and sources of energy for the urban poor. A majority of the poor

families (47%) have access to water from community sources.

16% of the families do not have any definite source of water.

With respect to source of light, nearly 30% of the families depend

on kerosene lamps.

(f) Pavement Dwellers :

Around 1 lakh homeless people constitute another

component of the poor in Delhi. They are mostly found in the

Walled City or its surrounding areas and generally sleep on the

pavements. There are around 10 night shelters located at Azadpur,

Subzi Mandi, Paharganj, Jhandewalan, Red Fort, Old Delhi

Railway Station, Azad Market and Roshanara Road. The night

shelters operated by MCD provide accommodation to only male

dwellers.

SHELTER OPTIONS :

The poor typically inhabit unplanned or semi-planned

developments. In Delhi they are classified as :

(a) Notified slums in old walled city area;

(b) Resettlement colonies;

(c) Relocated JJ clusters or squatter settlements.

The section below describe the characteristics of these

areas.

THE OLD WALLED CITY AREA :

In Delhi, areas designated or notified as slums under the

159

act are generally located in the walled city and its adjoining

environs. There are 319 katras in the walled city area with about

3,000 buildings or properties. Out of these, 365 properties have

been identified as dangerous and therefore require resettlement

of inhabitants. In addition, there are 400 properties, which are

with the Evacuee Property Cell of Land and Building Department

of Delhi Government.

SQUATTER SETTLEMENTS/ JJ CLUSTERS :

The squatter settlements are encroachments on mainly

public land. As such these are illegal clusters (JCs) and are

devoid of any legal entitlements. However, efforts have been made

by the government to extend basic social and environmental

services to them.

LOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF JJ CLUSTERS :

JJ clusters are scattered all over the city. Generally they

are situated on the vacant land along railway lines, roads, drains

and river embankments and also vacant spaces near residential,

industrial and commercial complexes.

Figure 5.4

160

Figure 5.4 shows that around 55 percent of squatters are

near the residential areas and 40% along the road berms as also

shown in the complete picture in Table 5.2.

TABLE - 5.2

AREAWISE STATUS OF JJ CLUSTERS IN DELHI

Areas with Number of squatters %age to total encroachment Residential Areas 34100 55.86 Road Berms 24184 39.62 Park and open spaces 966 1.58 Schools 500 0.82 Market 1093 1.79 Railway Station 200 0.33 TOTAL 61043 100.00

Source : Sabir Ali, Environment Scenario of Delhi Slums, Centre for social Develop

ment Studies - 1998.

It is clear from Table 5.3 that around 70% of clusters have

less than 500 JJ’s. This percentage has remained constant from

1991-2001. The sharp decline in number of JJ clusters (1994-

2001) is attributed to large scale relocation of JJs since 1999.

TABLE - 5.3

SIZE WISE DISTRIBUTION OF JJ CLUSTERS

No. of JJ in 1991 1994 2001 clusters Upto 100 496 396 227 1119 101-500 311 446 295 1052 501-1000 59 121 110 290 1001-1500 30 54 37 121 1500 & above 33 63 59 155Source : (i) Slum Department, MCD Delhi; (ii) Status Report for Delhi-21, Delhi Urban

Environment and Infrastructure Improvement Project (DUEIIP), January 2001.

161

Figure 5.5 shows the size-wise distribution of JJclusters

in NCT Delhi in 2001.

AREAS WITH CONCENTRATION OF JJ CLUSTERS :

The spread of JJ clusters ranges from a plot of 0.4 acres with 8

JJs to JJcs as large as 50 acres with 10,000 households & 45000

populations. The average number of JJ per acre comes to 200

with 193 being the lowest (Najafgarh area) and 206 the highest

(Gole Market and Kalkaji areas) (Refer to Map 5.1). The

average area of JJ is 20m2. Some of the major areas with such

concentrations are given below :

(i) HIGH CONCENTRATION :

(a) Minto Road/ Gole Market/ Matia Mahal (129 clusters, 43388

JJs, 215.08 Acres) - NDMC Area.

(b) Badarpur/ Tuglaqabad/ Saket (79 clusters, 64187 JJs, 79 Acres)-

MCD area.

Figure 5.5

162

(c) Moti Nagar/ Patel Nagar/ Rajendra Nagar (72 clusters, 35,427

JJs, 175.45 Acres) - MCD Area.

(d) Jahangirpuri/ Adarsh Nagar/ Model Town/ Wazirpur (117 clus-

ters, 71538 JJs, 356 Acres) - MCD Area.

(e) Badli/ Shahbad-Daulatpur (21 clusters, 27551 JJs, 137.70 Acres)-

MCD Area.

(ii) MEDIUM CONCENTRATION :

(a) Delhi Cantonment/ Janakpuri/ Tilak Marg (17 clusters, 18,982

JJs, 95.03 Acres) - MCD Area.

(b) Biswas Nagar/ Shahdara/ Babarpur (44 clusters, 18,915 JJs, 88.91

Acres) - MCD Area.

(c) Hauzkhas. R.K. Puram (52 clusters, 14,110 JJs, 70.22 acres) -

NDMC Area.

(iii) LOW CONCENTRATION :

(a) Nazafgarh/ Nasirpur/ Palam (11 clusters, 363 JJs, 1.83 Acres) -

MCD Area.

(b) Sarojini Nagar/ Kalkaji/ Malviya Nagar/ Ambedkar Nagar/

Kasturba Marg (45 clusters, 11,802 JJs, 68.42 Acres) - NDMC

Area.

GROWTH OF SQUATTER SETTLEMENTS :

The squatter settlements or Jhuggi jhopari clusters (JJC)

assume strategic importance as far as issues of unorganized settle-

163

ments are concerned. As mentioned in Table - 5.4 in 1951 Delhi

had 12,749 jhuggi jhoparis (JJS) scattered over 199 clusters. By

1973 the number of JJS had reached 98,483 spread over 1373

clusters. The resettlement scheme pursued in 1962-77, with a

concentrated effort in 1975-77 resulted in the resettlement of 2.4

lakh JJS in different parts of Delhi. In 1977 only 20,000 JJ house-

holds had gone upto 1.13 lakhs. In 2001 the JJ clusters had declined

to (729 from 1080 in 1994) due to relocation of around 300

clusters from Gautampuri, Kingsway Camp, Ashok Vihar, AIIMS

and Hauz Khas etc.

TABLE - 5(4)

YEARWISE STATUS OF JJ CLUSTERS IN DELHI

Year JJ Clusters Jhuggi Area in PopulationHHS HA

1951 199 12749 21.1 63745

1973 1373 98483 164.1 492415

1983 534 113000 188.3 565000

1990 929 259000 431.7 1295000

1997 1100 600000 902.1 3000000

2001 728 429662 650.2 2148310

Source : Slum Deptt., Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi.

LAND OWNING AGENCIES AND JJ CLUSTERS :

The land owning agencies in whose area the JJ clusters are

situated are given in Table 5.5. Eighty three percent of DDA land

is squatted on by 600 JJ clusters.

164

TABLE - 5.5

LAND OWNING AGENCIES & JJ CLUSTERS

LO Agencies NO. of Jhuggies Population Area in Acres1990 1994 1994

DDA 280988 349705 1856683 1865.93

L&Do 21530 29415 132327 149.86

Railway 12161 17346 78929 84.34

MCD 8428 11052 52045 47.29

NDMC 3226 4487 20182 22.52

Gram Sabha 4132 4360 19619 21.31

Cantonment 1570 1700 7064 7.86 Board

Source : Status Report for Delhi- 21 Delhi Urban Environment

and infrastructure Improvement Project (DUEIIP), January 2001

ACCESS TO INFRASTRUCTURE IN SLUMS/ JJ CLUSTERS:

Water and sanitation facilities, in these unorganized

colonies, particularly JJ clusters, are poor. Only 21% of colonies

are covered with piped water supply and 10% are covered by

sanitation. Table 5.6 presents a satisfactory level of infrastruc-

ture availability in unplanned settlements, but these facilities are

non- functional in around 75-80% of the settlements. The average

population served by one PSP ranges from 250-300 against the

standard of 150. Moreover, average waiting at PSP is 20-30

minutes. Around 85-90% of JJ clusters did not have even

community toilets, forcing habitants to defecate in the open near

the water bodies or drainage channels.

165

TABLE - 5.6

WATER AND SANITATION STATUS IN THEUNPLANNED SETTLEMENTS (2004)

Service provision in Piped water supply Sewer facility unplanned settlement No. % of colonies No. % of colonies

Regularized 557 98.2 458 80.7 unauthorized colonies

Resettlement colonies 44 100.0 44 100.0

JJ Clusters 158 21.7 72 9.8

Source : Slum Department, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi.

RESETTLEMENT COLONIES :

Under the schemes for resettlement of JJ clusters 47

resettlement colonies were developed during 1961-77. Around

2.0 lakh plots were developed accommodating about 2.4 lakh

households. These resettlement colonies have degenerated due to

intense population pressure and unorganized development. There-

fore investment towards up-gradation of physical infrastructure

has to be made for improving civic life.

LOCATION OF RESETTLEMENT COLONIES :

The spatial distribution of these colonies indicates that they

are proliferating mainly in the South-East, North-East, North-West,

South-West and Central parts of the NCT of Delhi. These are five

colonies in South-East, eight in North-East, fifteen in North-West,

seven in South-West and twelve in Central Delhi.

166

RELOCATION SITES :

The Map 5.2 shows that there are around 12 relocation

sites as Bhalaswa, Holambi Kalan, Pappan Kalan, Rohini, Narela,

Bakanwar, Madanpur Khadar etc. The most recent relocation has

been made to three principal sites. These are Dwarka (known

also as Pappan Kalan), Rohini, Narela and Savda Ghevara. The

main pockets from where JJ clusters were relocated are Central,

South and East Delhi areas. Thus, during 1999-2000, 3741 squat-

ter households from the JJ clusters at CGO Complex, Chankyapuri,

Kotla Mubarakpur, Andrews Ganj, Sadiq Nagar, Mahaki Sarai,

Shahdara were moved to Narela and Rohini. 27.4 acres of land

has been allotted at Molar Band for shifting of the JJ clusters at

Gautam Nagar behind AIIMS as shown in Map 5.3. In 1997-98,

DDA allocated 32 acres of land in Tehkhand Village for reloca-

tion of squatter families.

These relocation resettlement sites offer no security of

tenure to habitants who begin a new life without security, basic

services, schools and other basic amenities.

SLUM DEVELOPMENT POLICIES IN PLACE :

While evaluating the policies affecting housing for slum

dwellers we take a top down approach by first giving a brief

overview of the National Housing Policy 2007, and laid out for

Delhi’s slums by various authorities.

167

(i) NATIONAL URBAN HOUSING AND HABITAT POLICY 2007:

The National Urban Housing and Habitat Policy 2007 states

its goal as ‘affordable housing for all’ in the country. It promotes

various types of Public Private Partnerships and pays special

emphasis on the urban poor, intending to promote sustainable

development of housing in the country with a view to ensuring

equitable supply of land, shelter and services at affordable prices

to all sections of society. The policy focused on multiple stake-

holders the private sector, the cooperative sector, the industrial

sector for labor housing and the services and institutional sector

for employee housing. To attain the overarching goal of afforable

housing for all, emphasis is laid on urban planning, increasing

supply of land and use of spatial incentives like additional floor

area ratio (FAR), transferable development rights, and increased

flow of funds, effective solid waste management and use of

renewal sources of energy. Encouraging integrated townships and

special economic zones (SEZs), the policy calls for reservation

of 10-15 percent land in every new public and private housing

projects or 20-25 percent FAR whichever is greater to for EWS

and LIG housing through appropriate spatial incentives.

The private sector would be permitted assembling land

within the purview of master plans. The policy also sets action

plans for urban slum dwellers with a special package being

prepared for cooperative housing, labor housing and employees

housing. The primary choice would be to give provision of shelter

168

to urban poor at their present location or near their work place.

The role of housing and provision of basic services to the

urban poor has been integrated into the objectives of the Jawaharlal

Nehru Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM).

(ii) BASIC SERVICES TO THE URBAN POOR, JNNURM :

The Sub Mission II of the JNNURM involves Basic

Services to the Urban Poor (BSUP) including the integrated

housing and slum development programme. The objectives of the

mission are outlined as :

1. Focused attention to integrated development of Basic Services to

the urban poor in the cities covered under the mission.

2. Provision of Basic Services to Urban Poor including security of

tenure at affordable prices, improved housing, water supply,

sanitation and ensuring delivery through convergence of other

already existing universal services of the Government for Educa-

tion, health and social security care will be taken to see that the

urban poor are provided housing near their place of occupation.

3. Secure effective linkages between asset creation and asset man-

agement to that the Basic Services to the Urban Poor created in

the cities are not only maintained efficiently but also become self-

sustaining over time.

4. Ensure adequate investment of funds to fulfill deficiencies in the

Basic Services to the Urban Poor.

169

5. Scale up delivery of civic amenities and provision of utilities

with emphasis on universal access to urban poor.

The Delhi Master Plan 2021 has laid emphasis on improve-

ment of the living conditions of the 45% of Delhities living in

slums and JJ clusters in the next ten years as part of the improve-

ment in the livability of the city for its inhabitants.

(iii) THREE PRONGED APPROACH IN DELHI :

Of the settlements considered as sub-standard slum and

squatter settlements rank among the worst and it is the urban poor

that live predominantly in such settlements. The program of

squatter clearance was discontinued at the end of sixth plan (from

1985). Accordingly no major settlement program was carried out

until 1992 when a Revised Resettlement Policy was formulated

by the DDA. This did not mean that there were no resettlement

works in progress. The general policy adopted by the govern-

ment since then it twofold. One is that no fresh encroachments

shall be permitted on public land and the second is that past

encroachments (those in existence till 30.01.1990) would not be

removed without providing alternatives.

Squatter settlements are to be found throughout the city but

especially on the vacant land along railway lines, roads, drains,

river embankments, and around resettlement colonies. The strat-

egy of the government towards slums/ squatter settlements has

been mainly of clearance.

170

In recent years, however, there have been some changes in

the attitude and strategies. Since 1991 three strategies have been

used in Delhi, which are as follows :

1. Improvement of the slum environment.

2. Relocation of the slums

3. In situ-up-gradation and rehabilitation.

(iv) IMPROVEMENT OF THE SLUM ENVIRONMENT :

Since 1987, in JJ clusters and notified slums which are not

being relocated or developed with the in situ approach, basic

urban services and amenities are being provided under ‘Envi-

ronmental improvement in urban slum scheme’. The facilities are

extended to all JJ clusters even those that developed after 1990.

The facilities being provided under the scheme are :

1. Pay and use Jan Suvidha Complexes containing toilets and bath-

rooms at the community level or the provision of mobile toilet,

vans in all those JJ clusters where the Jan Suvidha Complex can

not be provided.

2. Water supply either through water hydrants, hand pipes or water

tanker.

3. Street lighting.

4. Dusbins for collection of domestic waste.

5. Paved pathways and drains.

171

(v) RELOCATION OF SLUMS :

Jhuggi Jhopri resettlement, relocation scheme was started

in the Union Territory of Delhi for the rehousing of squatters on

government and private lands in 1960. The scheme began with

the allotment of two room tenements to 3,560 JJ households.

Subsequently, partially developed plots of 80 square yards were

allotted under the scheme to the squatters on a nominal rent.

However, due to demand of land in Delhi and the fact that the

allotment procedure was misused, size of plots was reduced to

40 square meters and then 25 square meters. Under the present

situation, Relocation is carried out for only those JJ clusters and

slums that are required by the land owning agency for public

interest projects.

Since the inception of the scheme with effect from 1990-

1991, so far about 70,000 plots have been developed and about

60,000 families have been rehabilitated at Dwarka, Rohini, Narela,

Bawana, Holambi, Molar Band, Madanpur Khaddar & Sawda

Ghevre keeping in view the scarcity of land in Delhi and as per

the directions of the Delhi Government and Government of India.

The Delhi Government has formulated a new policy for the

resettlement of squatter families in Delhi. Under the new policy,

Delhi Government has proposed to provide built up flats instead

of plots to the slum dwellers, economically weaker sections

under the Rajiv Awas Yojna, JNNURM. Under this scheme, the

Delhi Government aims to provide 4 lakh flats by 2012.

172

(vi) IN SITU UP-GRADATION AND REHABILITATION :

There has been a general shift in the approach to slum and

JJ clusters in recent years. The emphasis is now on the improve-

ment of the environment of the JJ cluster and their in situ rehabili-

tation wherever possible. The in situ up gradation is undertaken

after the area has been notified as a slum area under the Slum

Area Act of 1956. The scheme involves replanning of JJ dwell-

ing units in modified layout by redistributing the encroached land

pockets amongst the squatter families. The JJ households are given

sites of 10 to 12.5 square meters for construction of their own

shelters. The housing plots are generally designed in a cluster

around open courtyards. The beneficiary constructs the shelter

under a self help approach with technical extension services

provided by the slum and JJ department of the MCD. So far 5,583

families have been rehabilitated at Prayog Vihar, Ekta Vihar, Shanti

Vihar and Shahbad Daulatpur Phase I. The implementation of the

in situ- up-gradation is very poor due to non availability of the

Notice of Consent from the concerned land owning agency. A

new policy of in situ slum up grading also suggests, as in the case

of relocation, the provision of developed flats on the same

location instead of plots for the slum dwellers.

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) decided to take

up in situ development towards rehabilitation of slum dwelling

units of about 25 square meters will be about 47,500. These will

be taken up on public- private partnership model in which the

173

land occupied by slum dwellers will be made available to de-

velopers, who will construct houses in accordance with the num-

bers identified by the DDA. These houses will be constructed in

same parts of the area while in the remaining areas the developer

will be allowed to carry out commercial exploitation of the land.

This would enable the developer to spill over some of the costs

from building the rehabilitation units to the commercial activity,

thereby reducing the burden on the slum dwellers as well. This

mixed development allows them to get the cross subsidy by way

of targeting two different segments of society.

This model is being applied at the kathputli colony where

residents will have access to 12 storeyed buildings in which the

ground floors will be devoted to promoting artistic and commer-

cial enterprise since most of the residents are puppeteers, crafts-

men or musicians. The constructions will house 2,800 dwelling

units meant for the colony’s residents. The site will also boast of

a separate 2.1 acre commercial space to be developed by private

developers and “high-category residential apartmentments” in 2.4

acres which will help boost the earning of artisans and crafts-

men, according to the DDA’s plans.

In the scheme, modeled on Mumbai’s slum rehabilitation

programme, private players will join hands with the government

and the work of clearing the slums would proceed in phases.

Since residents will be resettled, tents will be pitched to provide

174

temporary accommodation to the people till the project is

completed.

(vii) DRAFT NATIONAL SLUM POLICY 2001 :

Another more specific, policy the “draft” National Slum

Policy is yet to be ratified by the government. The draft National

Slum Policy envisages cities without slums. Towards fulfillment

of this vision, the policy adopts an approach of in situ up gradation

and improvement. It recommends clearance only in exceptional

circumstances. It, therefore, talks of urban growth with equity

and justice and makes plea for greater participation of communi-

ties and civil society in all areas of planning, capacity building

and development. Correspondingly it proposes a series of

interventions with regards to definitions, tenure, planning,

economic empowerment, governance and management, shelter up

gradation etc.

The governing principal of the Draft National Slum Policy

are as follows :

1. The endorsement of an upgrading and improvement approach in

all slums, and the acceptance of the necessity of slum clearance

in an extremely defined circumstances.

2. Recognition that households in all urban informal settlements

should have access to certain basic minimum services, irrespec-

tive of land tenure or occupancy status.

175

3. The goal that planning in all cities should have the objective of

creating cities without slums.

4. The objective of ensuring that urban growth takes place with

equity and distributive justice.

5. The intention that urban local bodies should work in collabora-

tion with all other stakeholders to enhance the impact of slum

development through building the capacities of the poor and

empowering them to improve their own living conditions.

6. The adoption of a more “enabling” approach to the delivery of

basic social services to the poor as a result of more effective

mobilization of community resources and skills to complement

public resource allocations.

7. A greater participation of communities and civil society in all

areas of planning, capacity building and development.

The draft policy is however silent over the ways in which

such goals could be realized. Also, the definition of all under

served serviced lands as slums will hinder and deny the most

needy and vulnerable from having access to resources for up-

gradation and improvement.

POLICY COMPARISON :

A comparative study of these policies and schemes can now

be undertaken, based on the parameters discussed earlier. The

National Urban Housing and Habitat Policy 2007 seems to be a

176

step in the right direction, with focus on affordable housing,

public private partnerships (PPP), sustainable development of

housing in the country, special package being prepared for

cooperative housing, labor housing and employees housing and

prioritizing houses for the urban poor at their present location or

near their work place using the in- situ slum rehabilitation

approach. Using the parameters as tools for analysis we see that

with PPPs and the in situ rehabilitation approach, affordable

housing for slum dwellers at their present location is an option.

This enables them to earn their livelihood just as they did before,

in the slums. The security of tenure objective is also achieved

through the policy. Only the characteristics of housing provided

remains questionable. The quality of houses, its cost and the

allocation can be a hindrance to the residents. Sometimes the

costs are too high for them and at other times the quality of the

houses is compromised. Under the JNNURM, the improved quality

of housing is specifically included and allocation is said to be on

the basis of need (determined through income). As is the case

with both the relocation and the in situ rehabilitation policy, any

worker whose source of livelihood is within the slums (dhobi,

tailor etc.) might be compromised unless there is specific

mention of a workstation being supplied. Thus this would be a

violation of the first parameter and the people affected by this

would prefer to stay in some other slum again. This vary case

would be an important characteristic of the third approach of

177

improvement of the slum environment or up- gradation. The

livelihoods of the residents are maintained even though the slum,

not lacking basic facilities but still an unplanned part of the city,

still exists. The draft national slum policy outlines its objectives

but has not clearly defined how these objectives will be met and

therefore no analysis on the basis of parameters and incentives

for residents can be undertaken. Thus, as is the case with most of

the policies in India, each of these policies, schemes and

approaches looks impeccable on paper but the ground realities

of these projects are often very different from what is claimed

and therefore it is necessary that a follow up mechanism be

incorporated into each of the policies to ensure their efficiency.

(C) URBAN GARBAGE GROUNDS :

Various human processes produce waste. Disposing waste

products is major global problem since last many decades.

Landfill is considered as the primitive way to organized waste

dumping in various parts of earth. It is a method of removing the

refuse on land without creating a hazard to public health or safety.

Landfills may consist of domestic waste dumping sites as well as

sites utilized by several manufacturers. This method is also

adopted for other waste management tasks for example the

momentary storage, consolidation and relocation, or meting out

of waste substance such as sorting, treatment, or recycling. The

landfill is supportive process of waste diminution and has a key

role in resource revival. A landfill also denotes the practice in

178

which ground has been packed in with soil and rocks as an alter-

native of garbage which solves many important purposes such as

for building construction.

Landfill is emerged as the most practicable ecological

substitute for the specific waste removal in various countries.

Today government priority is to set up a waste policy by

applying the ideology in order to deal with environmental risks,

the economic and health dangers of resource degradation. These

strategies are basically planned to maintain landfill practices

which will stabilize the landfill sites in present generation. The

main intent of waste organization is to deal with the garbage

produced by existing generation and do not switch over waste

related harms to next generation. The Landfill Directive is

committed to raise standards and lessen harmful consequences

on the surroundings, groundwater, surface waters, soil, and

restrictions on the universal impact of waste dumping. For

commercial purpose, a landfill technique must meet definite

requirements, which are linked to many important factors. The

first factor is the location. Landfill must have easy access to

transportation via road. It must have stability such as fundamen-

tal geology, earthquake faults, water table. Another factor is

capacity. The existing annulled space must be planned by assess-

ment of the landform with a proposed re-establishment profile.

This computation of capacity is based on density of the wastes,

amount of intermediate and daily cover, and amount of settle-

179

ment. Landfill must have protection of soil and water through

installation of inside layer and collection systems. To handle speci-

fied harmless waste landfills such method must be applied through

which the trash are cramped to small area, compressed to decrease

their quantity, enclosed with layers of soil. Completely lined

landfills reinstate the previous one, unlined deposits that were

earlier used. In the operation of landfill, the garbage collection

trucks are weighed at entrance and their load is checked for wastes.

Then, these vehicles drop their load. After loads are dumped,

compactors or dozers spread and compressed the waste on the

operational field. This flattened waste is enclosed with soil

every day. Other waste wrap materials are sprayed on froth

products and transitory mantles. These mantles can be elevated

into place with tracked excavators and then detatched the next

day proceeding to waste placement. Chipped wood and chemi-

cally ‘fixed’ bio-solids are the substitute cover. Since the 20th

century, population is exploding speedily in developed areas; it

is a need of an hour to implement land reprocesses tractics for

completed landfills. The common usages are parks, golf courses.

Office buildings and industrial uses are made of a completed

landfill. Many steps are taken to disperse garbage produced

through communities, Industry and other establishments. At the

end of 20th century, different methods to waste removal to land-

fill and burning have started. The apparent substitutes to landfills

are waste reduction and recycling policies. Incineration is the

180

most effectual technique of plummeting volume and weight of

solid waste by burning in a well designed furnace.

Landfill reclamation is one of the control measures to check

spoilage of landscape. It is the burning of landfill garbage at high

temperature via the plasma-arc gasification procedure. Another

important way to deal with solid waste is composing by which

the organic components of solid waste are biologically decom-

posed under controlled aerobic conditions. In this method,

plastics, rubber and leather are separated from the solid waste

and the remaining organic matter is decomposed aerobically or

an aerobically to end product called compost. Anaerobic

digestion, mechanical biological treatment, pyrolysis and gasifi-

cation have all started to establish themselves in the marketplace.

Optional waste disposal technology is quite expensive than

landfill and mass burn incineration is the sole technology for mixed

waste. India is working to develop clean energy sources that can

yield considerable economic, environmental and health benefits

for people. Methane emissions from the solid waste sector in

India are projected to increase significantly over the next 15 years.

Reusing landfill methane gas for energy purposes has the poten-

tial to mitigate 5.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equiva-

lents, which is equal to the annual emissions from one million

vehicles. Currently, there are no operational landfill gas-to-

energy projects in India but several large sites in Delhi, Mumbai

and other cities could support the clean energy projects.

181

Basically, a landfill is a large area of land or an excavated

site that is a carefully designed structure built into or on top of the

ground. The rubbish collected at the landfill is isolated from the

surrounding environment with a bottom liner and a daily cover-

ing of soil. Though the modern landfill practices are technically

sound but still these proven techniques sometimes fail to meet

challenges. These practices require further precision to secure

public areas. Appropriate removal practices should be adopted

to control environmental contamination. These practices include-

All loads must be alienated when unloading in selected area.

Domestic refuse and small things should be kept in the dustbin.

Removal should be permitted exterior the landfill entrance and

video watch is carried out.

SOLID WASTE GENERATION IN NCT DELHI :

The problem of solid waste management in Delhi is as-

suming serious proportions due to increasing population, urban-

ization, changing lifestyles and consumption patterns. There are

24 existing landfill sites for waste management in NCT Delhi

from 16 are filled up, 4 are in operation and other 4 are newly

operated as shown in Map 5.4. The garbage from unauthorized

developments, slums, JJ settlements, etc. is not collected which

further adds to the environmental degradation. The projected

average garbage generation upto the year 2021 is @ 0.68 kg. per

capita per day and total quantum of solid waste is 15750 tonnes/

day as given in Table - 5.7.

182

TABLE - 5.7

QUANTUM OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE(TONNES / DAY)

Local body area Existing Capacity Projected generation

2001 for 2021

MCD 5250 15100

NDMC 245 550

Cantonment 48 100

TOTAL 5543 15750

Management of solid waste involves waste generation,

segregation and storage; waste collection; waste transfer/ trans-

portation treatment, recycle reuse, recovery; and disposal. For

effective waste management, its segregation at the community and

neighbourhood level is imperative. The waste shall be segre-

gated and collected, in separate chambers at dalaos. For this,

involvement of rag pickers with RWAs, CBOs and NGOs is to be

encouraged.

The projected composition of municipal waste for the plan

period is estimated as given in table - 5.8 for biodegradable and

recyclable waste which is segregated at the source, decentral-

ized treatment at neighbourhood level may be adopted, while for

silt, centralized treatment may be followed.

The other type of specialized waste includes biomedical

waste; hazardous waste from industries; construction debris and

fly ash; meat processing centre etc. Disposal of bio-medical waste

183

is to be as per bio-medical waste rules and hazardous waste

requires special handling rules. Proper dumping, recycling and

reuse of construction debris and fly ash have to be linked. Meat

processing centre waste is to be recycled for chicken feed etc.

TABLE - 5.8

PROJECTED COMPOSITION OFTOTAL MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE FOR 2021

Constituents Quantum (in tons) Percentage to totalwaste

Bio- degradable 6000 38

Silt 6000 38

Recyclable 3750 24

TOTAL 15750 100

Notes :(i) Above figures are based on Report on Solid Waste Management in Delhi

conducted by NEERI, Nagpur through DDA;(ii) Figures of MCD are based on Feasibility study in Master Plan for optimal

waste Treatment & Disposal for the entire state of Delhi, June, 2004, by COWIConsultants appointed by MCD.

Considering the nature of solid waste and the economic

aspects of its disposal, major part of solid waste especially silt

has to be disposed off in sanitary landfills. But wherever recy-

cling is possible, it should be preferred than disposing off the

waste in sanitary landfill sites. More viable alternatives to land-

fills are vermiculture, fossilization, composting etc. Waste Mini-

mization Circles (WMCs) should be constituted and made effec-

tive. Implementation and monitoring & Bio-Medical Wastes (Han-

dling & Management) Rules, 1998, for hospitals, nursing homes,

184

and clinics should be taken up. The sites, which are filled up or

are in operation, given in Table - 5.9. The filled up sites may be

reuse for plantation or as recreational area. The proposed sites

for sanitary landfill and compost plants are to be finalized by

MCD. The Map 5.5 shows the area of existing and proposed

landfill sites.

Keeping in view the fact that finding new sanitary landfill

sites in Delhi is becoming extremely difficult there is no option,

as shown by the Map 5.5 & 5.6 but to resort to alternative and

decentralized methods of waste treatment, reduction, recycle and

use, which include vermiculture, fossilization and composting.

TABLE - 5.9

EXISTING LANDFILL SITES FORWASTE MANAGEMENT

S.N. Location Area (in ha.) Remarks

1. Kailash Nagar, East Delhi 1.8 Filled up

2. Tilak Nagar 16.0 Filled up

3. Subroto Park - Filled up

4. Purana Quila/ Bharion Road 2.7 Filled up

5. Timar Pur 16.0 Filled up

6. Sarai Kale Khan 24.0 Filled up

7. Gopal Pur 4.0 Filled up

8. Chhater Pur 1.7 Filled up

9. S.G.T. Nagar 14.4 Filled up

10. I.P. Depot 1.8 Filled up

11. Sunder Nagar 2.8 Filled up

12. Tuglakabad Ext. 2.4 Filled up

185

13. Haiderpur 1.6 Filled up

14. Mandawali Fazilpur 2.8 --

15. Rohini Phase III 4.8 --

16. Near Hastsal Village in West Delhi 9.6 Filled up

17. Site near Gazipur Dairy Farm 28.0 In Operation

18. Site near Jhangirpur/ Bhalswa 16.0 In Operation

19. Okhla Phase I 12.8 In Operation

20. Crossing on G.T. Karnal Road 3.2 In Operation

21. Jaitpur/ Tajpur 9.84 New

22. Near Puthkhurd 55.0 New

23. Bhawana to Narela Road 28.0 New

24. Sultanpur Dabas (Bawana) 16.0 New

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT :

The dumping of solid waste on land is the cause of follow-

ing problems :

(a) WATER POLLUTION :

Toxic liquid (leachate) that flows from the dumped waste

seeps into surface and groundwater and contaminates postable

water.

(b) SOIL POLLUTION :

Toxins seep into the soil and surrounding vegetation, and

move into the food chain through fruits and vegetables grown in

the area.

(c) DUM FIRES :

When waste decomposes, inflammable methane is released

186

which can result in explosion. The smoke released is also highly

toxic for inhalation and contributes to global warming.

(d) SOURCE OF DISEASE :

Dumpsites breed flies, rodents, and pests, which spread

diseases.

(e) OTHER IMPACTS :

Foul smell, visual ugliness, and bird menace which can be

a hazard to airplanes.

CONCLUSION :

The primary goal of any solid waste management system is

to safeguard the health of the citizens and protect the environ-

ment. This is achieved by ensuring proper collection, transporta-

tion, treatment and finally, safe disposal of waste. However, the

last step is missing in most solid waste management systems

implemented in the country.

REFERENCES :

* Gita Dewan Verma (2002): ‘Slumming India—A Chronicle of

Slums and Their Saviours’. Penguin Books, India.

* Voluntary Health Association of India (1993). ‘Delhi—A Tale of

Two Cities’. 40, Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi.

* Sabir Ali (1991). ‘Slums Within Slums’. Vikas Publications, New

Delhi.

187

* Supriti, Barnhardt S. and Ramanathan R. 2002. Urban Poverty

Alleviation in India : A General Assessment and a Particular

Perspective; Bangalore : Ramanathan foundation.

* Subramaniam. 2003. Inequalities in health in India : The Method-

ological construction of indices and measures- Draft report,

Department of health and social behavior, Harvard School of

Public Health.

* Carmines EG, Zeller RA. 1991. Reliability and Validity assess-

ment. Newbury Park : Sage Publications.

* WHO and UNICEF, 2000 : Global Water Supply and Sanitation

Assessment 2000 Report. WHO and UNICEF.

* GNCT. 2006. Delhi Human Development Report 2006. New

Delhi: Oxford University Press.

* Banerji, Manjistha, Provision of Basic Services in the Slums and

Resettlement Colonies of Delhi, Ensuring public accountability

through community action 2005, Institute of Social Studies Trust,

New Delhi.

* Verma, G.D. (2002), Slumming India : A chronicle of slums and

their saviours, Penguin Books India, Delhi.

—:: O ::—

CHAPTER - 5

CIVIC AMENITIES ANDHEALTH HAZARDS

(A) URBAN BORN INSECTS :

Insects and related arthropods of importance in the urban

environment are broadly covered under the auspices of urban

entomology. Most arthropods in human environments go unno-

ticed. However, some species post significant problems because

they directly affect the health of humans or their domesticated

animals, attack human structures, foods, goods, materials, or plants

that adorn urban settings.

A relatively small number of insect species have been

intentionally introduced into the urban environment. Examples

include the gupsy moth, Lymantria dispar that was intentionally

introduced into Massachustts in 1868. It is highly probable also

that the Asian Lady Beetle, Harmonia axyridis, was intentionally

introduced in 1980s. Many pest species have been accidentally

introduced with human commerce and travel. Some invasive

species have adapted themselves to disturbed human habitats and

have rapidly spread world wide via commerce and human travel.

The German cockroach Blattella germanica, is an excellent

example of such a species. It is rarely found outdoors, preferring

heated and controlled environments typically associated with

human food preparation. Probably native to Eastern Asia, it spread

143

throughout the Eastern Mediterranean Region by Greek or

Phoenician Vessels. It remained in Southern Russia until after the

Thirty years war (1618-1648) spreading into Europe and finally

becoming established in restaurants and other food handling

establishments in the rapid modernization of China.

With the increasing rate of urbanization in NCT Delhi,

problems associated with arthropod pests in urban centers will

continue to grow. In 1951, about 14.37 lac people (82.4%) lived

in urban areas. At the turn of the twenty-first century, this had

increased to greater than 129 lac people (93.18%) in Delhi. By

the year 2021, it is estimated that there will be greater than 230

lac people living in urban areas. The most dramatic increases in

urbanization and challenges in Delhi will occur in development;

the complex of urban invasive species will likely spread to these

urban centers, or attain the problem status now associated with

more developed countries. Many of these countries and develop-

ing urban centres exist in areas endemic to arthropod vector

borne diseases such as malaria, dengue, encephalitis, yellow fe-

ver, and plague the importance of urban and medical entomology

in tropical urban centers will increase in the future.

The urban environment in NCT Delhi is a complex of

habitats developed by human from natural sites. Houses, villages,

towns, cities, buildings, roads and other features that characterize

the urban environment in Delhi have gradually and irrecoverably

changed the landscape of natural and agricultural areas. As a part

144

of this change, some habitats and their associated plants and

animal communities were eliminated, while others were expanded

and new ones were created. Many of the new habitats were

intentional - parks, waterways, street trees, turf grass, food stores

but some were consequential- standing water in road side ditches,

garbage and landfill sites near residential neighbourhoods, the

underground sewer and storm drain network in urban and

suburban areas of Delhi. They all provided habitats for a select

group of insects and other arthropods, some of which attained

pest status.

Local conditions, climate, and available resources deter-

mine the distribution of some arthropods in the urban environ-

ment of Delhi, and for some species their abundance is limited.

Other species are broadly adapted to the resources and harbor-

ages in and around buildings, and these are cosmopolitan in their

distribution and pest status. Stable habitats with resources and

conditions suitable for long-term survival support reservoir popu-

lations of pest species, and from these habitats individuals or

groups move or are transported to establish infestations in

unstable or temporary habitats.

PERIDOMESTIC AND DOMESTIC HABITATS :

Within and around buildings, houses, and other urban struc-

tures are habitats that support individuals or populations of plants

and animals. Peridomestic habitats are outside, around the pe-

145

rimeter of structures. They include the external surfaces of

buildings, the ornamental trees, shrubs, and turf grass that

characterize the urban and suburban landscape. Domestic

habitats are indoors and include the plant and animal based

materials in this controlled, anthropogenic environment.

PERIDOMESTIC :

Harborage substrates, food resources, and environmental

conditions of urban landscapes of Delhi generally support a large

numbers. The soil-inhabiting and nesting arthropods in this envi-

ronment include ants that forage indoors and termites that damage

structural wood, ground nest bees and wasps, and occasional or

nuisance pests such as clover mites, millipedes, centipedes, and

springtails. Plant-feeding insects utilize the cultivated urban and

suburban trees and shrubs, and many are aesthetic pests. Blood

feeding mites (chiggers), ticks, mosquitoes and other biting flies

are associated with domestic and feral vertebrates. Species

utilizing building surfaces or perimeter substrates include the

umbrella wasp, hornets, yellow jackets, spiders and scorpions.

Underground sewer and storm drainage pipes provide some

cockroach and rodent species access to urban areas. The garbage

disposal network of collection, sorting, and landfill in Delhi

provide harborage and food for cockroaches, flies, rodents, and

pest birds.

Reservoir populations for many of the pest species estab-

lished in peridomestic habitats are in nearby natural or undis-

146

turbed areas. Woodland tracts and other small or large patches of

green space can support populations of biting flies, wasps and

hornets, ticks, and spiders in Delhi. Here are the populations that

provide the individuals or groups that establish or replenish

infestations in less stable habitats, or re-establish populations

lost to habitat destruction.

DOMESTIC :

Environmental conditions in NCT Delhi indoors are

generally stable and the harborages and food resources are some-

what limited. There may be few species, but those adapted to

specialized resources often occur in large numbers. Stored food,

including packaged whole food and vegetables, organic fabrics

and other materials are the most common harborates and food

resources in the domestic habitat. Directly or indirectly associ-

ated with these are dermestid beetles, flour beetles and moths,

flies and cockroaches. The distribution of domestic products and

similar storage environments has contributed to the cosmopolitan

pest status of many of these insects, in both residential and com-

mercial sites in Delhi. Blood and skin feeding species that breed

indoors are limited, but lice, fleas, bed bugs and mites are medi-

cally important pests for more than one socio-economic level of

society. Insects and other arthropods in the living space are

nuisance pest when they are few and their presence brief, but are

not tolerated when they pose a health treat or persist in large

numbers.

147

Natural habitats and populations for some domestic

species, especially those infesting sored food have been lost. Only

populations in the urban environment in NCT Delhi represent

many of these species or they survive only through their link to

humans (bed bugs, lice). Other indoor pests have reservoir popu-

lations in peridomestic and natural areas. Many of the common

species occur in the nests of bird and rodents and from there

have access to indoor habitats.

INSECT DISPERSAL AND DISTRIBUTION :

International transportation, economic exchange, and

globalization have brought a degree of uniformity to the urban

area around the world, and increased the movement and exchange

of arthropods. The majorities of household and store food pests,

including fruit flies, cockroaches, flour beetles, moths and mites,

have moved with infested commercial goods and now have

cosmopolitan distribution. Peridomestic mosquitoes, subterranean

termites and wood-infesting beetles share the same potential for

widespread distribution. Current distribution records for many

household and structural pests are subject to change with increased

movement of people and materials around the world.

Information on pest identification, biology and habits,

compiled on an international basis, is appropriate for the urban

environment. A global census indicates that nearly 2300 insects

and other arthropods have some level of pest status around the

148

world. Some are only occasional invaders of houses and other

buildings, some are closely associated with the foods, fabrics,

and other aspects of dwellings and others are linked to plants and

animals in domestic and peridomestic habitats. Many of these

species are capable of adapting to the soil conditions, climate

and building construction in other regions of the world, and

becoming established in pest populations. Regional conditions

may after some behaviors, but morphological features and the

basic life cycle will remain unchanged and control strategies are

usually transferable from region to region.

URBAN ECOSYSTEM :

Major ecosystems can be broadly classified as natural,

agricultural and urban. Urban ecosystems are primitive sites where

the interacting plant and animal communities have not been

altered by human activity. There are few, if these in the world

today, and a more practical definition of natural ecosystems might

be undisturbed habitats that have had limited human influence

and retain a portion of their original flora and fauna. An impor-

tant feature of these habitats is the populations of native plants

and animals. These are the reservoir populations of many

species that have adapted to agricultural and urban conditions.

Agricultural and urban ecosystems are defined by their use and

the degree to which their biotic and abiotic features have been

altered by human activity. These ecosystems contain few of the

features that characterize their natural origins; many of the

149

features were built or brought there, or designed by humans.

(B) URBAN SLUMS :

Delhi, capital of India, is home to about 3 million people

living in slums and it is estimated that 45% of its population lives

in unauthorized colonies, jhuggi jhompri (JJ) and urban villages.

As the UNHABITAT definition status a slum household is a group

of individuals living under the same roof in an urban area that

lack one of more of the following :

1. Durable housing of a permanent nature that protects against

extreme climate conditions.

2. Sufficient living space which means not more than three

people sharing the same roof.

3. Easy access to safe water in sufficient amounts at an

affordable price.

4. Access to adequate sanitation in the form of a private or

public toilet shared by a reasonable number of people.

5. Security of tenure that prevents forced evictions.

DEFINING THE ISSUE :

For the purpose of Census of India 2001, Slum areas broadly

constitute :

1. All specified areas notified as “slums” by state / local

government and UT administration under any act.

150

2. All areas recognized as “Slums” by State/local government

and UT administration, which may not have been formally

notified as slum under any act.

3. A compact area with a population of at least 300 or about

60-70 households of poorly built congested tenements, in

unhygienic environment usually with inadequate infrastruc-

ture and lacking in proper sanitation and drinking water

facilities.

The slum areas are those that are notified under the Slum

Improvement and Clearance Areas Act of 1956. Building and/or

areas that are considere to be unfit for human habitation may be

declared as the slum areas under section 3 of the act. As such,

they are considered to be legal structures and are eligible for

benefits under the act. The squatter or JJ cluster settlements on

the other hand are considered as encroachments on public and

private lands. They are, therefore, seen as illegal settlements.

According to the United Nations, the proportion of urban

dwellers living in slums decreased from 47 percent to 37 percent

in the developing world between 1990 and 2005. However, due

to rising population, the number of slum dwellers is rising. One

billion people worldwide live in slums and the figure will likely

to grow to 2 billion by 2030.

As India is urbanizing very fast and along with this, the

slum population is also increasing. India’s urban population is

151

increasing at a faster rate than its total population. With over 575

million people, India will have 41% of its population living in

cities and towns by 2030 from the present level of 286 million

and 28%. However, most of them do not have access to basic

facilities like drinking water and sanitation.

Because of the lack at affordable prices to different

categories of residents, various types of unplanned settlements

have come up in Delhi. According to an estimate, the population

residing in different types of settlements in 2006 was as shown in

Figure - 5.1.

Among the urban poor, the slum dwellers are the poorest.

The very definition of slums points at the acute drinking water

and sanitation crisis for the slum dwellers. A slum in India is

defined as “a cluster inside urban areas without having water and

sanitation access.”

The National Sample Survey Organization Survey conducted

in 2002 found that in 84% of the notified slums the main water

Figure - 5.1

152

source is through tap water supply. But these numbers mask

differences across the states of India. In Bihar none of the slums

get water via the tap.

In Chhattisgarh, Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh less than 35%

of slums get tap water. Nearly 44% of non-notified slums do not

have a drainage system of any type whereas only 15% of notified

slums do not have a drainage system.

A similar picture emerges in the case of latrines. Nearly

half of the non-notified slums do not have a latrine of any type. In

contrast only 17% of notified slums do not have a latrine. How-

ever, the past few years have seen significant improvements in

water and sanitation situation in slums. But, that is not a source of

solace as there is still a vast number of slum dweller to be

provided these basic facilities.

CHARACTERIZING LIFE IN SLUMS :

While studying and assessing the feasibility of any policy

it is imperative that there are certain parameters that would help

breakdown the objectives of the policies. Each of these schemes

must be compared with the current situation for slum dwellers

since from their perspective the next best option is starting a new

slum and living in the same conditions as before and thus, the

aforementioned conditions remain. Benchmarks and weightings

to these parameters must also be set before comparison of the

policy objectives so that the methodology is clear. To clearly

153

identify these parameters an understanding of the current situa-

tion and of life as slums dwellers is required. This situation can

be categorized into physical, legal, social, political and economic

characteristics of living in slums as shown in the Figure 5.2.

As can be seen, the physical characteristics of slum life

include shelter but lack a permanent residence, a house and most

of the times even space. The average population density in a shanty

town in Delhi is 3,00,000 people per square kilometer and an

average dwelling houses 6-8 people, yet measures only 6 ft. by 8

ft. Many slums have no latrine facilities, and those that do have

an average of 1 latrine serving 27 households. 1 water pump is

used by 1000 people on average and more often than not water

flows through these pumps only once a day. These low hygiene

and sanitation facilities lead to unhealthy living conditions in the

slums. This, along with illegally high rates for electricity makes

every basic need for slum dwellers is the close proximity of the

slums to most of the resident’s places of work, thus negating

transport costs or reducing it due to convenient transport stations

close by.

Moving onto the economic characteristics, we discuss prob-

ably the main reason for the existence of slums. As mentioned,

people migrate to Delhi from surrounding areas in an attempt to

find employment and improve their own and the lives of their

families. Many a time, these laborers come from their villages on

a contract but end up staying on in Delhi looking to find more

154

work here rather than in their village. Another common case is

that of those who open their own shop or work station in the slum

and operate out of there, such as the local “dhobi” (laundry man)

or tailor. Also because of lack of useable capital many of these

ventures are remain extremely small scale. From the legal aspect,

most of the slums in Delhi are unauthorized i.e. not recognized

and therefore still an illegal encroachment on state land. Because

of this, there is no security of tenure and hardly any dwellers

invest in their houses. Also, in the case that a slum is partially

recognized by the government, i.e. cases when residents before a

certain date are recognized as licensed owners of the land, there

are many hurdles to be faced by the slum dwellers before they

are finally established owners.

For social characteristics, the fact that there are many fairly

good and affordable schools is an important consideration along

with the scene of community and companionship within the slums.

And lastly, the slum dwellers, because of their large numbers,

are eyed by politicians as vote banks where they make many

promises but no one holds them to it.

POVERTY PROFILE OF DELHI :

The Planning Commission estimates the proportion and

number of poor based on the projection of minimum needs and

effective consumption. Such a projection is based on the norm of

2100 calorie per capita per day consumption for an urban area.

155

The calorie norms are invariably expressed in monetary terms

that change with respect to weighted commodity indices of the

consumer price index.

Figure 5.3 shows that the percentage of people below

poverty line (BPL) stood at 52.23% for Delhi in 1973-74. The

figure has been declining steadily to 27.89% in 1983; 16.03 in

1993-94. The percentage of people below poverty line declined

to 10.02% in 2001. Table 5.1 presents the zone wise BPL

population.

TABLE - 5.1

BELOW POVERTY LINE POPULATION

Year Rural BPL %age to Urban BPL %age topopulation Total population Total(in Lakh) (in Lakh)

1973 1.06 24.44 21.78 52.23 1983 0.44 7.66 17.95 27.89 1987 0.10 1.29 10.15 13.56 1993 0.19 1.19 15.32 16.03 2001 0.07 0.40 11.42 9.42

Source : Economic Survey Report, Govt. of Delhi, Delhi.

Figure 5.3

156

SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE OF POOR :

The socio-economic profile of segment of population

categorized as poor is of strategic importance for both planning

purposes, and for managing the habitat and its environmental

up-gradation and improvement.

However, comprehensive data is not available for the whole

of Delhi, although generalization can be made on the following

parameters based on data available from the few available sur-

veys and studies. It is important to keep in perspective however

that inhabitants of LIG/ EWS areas are not homogenous segment.

(a) Income and Expenditure :

The average total monthly income, per household, ranges

from Rs. 1500-2500 among the poor. The expenditure of these

families is around 5-10% more than their incomes. The per capita

monthly income and expenditure is Rs. 245 & Rs. 423 respec-

tively. Poor households, therefore, are increasingly dependent upon

loans from the local moneylenders. The monthly income of around

25-30% households is above Rs. 1500 and around 45-50% house

holds is below Rs. 1000.

(b) Access to Housing :

Housing is a basic need of the poor. Most of the poor do

not have access to secure land tenure. 85% of the poor are squat-

ters, and are vulnerable to frequent eviction. 6% of the poor live

in rented accommodation and have to pay a substantial portion of

157

their income for rent. Most importantly, such rental quarters do

not have even basic infrastructure facilities. The quality of life

led by these people is extremely poor.

(c) Occupation Profile of Poor :

41% of these families work as casual laborers, as most of

them are unskilled. However, one-third of the poor also work in

the service sector and only 20-25% is self-employed. Therefore,

nearly 52% of the poor households do not have access to a

dependable occupation and secure incomes.

(d) Migration Status and Poor :

The employment opportunities (formal and informal) in

Delhi have attracted migrants from all over the country, particu-

larly from the backward state areas due to regional economic

imbalances. In 1961 the annual migration of low income house-

holds into Delhi were estimated to be around 70,000 and that

number has increased every year making it close to an approxi-

mate net addition of around 4 lakh settlers every year, migrating

from various parts of the country in search of livelihood. This

influx of population has resulted in an increased population of

city, pressure on civic amenities, crime, social imbalances, eco-

nomic exploitation, unplanned growth, deterioration of the city

beautification, culture etc.

(e) Access to Infrastructure :

The infrastructure facilities that have been covered are water

158

and sources of energy for the urban poor. A majority of the poor

families (47%) have access to water from community sources.

16% of the families do not have any definite source of water.

With respect to source of light, nearly 30% of the families depend

on kerosene lamps.

(f) Pavement Dwellers :

Around 1 lakh homeless people constitute another

component of the poor in Delhi. They are mostly found in the

Walled City or its surrounding areas and generally sleep on the

pavements. There are around 10 night shelters located at Azadpur,

Subzi Mandi, Paharganj, Jhandewalan, Red Fort, Old Delhi

Railway Station, Azad Market and Roshanara Road. The night

shelters operated by MCD provide accommodation to only male

dwellers.

SHELTER OPTIONS :

The poor typically inhabit unplanned or semi-planned

developments. In Delhi they are classified as :

(a) Notified slums in old walled city area;

(b) Resettlement colonies;

(c) Relocated JJ clusters or squatter settlements.

The section below describe the characteristics of these

areas.

THE OLD WALLED CITY AREA :

In Delhi, areas designated or notified as slums under the

159

act are generally located in the walled city and its adjoining

environs. There are 319 katras in the walled city area with about

3,000 buildings or properties. Out of these, 365 properties have

been identified as dangerous and therefore require resettlement

of inhabitants. In addition, there are 400 properties, which are

with the Evacuee Property Cell of Land and Building Department

of Delhi Government.

SQUATTER SETTLEMENTS/ JJ CLUSTERS :

The squatter settlements are encroachments on mainly

public land. As such these are illegal clusters (JCs) and are

devoid of any legal entitlements. However, efforts have been made

by the government to extend basic social and environmental

services to them.

LOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF JJ CLUSTERS :

JJ clusters are scattered all over the city. Generally they

are situated on the vacant land along railway lines, roads, drains

and river embankments and also vacant spaces near residential,

industrial and commercial complexes.

Figure 5.4

160

Figure 5.4 shows that around 55 percent of squatters are

near the residential areas and 40% along the road berms as also

shown in the complete picture in Table 5.2.

TABLE - 5.2

AREAWISE STATUS OF JJ CLUSTERS IN DELHI

Areas with Number of squatters %age to total encroachment Residential Areas 34100 55.86 Road Berms 24184 39.62 Park and open spaces 966 1.58 Schools 500 0.82 Market 1093 1.79 Railway Station 200 0.33 TOTAL 61043 100.00

Source : Sabir Ali, Environment Scenario of Delhi Slums, Centre for social Develop

ment Studies - 1998.

It is clear from Table 5.3 that around 70% of clusters have

less than 500 JJ’s. This percentage has remained constant from

1991-2001. The sharp decline in number of JJ clusters (1994-

2001) is attributed to large scale relocation of JJs since 1999.

TABLE - 5.3

SIZE WISE DISTRIBUTION OF JJ CLUSTERS

No. of JJ in 1991 1994 2001 clusters Upto 100 496 396 227 1119 101-500 311 446 295 1052 501-1000 59 121 110 290 1001-1500 30 54 37 121 1500 & above 33 63 59 155Source : (i) Slum Department, MCD Delhi; (ii) Status Report for Delhi-21, Delhi Urban

Environment and Infrastructure Improvement Project (DUEIIP), January 2001.

161

Figure 5.5 shows the size-wise distribution of JJclusters

in NCT Delhi in 2001.

AREAS WITH CONCENTRATION OF JJ CLUSTERS :

The spread of JJ clusters ranges from a plot of 0.4 acres with 8

JJs to JJcs as large as 50 acres with 10,000 households & 45000

populations. The average number of JJ per acre comes to 200

with 193 being the lowest (Najafgarh area) and 206 the highest

(Gole Market and Kalkaji areas) (Refer to Map 5.1). The

average area of JJ is 20m2. Some of the major areas with such

concentrations are given below :

(i) HIGH CONCENTRATION :

(a) Minto Road/ Gole Market/ Matia Mahal (129 clusters, 43388

JJs, 215.08 Acres) - NDMC Area.

(b) Badarpur/ Tuglaqabad/ Saket (79 clusters, 64187 JJs, 79 Acres)-

MCD area.

Figure 5.5

162

(c) Moti Nagar/ Patel Nagar/ Rajendra Nagar (72 clusters, 35,427

JJs, 175.45 Acres) - MCD Area.

(d) Jahangirpuri/ Adarsh Nagar/ Model Town/ Wazirpur (117 clus-

ters, 71538 JJs, 356 Acres) - MCD Area.

(e) Badli/ Shahbad-Daulatpur (21 clusters, 27551 JJs, 137.70 Acres)-

MCD Area.

(ii) MEDIUM CONCENTRATION :

(a) Delhi Cantonment/ Janakpuri/ Tilak Marg (17 clusters, 18,982

JJs, 95.03 Acres) - MCD Area.

(b) Biswas Nagar/ Shahdara/ Babarpur (44 clusters, 18,915 JJs, 88.91

Acres) - MCD Area.

(c) Hauzkhas. R.K. Puram (52 clusters, 14,110 JJs, 70.22 acres) -

NDMC Area.

(iii) LOW CONCENTRATION :

(a) Nazafgarh/ Nasirpur/ Palam (11 clusters, 363 JJs, 1.83 Acres) -

MCD Area.

(b) Sarojini Nagar/ Kalkaji/ Malviya Nagar/ Ambedkar Nagar/

Kasturba Marg (45 clusters, 11,802 JJs, 68.42 Acres) - NDMC

Area.

GROWTH OF SQUATTER SETTLEMENTS :

The squatter settlements or Jhuggi jhopari clusters (JJC)

assume strategic importance as far as issues of unorganized settle-

163

ments are concerned. As mentioned in Table - 5.4 in 1951 Delhi

had 12,749 jhuggi jhoparis (JJS) scattered over 199 clusters. By

1973 the number of JJS had reached 98,483 spread over 1373

clusters. The resettlement scheme pursued in 1962-77, with a

concentrated effort in 1975-77 resulted in the resettlement of 2.4

lakh JJS in different parts of Delhi. In 1977 only 20,000 JJ house-

holds had gone upto 1.13 lakhs. In 2001 the JJ clusters had declined

to (729 from 1080 in 1994) due to relocation of around 300

clusters from Gautampuri, Kingsway Camp, Ashok Vihar, AIIMS

and Hauz Khas etc.

TABLE - 5(4)

YEARWISE STATUS OF JJ CLUSTERS IN DELHI

Year JJ Clusters Jhuggi Area in PopulationHHS HA

1951 199 12749 21.1 63745

1973 1373 98483 164.1 492415

1983 534 113000 188.3 565000

1990 929 259000 431.7 1295000

1997 1100 600000 902.1 3000000

2001 728 429662 650.2 2148310

Source : Slum Deptt., Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi.

LAND OWNING AGENCIES AND JJ CLUSTERS :

The land owning agencies in whose area the JJ clusters are

situated are given in Table 5.5. Eighty three percent of DDA land

is squatted on by 600 JJ clusters.

164

TABLE - 5.5

LAND OWNING AGENCIES & JJ CLUSTERS

LO Agencies NO. of Jhuggies Population Area in Acres1990 1994 1994

DDA 280988 349705 1856683 1865.93

L&Do 21530 29415 132327 149.86

Railway 12161 17346 78929 84.34

MCD 8428 11052 52045 47.29

NDMC 3226 4487 20182 22.52

Gram Sabha 4132 4360 19619 21.31

Cantonment 1570 1700 7064 7.86 Board

Source : Status Report for Delhi- 21 Delhi Urban Environment

and infrastructure Improvement Project (DUEIIP), January 2001

ACCESS TO INFRASTRUCTURE IN SLUMS/ JJ CLUSTERS:

Water and sanitation facilities, in these unorganized

colonies, particularly JJ clusters, are poor. Only 21% of colonies

are covered with piped water supply and 10% are covered by

sanitation. Table 5.6 presents a satisfactory level of infrastruc-

ture availability in unplanned settlements, but these facilities are

non- functional in around 75-80% of the settlements. The average

population served by one PSP ranges from 250-300 against the

standard of 150. Moreover, average waiting at PSP is 20-30

minutes. Around 85-90% of JJ clusters did not have even

community toilets, forcing habitants to defecate in the open near

the water bodies or drainage channels.

165

TABLE - 5.6

WATER AND SANITATION STATUS IN THEUNPLANNED SETTLEMENTS (2004)

Service provision in Piped water supply Sewer facility unplanned settlement No. % of colonies No. % of colonies

Regularized 557 98.2 458 80.7 unauthorized colonies

Resettlement colonies 44 100.0 44 100.0

JJ Clusters 158 21.7 72 9.8

Source : Slum Department, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi.

RESETTLEMENT COLONIES :

Under the schemes for resettlement of JJ clusters 47

resettlement colonies were developed during 1961-77. Around

2.0 lakh plots were developed accommodating about 2.4 lakh

households. These resettlement colonies have degenerated due to

intense population pressure and unorganized development. There-

fore investment towards up-gradation of physical infrastructure

has to be made for improving civic life.

LOCATION OF RESETTLEMENT COLONIES :

The spatial distribution of these colonies indicates that they

are proliferating mainly in the South-East, North-East, North-West,

South-West and Central parts of the NCT of Delhi. These are five

colonies in South-East, eight in North-East, fifteen in North-West,

seven in South-West and twelve in Central Delhi.

166

RELOCATION SITES :

The Map 5.2 shows that there are around 12 relocation

sites as Bhalaswa, Holambi Kalan, Pappan Kalan, Rohini, Narela,

Bakanwar, Madanpur Khadar etc. The most recent relocation has

been made to three principal sites. These are Dwarka (known

also as Pappan Kalan), Rohini, Narela and Savda Ghevara. The

main pockets from where JJ clusters were relocated are Central,

South and East Delhi areas. Thus, during 1999-2000, 3741 squat-

ter households from the JJ clusters at CGO Complex, Chankyapuri,

Kotla Mubarakpur, Andrews Ganj, Sadiq Nagar, Mahaki Sarai,

Shahdara were moved to Narela and Rohini. 27.4 acres of land

has been allotted at Molar Band for shifting of the JJ clusters at

Gautam Nagar behind AIIMS as shown in Map 5.3. In 1997-98,

DDA allocated 32 acres of land in Tehkhand Village for reloca-

tion of squatter families.

These relocation resettlement sites offer no security of

tenure to habitants who begin a new life without security, basic

services, schools and other basic amenities.

SLUM DEVELOPMENT POLICIES IN PLACE :

While evaluating the policies affecting housing for slum

dwellers we take a top down approach by first giving a brief

overview of the National Housing Policy 2007, and laid out for

Delhi’s slums by various authorities.

167

(i) NATIONAL URBAN HOUSING AND HABITAT POLICY 2007:

The National Urban Housing and Habitat Policy 2007 states

its goal as ‘affordable housing for all’ in the country. It promotes

various types of Public Private Partnerships and pays special

emphasis on the urban poor, intending to promote sustainable

development of housing in the country with a view to ensuring

equitable supply of land, shelter and services at affordable prices

to all sections of society. The policy focused on multiple stake-

holders the private sector, the cooperative sector, the industrial

sector for labor housing and the services and institutional sector

for employee housing. To attain the overarching goal of afforable

housing for all, emphasis is laid on urban planning, increasing

supply of land and use of spatial incentives like additional floor

area ratio (FAR), transferable development rights, and increased

flow of funds, effective solid waste management and use of

renewal sources of energy. Encouraging integrated townships and

special economic zones (SEZs), the policy calls for reservation

of 10-15 percent land in every new public and private housing

projects or 20-25 percent FAR whichever is greater to for EWS

and LIG housing through appropriate spatial incentives.

The private sector would be permitted assembling land

within the purview of master plans. The policy also sets action

plans for urban slum dwellers with a special package being

prepared for cooperative housing, labor housing and employees

housing. The primary choice would be to give provision of shelter

168

to urban poor at their present location or near their work place.

The role of housing and provision of basic services to the

urban poor has been integrated into the objectives of the Jawaharlal

Nehru Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM).

(ii) BASIC SERVICES TO THE URBAN POOR, JNNURM :

The Sub Mission II of the JNNURM involves Basic

Services to the Urban Poor (BSUP) including the integrated

housing and slum development programme. The objectives of the

mission are outlined as :

1. Focused attention to integrated development of Basic Services to

the urban poor in the cities covered under the mission.

2. Provision of Basic Services to Urban Poor including security of

tenure at affordable prices, improved housing, water supply,

sanitation and ensuring delivery through convergence of other

already existing universal services of the Government for Educa-

tion, health and social security care will be taken to see that the

urban poor are provided housing near their place of occupation.

3. Secure effective linkages between asset creation and asset man-

agement to that the Basic Services to the Urban Poor created in

the cities are not only maintained efficiently but also become self-

sustaining over time.

4. Ensure adequate investment of funds to fulfill deficiencies in the

Basic Services to the Urban Poor.

169

5. Scale up delivery of civic amenities and provision of utilities

with emphasis on universal access to urban poor.

The Delhi Master Plan 2021 has laid emphasis on improve-

ment of the living conditions of the 45% of Delhities living in

slums and JJ clusters in the next ten years as part of the improve-

ment in the livability of the city for its inhabitants.

(iii) THREE PRONGED APPROACH IN DELHI :

Of the settlements considered as sub-standard slum and

squatter settlements rank among the worst and it is the urban poor

that live predominantly in such settlements. The program of

squatter clearance was discontinued at the end of sixth plan (from

1985). Accordingly no major settlement program was carried out

until 1992 when a Revised Resettlement Policy was formulated

by the DDA. This did not mean that there were no resettlement

works in progress. The general policy adopted by the govern-

ment since then it twofold. One is that no fresh encroachments

shall be permitted on public land and the second is that past

encroachments (those in existence till 30.01.1990) would not be

removed without providing alternatives.

Squatter settlements are to be found throughout the city but

especially on the vacant land along railway lines, roads, drains,

river embankments, and around resettlement colonies. The strat-

egy of the government towards slums/ squatter settlements has

been mainly of clearance.

170

In recent years, however, there have been some changes in

the attitude and strategies. Since 1991 three strategies have been

used in Delhi, which are as follows :

1. Improvement of the slum environment.

2. Relocation of the slums

3. In situ-up-gradation and rehabilitation.

(iv) IMPROVEMENT OF THE SLUM ENVIRONMENT :

Since 1987, in JJ clusters and notified slums which are not

being relocated or developed with the in situ approach, basic

urban services and amenities are being provided under ‘Envi-

ronmental improvement in urban slum scheme’. The facilities are

extended to all JJ clusters even those that developed after 1990.

The facilities being provided under the scheme are :

1. Pay and use Jan Suvidha Complexes containing toilets and bath-

rooms at the community level or the provision of mobile toilet,

vans in all those JJ clusters where the Jan Suvidha Complex can

not be provided.

2. Water supply either through water hydrants, hand pipes or water

tanker.

3. Street lighting.

4. Dusbins for collection of domestic waste.

5. Paved pathways and drains.

171

(v) RELOCATION OF SLUMS :

Jhuggi Jhopri resettlement, relocation scheme was started

in the Union Territory of Delhi for the rehousing of squatters on

government and private lands in 1960. The scheme began with

the allotment of two room tenements to 3,560 JJ households.

Subsequently, partially developed plots of 80 square yards were

allotted under the scheme to the squatters on a nominal rent.

However, due to demand of land in Delhi and the fact that the

allotment procedure was misused, size of plots was reduced to

40 square meters and then 25 square meters. Under the present

situation, Relocation is carried out for only those JJ clusters and

slums that are required by the land owning agency for public

interest projects.

Since the inception of the scheme with effect from 1990-

1991, so far about 70,000 plots have been developed and about

60,000 families have been rehabilitated at Dwarka, Rohini, Narela,

Bawana, Holambi, Molar Band, Madanpur Khaddar & Sawda

Ghevre keeping in view the scarcity of land in Delhi and as per

the directions of the Delhi Government and Government of India.

The Delhi Government has formulated a new policy for the

resettlement of squatter families in Delhi. Under the new policy,

Delhi Government has proposed to provide built up flats instead

of plots to the slum dwellers, economically weaker sections

under the Rajiv Awas Yojna, JNNURM. Under this scheme, the

Delhi Government aims to provide 4 lakh flats by 2012.

172

(vi) IN SITU UP-GRADATION AND REHABILITATION :

There has been a general shift in the approach to slum and

JJ clusters in recent years. The emphasis is now on the improve-

ment of the environment of the JJ cluster and their in situ rehabili-

tation wherever possible. The in situ up gradation is undertaken

after the area has been notified as a slum area under the Slum

Area Act of 1956. The scheme involves replanning of JJ dwell-

ing units in modified layout by redistributing the encroached land

pockets amongst the squatter families. The JJ households are given

sites of 10 to 12.5 square meters for construction of their own

shelters. The housing plots are generally designed in a cluster

around open courtyards. The beneficiary constructs the shelter

under a self help approach with technical extension services

provided by the slum and JJ department of the MCD. So far 5,583

families have been rehabilitated at Prayog Vihar, Ekta Vihar, Shanti

Vihar and Shahbad Daulatpur Phase I. The implementation of the

in situ- up-gradation is very poor due to non availability of the

Notice of Consent from the concerned land owning agency. A

new policy of in situ slum up grading also suggests, as in the case

of relocation, the provision of developed flats on the same

location instead of plots for the slum dwellers.

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) decided to take

up in situ development towards rehabilitation of slum dwelling

units of about 25 square meters will be about 47,500. These will

be taken up on public- private partnership model in which the

173

land occupied by slum dwellers will be made available to de-

velopers, who will construct houses in accordance with the num-

bers identified by the DDA. These houses will be constructed in

same parts of the area while in the remaining areas the developer

will be allowed to carry out commercial exploitation of the land.

This would enable the developer to spill over some of the costs

from building the rehabilitation units to the commercial activity,

thereby reducing the burden on the slum dwellers as well. This

mixed development allows them to get the cross subsidy by way

of targeting two different segments of society.

This model is being applied at the kathputli colony where

residents will have access to 12 storeyed buildings in which the

ground floors will be devoted to promoting artistic and commer-

cial enterprise since most of the residents are puppeteers, crafts-

men or musicians. The constructions will house 2,800 dwelling

units meant for the colony’s residents. The site will also boast of

a separate 2.1 acre commercial space to be developed by private

developers and “high-category residential apartmentments” in 2.4

acres which will help boost the earning of artisans and crafts-

men, according to the DDA’s plans.

In the scheme, modeled on Mumbai’s slum rehabilitation

programme, private players will join hands with the government

and the work of clearing the slums would proceed in phases.

Since residents will be resettled, tents will be pitched to provide

174

temporary accommodation to the people till the project is

completed.

(vii) DRAFT NATIONAL SLUM POLICY 2001 :

Another more specific, policy the “draft” National Slum

Policy is yet to be ratified by the government. The draft National

Slum Policy envisages cities without slums. Towards fulfillment

of this vision, the policy adopts an approach of in situ up gradation

and improvement. It recommends clearance only in exceptional

circumstances. It, therefore, talks of urban growth with equity

and justice and makes plea for greater participation of communi-

ties and civil society in all areas of planning, capacity building

and development. Correspondingly it proposes a series of

interventions with regards to definitions, tenure, planning,

economic empowerment, governance and management, shelter up

gradation etc.

The governing principal of the Draft National Slum Policy

are as follows :

1. The endorsement of an upgrading and improvement approach in

all slums, and the acceptance of the necessity of slum clearance

in an extremely defined circumstances.

2. Recognition that households in all urban informal settlements

should have access to certain basic minimum services, irrespec-

tive of land tenure or occupancy status.

175

3. The goal that planning in all cities should have the objective of

creating cities without slums.

4. The objective of ensuring that urban growth takes place with

equity and distributive justice.

5. The intention that urban local bodies should work in collabora-

tion with all other stakeholders to enhance the impact of slum

development through building the capacities of the poor and

empowering them to improve their own living conditions.

6. The adoption of a more “enabling” approach to the delivery of

basic social services to the poor as a result of more effective

mobilization of community resources and skills to complement

public resource allocations.

7. A greater participation of communities and civil society in all

areas of planning, capacity building and development.

The draft policy is however silent over the ways in which

such goals could be realized. Also, the definition of all under

served serviced lands as slums will hinder and deny the most

needy and vulnerable from having access to resources for up-

gradation and improvement.

POLICY COMPARISON :

A comparative study of these policies and schemes can now

be undertaken, based on the parameters discussed earlier. The

National Urban Housing and Habitat Policy 2007 seems to be a

176

step in the right direction, with focus on affordable housing,

public private partnerships (PPP), sustainable development of

housing in the country, special package being prepared for

cooperative housing, labor housing and employees housing and

prioritizing houses for the urban poor at their present location or

near their work place using the in- situ slum rehabilitation

approach. Using the parameters as tools for analysis we see that

with PPPs and the in situ rehabilitation approach, affordable

housing for slum dwellers at their present location is an option.

This enables them to earn their livelihood just as they did before,

in the slums. The security of tenure objective is also achieved

through the policy. Only the characteristics of housing provided

remains questionable. The quality of houses, its cost and the

allocation can be a hindrance to the residents. Sometimes the

costs are too high for them and at other times the quality of the

houses is compromised. Under the JNNURM, the improved quality

of housing is specifically included and allocation is said to be on

the basis of need (determined through income). As is the case

with both the relocation and the in situ rehabilitation policy, any

worker whose source of livelihood is within the slums (dhobi,

tailor etc.) might be compromised unless there is specific

mention of a workstation being supplied. Thus this would be a

violation of the first parameter and the people affected by this

would prefer to stay in some other slum again. This vary case

would be an important characteristic of the third approach of

177

improvement of the slum environment or up- gradation. The

livelihoods of the residents are maintained even though the slum,

not lacking basic facilities but still an unplanned part of the city,

still exists. The draft national slum policy outlines its objectives

but has not clearly defined how these objectives will be met and

therefore no analysis on the basis of parameters and incentives

for residents can be undertaken. Thus, as is the case with most of

the policies in India, each of these policies, schemes and

approaches looks impeccable on paper but the ground realities

of these projects are often very different from what is claimed

and therefore it is necessary that a follow up mechanism be

incorporated into each of the policies to ensure their efficiency.

(C) URBAN GARBAGE GROUNDS :

Various human processes produce waste. Disposing waste

products is major global problem since last many decades.

Landfill is considered as the primitive way to organized waste

dumping in various parts of earth. It is a method of removing the

refuse on land without creating a hazard to public health or safety.

Landfills may consist of domestic waste dumping sites as well as

sites utilized by several manufacturers. This method is also

adopted for other waste management tasks for example the

momentary storage, consolidation and relocation, or meting out

of waste substance such as sorting, treatment, or recycling. The

landfill is supportive process of waste diminution and has a key

role in resource revival. A landfill also denotes the practice in

178

which ground has been packed in with soil and rocks as an alter-

native of garbage which solves many important purposes such as

for building construction.

Landfill is emerged as the most practicable ecological

substitute for the specific waste removal in various countries.

Today government priority is to set up a waste policy by

applying the ideology in order to deal with environmental risks,

the economic and health dangers of resource degradation. These

strategies are basically planned to maintain landfill practices

which will stabilize the landfill sites in present generation. The

main intent of waste organization is to deal with the garbage

produced by existing generation and do not switch over waste

related harms to next generation. The Landfill Directive is

committed to raise standards and lessen harmful consequences

on the surroundings, groundwater, surface waters, soil, and

restrictions on the universal impact of waste dumping. For

commercial purpose, a landfill technique must meet definite

requirements, which are linked to many important factors. The

first factor is the location. Landfill must have easy access to

transportation via road. It must have stability such as fundamen-

tal geology, earthquake faults, water table. Another factor is

capacity. The existing annulled space must be planned by assess-

ment of the landform with a proposed re-establishment profile.

This computation of capacity is based on density of the wastes,

amount of intermediate and daily cover, and amount of settle-

179

ment. Landfill must have protection of soil and water through

installation of inside layer and collection systems. To handle speci-

fied harmless waste landfills such method must be applied through

which the trash are cramped to small area, compressed to decrease

their quantity, enclosed with layers of soil. Completely lined

landfills reinstate the previous one, unlined deposits that were

earlier used. In the operation of landfill, the garbage collection

trucks are weighed at entrance and their load is checked for wastes.

Then, these vehicles drop their load. After loads are dumped,

compactors or dozers spread and compressed the waste on the

operational field. This flattened waste is enclosed with soil

every day. Other waste wrap materials are sprayed on froth

products and transitory mantles. These mantles can be elevated

into place with tracked excavators and then detatched the next

day proceeding to waste placement. Chipped wood and chemi-

cally ‘fixed’ bio-solids are the substitute cover. Since the 20th

century, population is exploding speedily in developed areas; it

is a need of an hour to implement land reprocesses tractics for

completed landfills. The common usages are parks, golf courses.

Office buildings and industrial uses are made of a completed

landfill. Many steps are taken to disperse garbage produced

through communities, Industry and other establishments. At the

end of 20th century, different methods to waste removal to land-

fill and burning have started. The apparent substitutes to landfills

are waste reduction and recycling policies. Incineration is the

180

most effectual technique of plummeting volume and weight of

solid waste by burning in a well designed furnace.

Landfill reclamation is one of the control measures to check

spoilage of landscape. It is the burning of landfill garbage at high

temperature via the plasma-arc gasification procedure. Another

important way to deal with solid waste is composing by which

the organic components of solid waste are biologically decom-

posed under controlled aerobic conditions. In this method,

plastics, rubber and leather are separated from the solid waste

and the remaining organic matter is decomposed aerobically or

an aerobically to end product called compost. Anaerobic

digestion, mechanical biological treatment, pyrolysis and gasifi-

cation have all started to establish themselves in the marketplace.

Optional waste disposal technology is quite expensive than

landfill and mass burn incineration is the sole technology for mixed

waste. India is working to develop clean energy sources that can

yield considerable economic, environmental and health benefits

for people. Methane emissions from the solid waste sector in

India are projected to increase significantly over the next 15 years.

Reusing landfill methane gas for energy purposes has the poten-

tial to mitigate 5.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equiva-

lents, which is equal to the annual emissions from one million

vehicles. Currently, there are no operational landfill gas-to-

energy projects in India but several large sites in Delhi, Mumbai

and other cities could support the clean energy projects.

181

Basically, a landfill is a large area of land or an excavated

site that is a carefully designed structure built into or on top of the

ground. The rubbish collected at the landfill is isolated from the

surrounding environment with a bottom liner and a daily cover-

ing of soil. Though the modern landfill practices are technically

sound but still these proven techniques sometimes fail to meet

challenges. These practices require further precision to secure

public areas. Appropriate removal practices should be adopted

to control environmental contamination. These practices include-

All loads must be alienated when unloading in selected area.

Domestic refuse and small things should be kept in the dustbin.

Removal should be permitted exterior the landfill entrance and

video watch is carried out.

SOLID WASTE GENERATION IN NCT DELHI :

The problem of solid waste management in Delhi is as-

suming serious proportions due to increasing population, urban-

ization, changing lifestyles and consumption patterns. There are

24 existing landfill sites for waste management in NCT Delhi

from 16 are filled up, 4 are in operation and other 4 are newly

operated as shown in Map 5.4. The garbage from unauthorized

developments, slums, JJ settlements, etc. is not collected which

further adds to the environmental degradation. The projected

average garbage generation upto the year 2021 is @ 0.68 kg. per

capita per day and total quantum of solid waste is 15750 tonnes/

day as given in Table - 5.7.

182

TABLE - 5.7

QUANTUM OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE(TONNES / DAY)

Local body area Existing Capacity Projected generation

2001 for 2021

MCD 5250 15100

NDMC 245 550

Cantonment 48 100

TOTAL 5543 15750

Management of solid waste involves waste generation,

segregation and storage; waste collection; waste transfer/ trans-

portation treatment, recycle reuse, recovery; and disposal. For

effective waste management, its segregation at the community and

neighbourhood level is imperative. The waste shall be segre-

gated and collected, in separate chambers at dalaos. For this,

involvement of rag pickers with RWAs, CBOs and NGOs is to be

encouraged.

The projected composition of municipal waste for the plan

period is estimated as given in table - 5.8 for biodegradable and

recyclable waste which is segregated at the source, decentral-

ized treatment at neighbourhood level may be adopted, while for

silt, centralized treatment may be followed.

The other type of specialized waste includes biomedical

waste; hazardous waste from industries; construction debris and

fly ash; meat processing centre etc. Disposal of bio-medical waste

183

is to be as per bio-medical waste rules and hazardous waste

requires special handling rules. Proper dumping, recycling and

reuse of construction debris and fly ash have to be linked. Meat

processing centre waste is to be recycled for chicken feed etc.

TABLE - 5.8

PROJECTED COMPOSITION OFTOTAL MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE FOR 2021

Constituents Quantum (in tons) Percentage to totalwaste

Bio- degradable 6000 38

Silt 6000 38

Recyclable 3750 24

TOTAL 15750 100

Notes :(i) Above figures are based on Report on Solid Waste Management in Delhi

conducted by NEERI, Nagpur through DDA;(ii) Figures of MCD are based on Feasibility study in Master Plan for optimal

waste Treatment & Disposal for the entire state of Delhi, June, 2004, by COWIConsultants appointed by MCD.

Considering the nature of solid waste and the economic

aspects of its disposal, major part of solid waste especially silt

has to be disposed off in sanitary landfills. But wherever recy-

cling is possible, it should be preferred than disposing off the

waste in sanitary landfill sites. More viable alternatives to land-

fills are vermiculture, fossilization, composting etc. Waste Mini-

mization Circles (WMCs) should be constituted and made effec-

tive. Implementation and monitoring & Bio-Medical Wastes (Han-

dling & Management) Rules, 1998, for hospitals, nursing homes,

184

and clinics should be taken up. The sites, which are filled up or

are in operation, given in Table - 5.9. The filled up sites may be

reuse for plantation or as recreational area. The proposed sites

for sanitary landfill and compost plants are to be finalized by

MCD. The Map 5.5 shows the area of existing and proposed

landfill sites.

Keeping in view the fact that finding new sanitary landfill

sites in Delhi is becoming extremely difficult there is no option,

as shown by the Map 5.5 & 5.6 but to resort to alternative and

decentralized methods of waste treatment, reduction, recycle and

use, which include vermiculture, fossilization and composting.

TABLE - 5.9

EXISTING LANDFILL SITES FORWASTE MANAGEMENT

S.N. Location Area (in ha.) Remarks

1. Kailash Nagar, East Delhi 1.8 Filled up

2. Tilak Nagar 16.0 Filled up

3. Subroto Park - Filled up

4. Purana Quila/ Bharion Road 2.7 Filled up

5. Timar Pur 16.0 Filled up

6. Sarai Kale Khan 24.0 Filled up

7. Gopal Pur 4.0 Filled up

8. Chhater Pur 1.7 Filled up

9. S.G.T. Nagar 14.4 Filled up

10. I.P. Depot 1.8 Filled up

11. Sunder Nagar 2.8 Filled up

12. Tuglakabad Ext. 2.4 Filled up

185

13. Haiderpur 1.6 Filled up

14. Mandawali Fazilpur 2.8 --

15. Rohini Phase III 4.8 --

16. Near Hastsal Village in West Delhi 9.6 Filled up

17. Site near Gazipur Dairy Farm 28.0 In Operation

18. Site near Jhangirpur/ Bhalswa 16.0 In Operation

19. Okhla Phase I 12.8 In Operation

20. Crossing on G.T. Karnal Road 3.2 In Operation

21. Jaitpur/ Tajpur 9.84 New

22. Near Puthkhurd 55.0 New

23. Bhawana to Narela Road 28.0 New

24. Sultanpur Dabas (Bawana) 16.0 New

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT :

The dumping of solid waste on land is the cause of follow-

ing problems :

(a) WATER POLLUTION :

Toxic liquid (leachate) that flows from the dumped waste

seeps into surface and groundwater and contaminates postable

water.

(b) SOIL POLLUTION :

Toxins seep into the soil and surrounding vegetation, and

move into the food chain through fruits and vegetables grown in

the area.

(c) DUM FIRES :

When waste decomposes, inflammable methane is released

186

which can result in explosion. The smoke released is also highly

toxic for inhalation and contributes to global warming.

(d) SOURCE OF DISEASE :

Dumpsites breed flies, rodents, and pests, which spread

diseases.

(e) OTHER IMPACTS :

Foul smell, visual ugliness, and bird menace which can be

a hazard to airplanes.

CONCLUSION :

The primary goal of any solid waste management system is

to safeguard the health of the citizens and protect the environ-

ment. This is achieved by ensuring proper collection, transporta-

tion, treatment and finally, safe disposal of waste. However, the

last step is missing in most solid waste management systems

implemented in the country.

REFERENCES :

* Gita Dewan Verma (2002): ‘Slumming India—A Chronicle of

Slums and Their Saviours’. Penguin Books, India.

* Voluntary Health Association of India (1993). ‘Delhi—A Tale of

Two Cities’. 40, Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi.

* Sabir Ali (1991). ‘Slums Within Slums’. Vikas Publications, New

Delhi.

187

* Supriti, Barnhardt S. and Ramanathan R. 2002. Urban Poverty

Alleviation in India : A General Assessment and a Particular

Perspective; Bangalore : Ramanathan foundation.

* Subramaniam. 2003. Inequalities in health in India : The Method-

ological construction of indices and measures- Draft report,

Department of health and social behavior, Harvard School of

Public Health.

* Carmines EG, Zeller RA. 1991. Reliability and Validity assess-

ment. Newbury Park : Sage Publications.

* WHO and UNICEF, 2000 : Global Water Supply and Sanitation

Assessment 2000 Report. WHO and UNICEF.

* GNCT. 2006. Delhi Human Development Report 2006. New

Delhi: Oxford University Press.

* Banerji, Manjistha, Provision of Basic Services in the Slums and

Resettlement Colonies of Delhi, Ensuring public accountability

through community action 2005, Institute of Social Studies Trust,

New Delhi.

* Verma, G.D. (2002), Slumming India : A chronicle of slums and

their saviours, Penguin Books India, Delhi.

—:: O ::—

CHAPTER - 5

CIVIC AMENITIES ANDHEALTH HAZARDS

(A) URBAN BORN INSECTS :

Insects and related arthropods of importance in the urban

environment are broadly covered under the auspices of urban

entomology. Most arthropods in human environments go unno-

ticed. However, some species post significant problems because

they directly affect the health of humans or their domesticated

animals, attack human structures, foods, goods, materials, or plants

that adorn urban settings.

A relatively small number of insect species have been

intentionally introduced into the urban environment. Examples

include the gupsy moth, Lymantria dispar that was intentionally

introduced into Massachustts in 1868. It is highly probable also

that the Asian Lady Beetle, Harmonia axyridis, was intentionally

introduced in 1980s. Many pest species have been accidentally

introduced with human commerce and travel. Some invasive

species have adapted themselves to disturbed human habitats and

have rapidly spread world wide via commerce and human travel.

The German cockroach Blattella germanica, is an excellent

example of such a species. It is rarely found outdoors, preferring

heated and controlled environments typically associated with

human food preparation. Probably native to Eastern Asia, it spread

143

throughout the Eastern Mediterranean Region by Greek or

Phoenician Vessels. It remained in Southern Russia until after the

Thirty years war (1618-1648) spreading into Europe and finally

becoming established in restaurants and other food handling

establishments in the rapid modernization of China.

With the increasing rate of urbanization in NCT Delhi,

problems associated with arthropod pests in urban centers will

continue to grow. In 1951, about 14.37 lac people (82.4%) lived

in urban areas. At the turn of the twenty-first century, this had

increased to greater than 129 lac people (93.18%) in Delhi. By

the year 2021, it is estimated that there will be greater than 230

lac people living in urban areas. The most dramatic increases in

urbanization and challenges in Delhi will occur in development;

the complex of urban invasive species will likely spread to these

urban centers, or attain the problem status now associated with

more developed countries. Many of these countries and develop-

ing urban centres exist in areas endemic to arthropod vector

borne diseases such as malaria, dengue, encephalitis, yellow fe-

ver, and plague the importance of urban and medical entomology

in tropical urban centers will increase in the future.

The urban environment in NCT Delhi is a complex of

habitats developed by human from natural sites. Houses, villages,

towns, cities, buildings, roads and other features that characterize

the urban environment in Delhi have gradually and irrecoverably

changed the landscape of natural and agricultural areas. As a part

144

of this change, some habitats and their associated plants and

animal communities were eliminated, while others were expanded

and new ones were created. Many of the new habitats were

intentional - parks, waterways, street trees, turf grass, food stores

but some were consequential- standing water in road side ditches,

garbage and landfill sites near residential neighbourhoods, the

underground sewer and storm drain network in urban and

suburban areas of Delhi. They all provided habitats for a select

group of insects and other arthropods, some of which attained

pest status.

Local conditions, climate, and available resources deter-

mine the distribution of some arthropods in the urban environ-

ment of Delhi, and for some species their abundance is limited.

Other species are broadly adapted to the resources and harbor-

ages in and around buildings, and these are cosmopolitan in their

distribution and pest status. Stable habitats with resources and

conditions suitable for long-term survival support reservoir popu-

lations of pest species, and from these habitats individuals or

groups move or are transported to establish infestations in

unstable or temporary habitats.

PERIDOMESTIC AND DOMESTIC HABITATS :

Within and around buildings, houses, and other urban struc-

tures are habitats that support individuals or populations of plants

and animals. Peridomestic habitats are outside, around the pe-

145

rimeter of structures. They include the external surfaces of

buildings, the ornamental trees, shrubs, and turf grass that

characterize the urban and suburban landscape. Domestic

habitats are indoors and include the plant and animal based

materials in this controlled, anthropogenic environment.

PERIDOMESTIC :

Harborage substrates, food resources, and environmental

conditions of urban landscapes of Delhi generally support a large

numbers. The soil-inhabiting and nesting arthropods in this envi-

ronment include ants that forage indoors and termites that damage

structural wood, ground nest bees and wasps, and occasional or

nuisance pests such as clover mites, millipedes, centipedes, and

springtails. Plant-feeding insects utilize the cultivated urban and

suburban trees and shrubs, and many are aesthetic pests. Blood

feeding mites (chiggers), ticks, mosquitoes and other biting flies

are associated with domestic and feral vertebrates. Species

utilizing building surfaces or perimeter substrates include the

umbrella wasp, hornets, yellow jackets, spiders and scorpions.

Underground sewer and storm drainage pipes provide some

cockroach and rodent species access to urban areas. The garbage

disposal network of collection, sorting, and landfill in Delhi

provide harborage and food for cockroaches, flies, rodents, and

pest birds.

Reservoir populations for many of the pest species estab-

lished in peridomestic habitats are in nearby natural or undis-

146

turbed areas. Woodland tracts and other small or large patches of

green space can support populations of biting flies, wasps and

hornets, ticks, and spiders in Delhi. Here are the populations that

provide the individuals or groups that establish or replenish

infestations in less stable habitats, or re-establish populations

lost to habitat destruction.

DOMESTIC :

Environmental conditions in NCT Delhi indoors are

generally stable and the harborages and food resources are some-

what limited. There may be few species, but those adapted to

specialized resources often occur in large numbers. Stored food,

including packaged whole food and vegetables, organic fabrics

and other materials are the most common harborates and food

resources in the domestic habitat. Directly or indirectly associ-

ated with these are dermestid beetles, flour beetles and moths,

flies and cockroaches. The distribution of domestic products and

similar storage environments has contributed to the cosmopolitan

pest status of many of these insects, in both residential and com-

mercial sites in Delhi. Blood and skin feeding species that breed

indoors are limited, but lice, fleas, bed bugs and mites are medi-

cally important pests for more than one socio-economic level of

society. Insects and other arthropods in the living space are

nuisance pest when they are few and their presence brief, but are

not tolerated when they pose a health treat or persist in large

numbers.

147

Natural habitats and populations for some domestic

species, especially those infesting sored food have been lost. Only

populations in the urban environment in NCT Delhi represent

many of these species or they survive only through their link to

humans (bed bugs, lice). Other indoor pests have reservoir popu-

lations in peridomestic and natural areas. Many of the common

species occur in the nests of bird and rodents and from there

have access to indoor habitats.

INSECT DISPERSAL AND DISTRIBUTION :

International transportation, economic exchange, and

globalization have brought a degree of uniformity to the urban

area around the world, and increased the movement and exchange

of arthropods. The majorities of household and store food pests,

including fruit flies, cockroaches, flour beetles, moths and mites,

have moved with infested commercial goods and now have

cosmopolitan distribution. Peridomestic mosquitoes, subterranean

termites and wood-infesting beetles share the same potential for

widespread distribution. Current distribution records for many

household and structural pests are subject to change with increased

movement of people and materials around the world.

Information on pest identification, biology and habits,

compiled on an international basis, is appropriate for the urban

environment. A global census indicates that nearly 2300 insects

and other arthropods have some level of pest status around the

148

world. Some are only occasional invaders of houses and other

buildings, some are closely associated with the foods, fabrics,

and other aspects of dwellings and others are linked to plants and

animals in domestic and peridomestic habitats. Many of these

species are capable of adapting to the soil conditions, climate

and building construction in other regions of the world, and

becoming established in pest populations. Regional conditions

may after some behaviors, but morphological features and the

basic life cycle will remain unchanged and control strategies are

usually transferable from region to region.

URBAN ECOSYSTEM :

Major ecosystems can be broadly classified as natural,

agricultural and urban. Urban ecosystems are primitive sites where

the interacting plant and animal communities have not been

altered by human activity. There are few, if these in the world

today, and a more practical definition of natural ecosystems might

be undisturbed habitats that have had limited human influence

and retain a portion of their original flora and fauna. An impor-

tant feature of these habitats is the populations of native plants

and animals. These are the reservoir populations of many

species that have adapted to agricultural and urban conditions.

Agricultural and urban ecosystems are defined by their use and

the degree to which their biotic and abiotic features have been

altered by human activity. These ecosystems contain few of the

features that characterize their natural origins; many of the

149

features were built or brought there, or designed by humans.

(B) URBAN SLUMS :

Delhi, capital of India, is home to about 3 million people

living in slums and it is estimated that 45% of its population lives

in unauthorized colonies, jhuggi jhompri (JJ) and urban villages.

As the UNHABITAT definition status a slum household is a group

of individuals living under the same roof in an urban area that

lack one of more of the following :

1. Durable housing of a permanent nature that protects against

extreme climate conditions.

2. Sufficient living space which means not more than three

people sharing the same roof.

3. Easy access to safe water in sufficient amounts at an

affordable price.

4. Access to adequate sanitation in the form of a private or

public toilet shared by a reasonable number of people.

5. Security of tenure that prevents forced evictions.

DEFINING THE ISSUE :

For the purpose of Census of India 2001, Slum areas broadly

constitute :

1. All specified areas notified as “slums” by state / local

government and UT administration under any act.

150

2. All areas recognized as “Slums” by State/local government

and UT administration, which may not have been formally

notified as slum under any act.

3. A compact area with a population of at least 300 or about

60-70 households of poorly built congested tenements, in

unhygienic environment usually with inadequate infrastruc-

ture and lacking in proper sanitation and drinking water

facilities.

The slum areas are those that are notified under the Slum

Improvement and Clearance Areas Act of 1956. Building and/or

areas that are considere to be unfit for human habitation may be

declared as the slum areas under section 3 of the act. As such,

they are considered to be legal structures and are eligible for

benefits under the act. The squatter or JJ cluster settlements on

the other hand are considered as encroachments on public and

private lands. They are, therefore, seen as illegal settlements.

According to the United Nations, the proportion of urban

dwellers living in slums decreased from 47 percent to 37 percent

in the developing world between 1990 and 2005. However, due

to rising population, the number of slum dwellers is rising. One

billion people worldwide live in slums and the figure will likely

to grow to 2 billion by 2030.

As India is urbanizing very fast and along with this, the

slum population is also increasing. India’s urban population is

151

increasing at a faster rate than its total population. With over 575

million people, India will have 41% of its population living in

cities and towns by 2030 from the present level of 286 million

and 28%. However, most of them do not have access to basic

facilities like drinking water and sanitation.

Because of the lack at affordable prices to different

categories of residents, various types of unplanned settlements

have come up in Delhi. According to an estimate, the population

residing in different types of settlements in 2006 was as shown in

Figure - 5.1.

Among the urban poor, the slum dwellers are the poorest.

The very definition of slums points at the acute drinking water

and sanitation crisis for the slum dwellers. A slum in India is

defined as “a cluster inside urban areas without having water and

sanitation access.”

The National Sample Survey Organization Survey conducted

in 2002 found that in 84% of the notified slums the main water

Figure - 5.1

152

source is through tap water supply. But these numbers mask

differences across the states of India. In Bihar none of the slums

get water via the tap.

In Chhattisgarh, Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh less than 35%

of slums get tap water. Nearly 44% of non-notified slums do not

have a drainage system of any type whereas only 15% of notified

slums do not have a drainage system.

A similar picture emerges in the case of latrines. Nearly

half of the non-notified slums do not have a latrine of any type. In

contrast only 17% of notified slums do not have a latrine. How-

ever, the past few years have seen significant improvements in

water and sanitation situation in slums. But, that is not a source of

solace as there is still a vast number of slum dweller to be

provided these basic facilities.

CHARACTERIZING LIFE IN SLUMS :

While studying and assessing the feasibility of any policy

it is imperative that there are certain parameters that would help

breakdown the objectives of the policies. Each of these schemes

must be compared with the current situation for slum dwellers

since from their perspective the next best option is starting a new

slum and living in the same conditions as before and thus, the

aforementioned conditions remain. Benchmarks and weightings

to these parameters must also be set before comparison of the

policy objectives so that the methodology is clear. To clearly

153

identify these parameters an understanding of the current situa-

tion and of life as slums dwellers is required. This situation can

be categorized into physical, legal, social, political and economic

characteristics of living in slums as shown in the Figure 5.2.

As can be seen, the physical characteristics of slum life

include shelter but lack a permanent residence, a house and most

of the times even space. The average population density in a shanty

town in Delhi is 3,00,000 people per square kilometer and an

average dwelling houses 6-8 people, yet measures only 6 ft. by 8

ft. Many slums have no latrine facilities, and those that do have

an average of 1 latrine serving 27 households. 1 water pump is

used by 1000 people on average and more often than not water

flows through these pumps only once a day. These low hygiene

and sanitation facilities lead to unhealthy living conditions in the

slums. This, along with illegally high rates for electricity makes

every basic need for slum dwellers is the close proximity of the

slums to most of the resident’s places of work, thus negating

transport costs or reducing it due to convenient transport stations

close by.

Moving onto the economic characteristics, we discuss prob-

ably the main reason for the existence of slums. As mentioned,

people migrate to Delhi from surrounding areas in an attempt to

find employment and improve their own and the lives of their

families. Many a time, these laborers come from their villages on

a contract but end up staying on in Delhi looking to find more

154

work here rather than in their village. Another common case is

that of those who open their own shop or work station in the slum

and operate out of there, such as the local “dhobi” (laundry man)

or tailor. Also because of lack of useable capital many of these

ventures are remain extremely small scale. From the legal aspect,

most of the slums in Delhi are unauthorized i.e. not recognized

and therefore still an illegal encroachment on state land. Because

of this, there is no security of tenure and hardly any dwellers

invest in their houses. Also, in the case that a slum is partially

recognized by the government, i.e. cases when residents before a

certain date are recognized as licensed owners of the land, there

are many hurdles to be faced by the slum dwellers before they

are finally established owners.

For social characteristics, the fact that there are many fairly

good and affordable schools is an important consideration along

with the scene of community and companionship within the slums.

And lastly, the slum dwellers, because of their large numbers,

are eyed by politicians as vote banks where they make many

promises but no one holds them to it.

POVERTY PROFILE OF DELHI :

The Planning Commission estimates the proportion and

number of poor based on the projection of minimum needs and

effective consumption. Such a projection is based on the norm of

2100 calorie per capita per day consumption for an urban area.

155

The calorie norms are invariably expressed in monetary terms

that change with respect to weighted commodity indices of the

consumer price index.

Figure 5.3 shows that the percentage of people below

poverty line (BPL) stood at 52.23% for Delhi in 1973-74. The

figure has been declining steadily to 27.89% in 1983; 16.03 in

1993-94. The percentage of people below poverty line declined

to 10.02% in 2001. Table 5.1 presents the zone wise BPL

population.

TABLE - 5.1

BELOW POVERTY LINE POPULATION

Year Rural BPL %age to Urban BPL %age topopulation Total population Total(in Lakh) (in Lakh)

1973 1.06 24.44 21.78 52.23 1983 0.44 7.66 17.95 27.89 1987 0.10 1.29 10.15 13.56 1993 0.19 1.19 15.32 16.03 2001 0.07 0.40 11.42 9.42

Source : Economic Survey Report, Govt. of Delhi, Delhi.

Figure 5.3

156

SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE OF POOR :

The socio-economic profile of segment of population

categorized as poor is of strategic importance for both planning

purposes, and for managing the habitat and its environmental

up-gradation and improvement.

However, comprehensive data is not available for the whole

of Delhi, although generalization can be made on the following

parameters based on data available from the few available sur-

veys and studies. It is important to keep in perspective however

that inhabitants of LIG/ EWS areas are not homogenous segment.

(a) Income and Expenditure :

The average total monthly income, per household, ranges

from Rs. 1500-2500 among the poor. The expenditure of these

families is around 5-10% more than their incomes. The per capita

monthly income and expenditure is Rs. 245 & Rs. 423 respec-

tively. Poor households, therefore, are increasingly dependent upon

loans from the local moneylenders. The monthly income of around

25-30% households is above Rs. 1500 and around 45-50% house

holds is below Rs. 1000.

(b) Access to Housing :

Housing is a basic need of the poor. Most of the poor do

not have access to secure land tenure. 85% of the poor are squat-

ters, and are vulnerable to frequent eviction. 6% of the poor live

in rented accommodation and have to pay a substantial portion of

157

their income for rent. Most importantly, such rental quarters do

not have even basic infrastructure facilities. The quality of life

led by these people is extremely poor.

(c) Occupation Profile of Poor :

41% of these families work as casual laborers, as most of

them are unskilled. However, one-third of the poor also work in

the service sector and only 20-25% is self-employed. Therefore,

nearly 52% of the poor households do not have access to a

dependable occupation and secure incomes.

(d) Migration Status and Poor :

The employment opportunities (formal and informal) in

Delhi have attracted migrants from all over the country, particu-

larly from the backward state areas due to regional economic

imbalances. In 1961 the annual migration of low income house-

holds into Delhi were estimated to be around 70,000 and that

number has increased every year making it close to an approxi-

mate net addition of around 4 lakh settlers every year, migrating

from various parts of the country in search of livelihood. This

influx of population has resulted in an increased population of

city, pressure on civic amenities, crime, social imbalances, eco-

nomic exploitation, unplanned growth, deterioration of the city

beautification, culture etc.

(e) Access to Infrastructure :

The infrastructure facilities that have been covered are water

158

and sources of energy for the urban poor. A majority of the poor

families (47%) have access to water from community sources.

16% of the families do not have any definite source of water.

With respect to source of light, nearly 30% of the families depend

on kerosene lamps.

(f) Pavement Dwellers :

Around 1 lakh homeless people constitute another

component of the poor in Delhi. They are mostly found in the

Walled City or its surrounding areas and generally sleep on the

pavements. There are around 10 night shelters located at Azadpur,

Subzi Mandi, Paharganj, Jhandewalan, Red Fort, Old Delhi

Railway Station, Azad Market and Roshanara Road. The night

shelters operated by MCD provide accommodation to only male

dwellers.

SHELTER OPTIONS :

The poor typically inhabit unplanned or semi-planned

developments. In Delhi they are classified as :

(a) Notified slums in old walled city area;

(b) Resettlement colonies;

(c) Relocated JJ clusters or squatter settlements.

The section below describe the characteristics of these

areas.

THE OLD WALLED CITY AREA :

In Delhi, areas designated or notified as slums under the

159

act are generally located in the walled city and its adjoining

environs. There are 319 katras in the walled city area with about

3,000 buildings or properties. Out of these, 365 properties have

been identified as dangerous and therefore require resettlement

of inhabitants. In addition, there are 400 properties, which are

with the Evacuee Property Cell of Land and Building Department

of Delhi Government.

SQUATTER SETTLEMENTS/ JJ CLUSTERS :

The squatter settlements are encroachments on mainly

public land. As such these are illegal clusters (JCs) and are

devoid of any legal entitlements. However, efforts have been made

by the government to extend basic social and environmental

services to them.

LOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF JJ CLUSTERS :

JJ clusters are scattered all over the city. Generally they

are situated on the vacant land along railway lines, roads, drains

and river embankments and also vacant spaces near residential,

industrial and commercial complexes.

Figure 5.4

160

Figure 5.4 shows that around 55 percent of squatters are

near the residential areas and 40% along the road berms as also

shown in the complete picture in Table 5.2.

TABLE - 5.2

AREAWISE STATUS OF JJ CLUSTERS IN DELHI

Areas with Number of squatters %age to total encroachment Residential Areas 34100 55.86 Road Berms 24184 39.62 Park and open spaces 966 1.58 Schools 500 0.82 Market 1093 1.79 Railway Station 200 0.33 TOTAL 61043 100.00

Source : Sabir Ali, Environment Scenario of Delhi Slums, Centre for social Develop

ment Studies - 1998.

It is clear from Table 5.3 that around 70% of clusters have

less than 500 JJ’s. This percentage has remained constant from

1991-2001. The sharp decline in number of JJ clusters (1994-

2001) is attributed to large scale relocation of JJs since 1999.

TABLE - 5.3

SIZE WISE DISTRIBUTION OF JJ CLUSTERS

No. of JJ in 1991 1994 2001 clusters Upto 100 496 396 227 1119 101-500 311 446 295 1052 501-1000 59 121 110 290 1001-1500 30 54 37 121 1500 & above 33 63 59 155Source : (i) Slum Department, MCD Delhi; (ii) Status Report for Delhi-21, Delhi Urban

Environment and Infrastructure Improvement Project (DUEIIP), January 2001.

161

Figure 5.5 shows the size-wise distribution of JJclusters

in NCT Delhi in 2001.

AREAS WITH CONCENTRATION OF JJ CLUSTERS :

The spread of JJ clusters ranges from a plot of 0.4 acres with 8

JJs to JJcs as large as 50 acres with 10,000 households & 45000

populations. The average number of JJ per acre comes to 200

with 193 being the lowest (Najafgarh area) and 206 the highest

(Gole Market and Kalkaji areas) (Refer to Map 5.1). The

average area of JJ is 20m2. Some of the major areas with such

concentrations are given below :

(i) HIGH CONCENTRATION :

(a) Minto Road/ Gole Market/ Matia Mahal (129 clusters, 43388

JJs, 215.08 Acres) - NDMC Area.

(b) Badarpur/ Tuglaqabad/ Saket (79 clusters, 64187 JJs, 79 Acres)-

MCD area.

Figure 5.5

162

(c) Moti Nagar/ Patel Nagar/ Rajendra Nagar (72 clusters, 35,427

JJs, 175.45 Acres) - MCD Area.

(d) Jahangirpuri/ Adarsh Nagar/ Model Town/ Wazirpur (117 clus-

ters, 71538 JJs, 356 Acres) - MCD Area.

(e) Badli/ Shahbad-Daulatpur (21 clusters, 27551 JJs, 137.70 Acres)-

MCD Area.

(ii) MEDIUM CONCENTRATION :

(a) Delhi Cantonment/ Janakpuri/ Tilak Marg (17 clusters, 18,982

JJs, 95.03 Acres) - MCD Area.

(b) Biswas Nagar/ Shahdara/ Babarpur (44 clusters, 18,915 JJs, 88.91

Acres) - MCD Area.

(c) Hauzkhas. R.K. Puram (52 clusters, 14,110 JJs, 70.22 acres) -

NDMC Area.

(iii) LOW CONCENTRATION :

(a) Nazafgarh/ Nasirpur/ Palam (11 clusters, 363 JJs, 1.83 Acres) -

MCD Area.

(b) Sarojini Nagar/ Kalkaji/ Malviya Nagar/ Ambedkar Nagar/

Kasturba Marg (45 clusters, 11,802 JJs, 68.42 Acres) - NDMC

Area.

GROWTH OF SQUATTER SETTLEMENTS :

The squatter settlements or Jhuggi jhopari clusters (JJC)

assume strategic importance as far as issues of unorganized settle-

163

ments are concerned. As mentioned in Table - 5.4 in 1951 Delhi

had 12,749 jhuggi jhoparis (JJS) scattered over 199 clusters. By

1973 the number of JJS had reached 98,483 spread over 1373

clusters. The resettlement scheme pursued in 1962-77, with a

concentrated effort in 1975-77 resulted in the resettlement of 2.4

lakh JJS in different parts of Delhi. In 1977 only 20,000 JJ house-

holds had gone upto 1.13 lakhs. In 2001 the JJ clusters had declined

to (729 from 1080 in 1994) due to relocation of around 300

clusters from Gautampuri, Kingsway Camp, Ashok Vihar, AIIMS

and Hauz Khas etc.

TABLE - 5(4)

YEARWISE STATUS OF JJ CLUSTERS IN DELHI

Year JJ Clusters Jhuggi Area in PopulationHHS HA

1951 199 12749 21.1 63745

1973 1373 98483 164.1 492415

1983 534 113000 188.3 565000

1990 929 259000 431.7 1295000

1997 1100 600000 902.1 3000000

2001 728 429662 650.2 2148310

Source : Slum Deptt., Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi.

LAND OWNING AGENCIES AND JJ CLUSTERS :

The land owning agencies in whose area the JJ clusters are

situated are given in Table 5.5. Eighty three percent of DDA land

is squatted on by 600 JJ clusters.

164

TABLE - 5.5

LAND OWNING AGENCIES & JJ CLUSTERS

LO Agencies NO. of Jhuggies Population Area in Acres1990 1994 1994

DDA 280988 349705 1856683 1865.93

L&Do 21530 29415 132327 149.86

Railway 12161 17346 78929 84.34

MCD 8428 11052 52045 47.29

NDMC 3226 4487 20182 22.52

Gram Sabha 4132 4360 19619 21.31

Cantonment 1570 1700 7064 7.86 Board

Source : Status Report for Delhi- 21 Delhi Urban Environment

and infrastructure Improvement Project (DUEIIP), January 2001

ACCESS TO INFRASTRUCTURE IN SLUMS/ JJ CLUSTERS:

Water and sanitation facilities, in these unorganized

colonies, particularly JJ clusters, are poor. Only 21% of colonies

are covered with piped water supply and 10% are covered by

sanitation. Table 5.6 presents a satisfactory level of infrastruc-

ture availability in unplanned settlements, but these facilities are

non- functional in around 75-80% of the settlements. The average

population served by one PSP ranges from 250-300 against the

standard of 150. Moreover, average waiting at PSP is 20-30

minutes. Around 85-90% of JJ clusters did not have even

community toilets, forcing habitants to defecate in the open near

the water bodies or drainage channels.

165

TABLE - 5.6

WATER AND SANITATION STATUS IN THEUNPLANNED SETTLEMENTS (2004)

Service provision in Piped water supply Sewer facility unplanned settlement No. % of colonies No. % of colonies

Regularized 557 98.2 458 80.7 unauthorized colonies

Resettlement colonies 44 100.0 44 100.0

JJ Clusters 158 21.7 72 9.8

Source : Slum Department, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi.

RESETTLEMENT COLONIES :

Under the schemes for resettlement of JJ clusters 47

resettlement colonies were developed during 1961-77. Around

2.0 lakh plots were developed accommodating about 2.4 lakh

households. These resettlement colonies have degenerated due to

intense population pressure and unorganized development. There-

fore investment towards up-gradation of physical infrastructure

has to be made for improving civic life.

LOCATION OF RESETTLEMENT COLONIES :

The spatial distribution of these colonies indicates that they

are proliferating mainly in the South-East, North-East, North-West,

South-West and Central parts of the NCT of Delhi. These are five

colonies in South-East, eight in North-East, fifteen in North-West,

seven in South-West and twelve in Central Delhi.

166

RELOCATION SITES :

The Map 5.2 shows that there are around 12 relocation

sites as Bhalaswa, Holambi Kalan, Pappan Kalan, Rohini, Narela,

Bakanwar, Madanpur Khadar etc. The most recent relocation has

been made to three principal sites. These are Dwarka (known

also as Pappan Kalan), Rohini, Narela and Savda Ghevara. The

main pockets from where JJ clusters were relocated are Central,

South and East Delhi areas. Thus, during 1999-2000, 3741 squat-

ter households from the JJ clusters at CGO Complex, Chankyapuri,

Kotla Mubarakpur, Andrews Ganj, Sadiq Nagar, Mahaki Sarai,

Shahdara were moved to Narela and Rohini. 27.4 acres of land

has been allotted at Molar Band for shifting of the JJ clusters at

Gautam Nagar behind AIIMS as shown in Map 5.3. In 1997-98,

DDA allocated 32 acres of land in Tehkhand Village for reloca-

tion of squatter families.

These relocation resettlement sites offer no security of

tenure to habitants who begin a new life without security, basic

services, schools and other basic amenities.

SLUM DEVELOPMENT POLICIES IN PLACE :

While evaluating the policies affecting housing for slum

dwellers we take a top down approach by first giving a brief

overview of the National Housing Policy 2007, and laid out for

Delhi’s slums by various authorities.

167

(i) NATIONAL URBAN HOUSING AND HABITAT POLICY 2007:

The National Urban Housing and Habitat Policy 2007 states

its goal as ‘affordable housing for all’ in the country. It promotes

various types of Public Private Partnerships and pays special

emphasis on the urban poor, intending to promote sustainable

development of housing in the country with a view to ensuring

equitable supply of land, shelter and services at affordable prices

to all sections of society. The policy focused on multiple stake-

holders the private sector, the cooperative sector, the industrial

sector for labor housing and the services and institutional sector

for employee housing. To attain the overarching goal of afforable

housing for all, emphasis is laid on urban planning, increasing

supply of land and use of spatial incentives like additional floor

area ratio (FAR), transferable development rights, and increased

flow of funds, effective solid waste management and use of

renewal sources of energy. Encouraging integrated townships and

special economic zones (SEZs), the policy calls for reservation

of 10-15 percent land in every new public and private housing

projects or 20-25 percent FAR whichever is greater to for EWS

and LIG housing through appropriate spatial incentives.

The private sector would be permitted assembling land

within the purview of master plans. The policy also sets action

plans for urban slum dwellers with a special package being

prepared for cooperative housing, labor housing and employees

housing. The primary choice would be to give provision of shelter

168

to urban poor at their present location or near their work place.

The role of housing and provision of basic services to the

urban poor has been integrated into the objectives of the Jawaharlal

Nehru Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM).

(ii) BASIC SERVICES TO THE URBAN POOR, JNNURM :

The Sub Mission II of the JNNURM involves Basic

Services to the Urban Poor (BSUP) including the integrated

housing and slum development programme. The objectives of the

mission are outlined as :

1. Focused attention to integrated development of Basic Services to

the urban poor in the cities covered under the mission.

2. Provision of Basic Services to Urban Poor including security of

tenure at affordable prices, improved housing, water supply,

sanitation and ensuring delivery through convergence of other

already existing universal services of the Government for Educa-

tion, health and social security care will be taken to see that the

urban poor are provided housing near their place of occupation.

3. Secure effective linkages between asset creation and asset man-

agement to that the Basic Services to the Urban Poor created in

the cities are not only maintained efficiently but also become self-

sustaining over time.

4. Ensure adequate investment of funds to fulfill deficiencies in the

Basic Services to the Urban Poor.

169

5. Scale up delivery of civic amenities and provision of utilities

with emphasis on universal access to urban poor.

The Delhi Master Plan 2021 has laid emphasis on improve-

ment of the living conditions of the 45% of Delhities living in

slums and JJ clusters in the next ten years as part of the improve-

ment in the livability of the city for its inhabitants.

(iii) THREE PRONGED APPROACH IN DELHI :

Of the settlements considered as sub-standard slum and

squatter settlements rank among the worst and it is the urban poor

that live predominantly in such settlements. The program of

squatter clearance was discontinued at the end of sixth plan (from

1985). Accordingly no major settlement program was carried out

until 1992 when a Revised Resettlement Policy was formulated

by the DDA. This did not mean that there were no resettlement

works in progress. The general policy adopted by the govern-

ment since then it twofold. One is that no fresh encroachments

shall be permitted on public land and the second is that past

encroachments (those in existence till 30.01.1990) would not be

removed without providing alternatives.

Squatter settlements are to be found throughout the city but

especially on the vacant land along railway lines, roads, drains,

river embankments, and around resettlement colonies. The strat-

egy of the government towards slums/ squatter settlements has

been mainly of clearance.

170

In recent years, however, there have been some changes in

the attitude and strategies. Since 1991 three strategies have been

used in Delhi, which are as follows :

1. Improvement of the slum environment.

2. Relocation of the slums

3. In situ-up-gradation and rehabilitation.

(iv) IMPROVEMENT OF THE SLUM ENVIRONMENT :

Since 1987, in JJ clusters and notified slums which are not

being relocated or developed with the in situ approach, basic

urban services and amenities are being provided under ‘Envi-

ronmental improvement in urban slum scheme’. The facilities are

extended to all JJ clusters even those that developed after 1990.

The facilities being provided under the scheme are :

1. Pay and use Jan Suvidha Complexes containing toilets and bath-

rooms at the community level or the provision of mobile toilet,

vans in all those JJ clusters where the Jan Suvidha Complex can

not be provided.

2. Water supply either through water hydrants, hand pipes or water

tanker.

3. Street lighting.

4. Dusbins for collection of domestic waste.

5. Paved pathways and drains.

171

(v) RELOCATION OF SLUMS :

Jhuggi Jhopri resettlement, relocation scheme was started

in the Union Territory of Delhi for the rehousing of squatters on

government and private lands in 1960. The scheme began with

the allotment of two room tenements to 3,560 JJ households.

Subsequently, partially developed plots of 80 square yards were

allotted under the scheme to the squatters on a nominal rent.

However, due to demand of land in Delhi and the fact that the

allotment procedure was misused, size of plots was reduced to

40 square meters and then 25 square meters. Under the present

situation, Relocation is carried out for only those JJ clusters and

slums that are required by the land owning agency for public

interest projects.

Since the inception of the scheme with effect from 1990-

1991, so far about 70,000 plots have been developed and about

60,000 families have been rehabilitated at Dwarka, Rohini, Narela,

Bawana, Holambi, Molar Band, Madanpur Khaddar & Sawda

Ghevre keeping in view the scarcity of land in Delhi and as per

the directions of the Delhi Government and Government of India.

The Delhi Government has formulated a new policy for the

resettlement of squatter families in Delhi. Under the new policy,

Delhi Government has proposed to provide built up flats instead

of plots to the slum dwellers, economically weaker sections

under the Rajiv Awas Yojna, JNNURM. Under this scheme, the

Delhi Government aims to provide 4 lakh flats by 2012.

172

(vi) IN SITU UP-GRADATION AND REHABILITATION :

There has been a general shift in the approach to slum and

JJ clusters in recent years. The emphasis is now on the improve-

ment of the environment of the JJ cluster and their in situ rehabili-

tation wherever possible. The in situ up gradation is undertaken

after the area has been notified as a slum area under the Slum

Area Act of 1956. The scheme involves replanning of JJ dwell-

ing units in modified layout by redistributing the encroached land

pockets amongst the squatter families. The JJ households are given

sites of 10 to 12.5 square meters for construction of their own

shelters. The housing plots are generally designed in a cluster

around open courtyards. The beneficiary constructs the shelter

under a self help approach with technical extension services

provided by the slum and JJ department of the MCD. So far 5,583

families have been rehabilitated at Prayog Vihar, Ekta Vihar, Shanti

Vihar and Shahbad Daulatpur Phase I. The implementation of the

in situ- up-gradation is very poor due to non availability of the

Notice of Consent from the concerned land owning agency. A

new policy of in situ slum up grading also suggests, as in the case

of relocation, the provision of developed flats on the same

location instead of plots for the slum dwellers.

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) decided to take

up in situ development towards rehabilitation of slum dwelling

units of about 25 square meters will be about 47,500. These will

be taken up on public- private partnership model in which the

173

land occupied by slum dwellers will be made available to de-

velopers, who will construct houses in accordance with the num-

bers identified by the DDA. These houses will be constructed in

same parts of the area while in the remaining areas the developer

will be allowed to carry out commercial exploitation of the land.

This would enable the developer to spill over some of the costs

from building the rehabilitation units to the commercial activity,

thereby reducing the burden on the slum dwellers as well. This

mixed development allows them to get the cross subsidy by way

of targeting two different segments of society.

This model is being applied at the kathputli colony where

residents will have access to 12 storeyed buildings in which the

ground floors will be devoted to promoting artistic and commer-

cial enterprise since most of the residents are puppeteers, crafts-

men or musicians. The constructions will house 2,800 dwelling

units meant for the colony’s residents. The site will also boast of

a separate 2.1 acre commercial space to be developed by private

developers and “high-category residential apartmentments” in 2.4

acres which will help boost the earning of artisans and crafts-

men, according to the DDA’s plans.

In the scheme, modeled on Mumbai’s slum rehabilitation

programme, private players will join hands with the government

and the work of clearing the slums would proceed in phases.

Since residents will be resettled, tents will be pitched to provide

174

temporary accommodation to the people till the project is

completed.

(vii) DRAFT NATIONAL SLUM POLICY 2001 :

Another more specific, policy the “draft” National Slum

Policy is yet to be ratified by the government. The draft National

Slum Policy envisages cities without slums. Towards fulfillment

of this vision, the policy adopts an approach of in situ up gradation

and improvement. It recommends clearance only in exceptional

circumstances. It, therefore, talks of urban growth with equity

and justice and makes plea for greater participation of communi-

ties and civil society in all areas of planning, capacity building

and development. Correspondingly it proposes a series of

interventions with regards to definitions, tenure, planning,

economic empowerment, governance and management, shelter up

gradation etc.

The governing principal of the Draft National Slum Policy

are as follows :

1. The endorsement of an upgrading and improvement approach in

all slums, and the acceptance of the necessity of slum clearance

in an extremely defined circumstances.

2. Recognition that households in all urban informal settlements

should have access to certain basic minimum services, irrespec-

tive of land tenure or occupancy status.

175

3. The goal that planning in all cities should have the objective of

creating cities without slums.

4. The objective of ensuring that urban growth takes place with

equity and distributive justice.

5. The intention that urban local bodies should work in collabora-

tion with all other stakeholders to enhance the impact of slum

development through building the capacities of the poor and

empowering them to improve their own living conditions.

6. The adoption of a more “enabling” approach to the delivery of

basic social services to the poor as a result of more effective

mobilization of community resources and skills to complement

public resource allocations.

7. A greater participation of communities and civil society in all

areas of planning, capacity building and development.

The draft policy is however silent over the ways in which

such goals could be realized. Also, the definition of all under

served serviced lands as slums will hinder and deny the most

needy and vulnerable from having access to resources for up-

gradation and improvement.

POLICY COMPARISON :

A comparative study of these policies and schemes can now

be undertaken, based on the parameters discussed earlier. The

National Urban Housing and Habitat Policy 2007 seems to be a

176

step in the right direction, with focus on affordable housing,

public private partnerships (PPP), sustainable development of

housing in the country, special package being prepared for

cooperative housing, labor housing and employees housing and

prioritizing houses for the urban poor at their present location or

near their work place using the in- situ slum rehabilitation

approach. Using the parameters as tools for analysis we see that

with PPPs and the in situ rehabilitation approach, affordable

housing for slum dwellers at their present location is an option.

This enables them to earn their livelihood just as they did before,

in the slums. The security of tenure objective is also achieved

through the policy. Only the characteristics of housing provided

remains questionable. The quality of houses, its cost and the

allocation can be a hindrance to the residents. Sometimes the

costs are too high for them and at other times the quality of the

houses is compromised. Under the JNNURM, the improved quality

of housing is specifically included and allocation is said to be on

the basis of need (determined through income). As is the case

with both the relocation and the in situ rehabilitation policy, any

worker whose source of livelihood is within the slums (dhobi,

tailor etc.) might be compromised unless there is specific

mention of a workstation being supplied. Thus this would be a

violation of the first parameter and the people affected by this

would prefer to stay in some other slum again. This vary case

would be an important characteristic of the third approach of

177

improvement of the slum environment or up- gradation. The

livelihoods of the residents are maintained even though the slum,

not lacking basic facilities but still an unplanned part of the city,

still exists. The draft national slum policy outlines its objectives

but has not clearly defined how these objectives will be met and

therefore no analysis on the basis of parameters and incentives

for residents can be undertaken. Thus, as is the case with most of

the policies in India, each of these policies, schemes and

approaches looks impeccable on paper but the ground realities

of these projects are often very different from what is claimed

and therefore it is necessary that a follow up mechanism be

incorporated into each of the policies to ensure their efficiency.

(C) URBAN GARBAGE GROUNDS :

Various human processes produce waste. Disposing waste

products is major global problem since last many decades.

Landfill is considered as the primitive way to organized waste

dumping in various parts of earth. It is a method of removing the

refuse on land without creating a hazard to public health or safety.

Landfills may consist of domestic waste dumping sites as well as

sites utilized by several manufacturers. This method is also

adopted for other waste management tasks for example the

momentary storage, consolidation and relocation, or meting out

of waste substance such as sorting, treatment, or recycling. The

landfill is supportive process of waste diminution and has a key

role in resource revival. A landfill also denotes the practice in

178

which ground has been packed in with soil and rocks as an alter-

native of garbage which solves many important purposes such as

for building construction.

Landfill is emerged as the most practicable ecological

substitute for the specific waste removal in various countries.

Today government priority is to set up a waste policy by

applying the ideology in order to deal with environmental risks,

the economic and health dangers of resource degradation. These

strategies are basically planned to maintain landfill practices

which will stabilize the landfill sites in present generation. The

main intent of waste organization is to deal with the garbage

produced by existing generation and do not switch over waste

related harms to next generation. The Landfill Directive is

committed to raise standards and lessen harmful consequences

on the surroundings, groundwater, surface waters, soil, and

restrictions on the universal impact of waste dumping. For

commercial purpose, a landfill technique must meet definite

requirements, which are linked to many important factors. The

first factor is the location. Landfill must have easy access to

transportation via road. It must have stability such as fundamen-

tal geology, earthquake faults, water table. Another factor is

capacity. The existing annulled space must be planned by assess-

ment of the landform with a proposed re-establishment profile.

This computation of capacity is based on density of the wastes,

amount of intermediate and daily cover, and amount of settle-

179

ment. Landfill must have protection of soil and water through

installation of inside layer and collection systems. To handle speci-

fied harmless waste landfills such method must be applied through

which the trash are cramped to small area, compressed to decrease

their quantity, enclosed with layers of soil. Completely lined

landfills reinstate the previous one, unlined deposits that were

earlier used. In the operation of landfill, the garbage collection

trucks are weighed at entrance and their load is checked for wastes.

Then, these vehicles drop their load. After loads are dumped,

compactors or dozers spread and compressed the waste on the

operational field. This flattened waste is enclosed with soil

every day. Other waste wrap materials are sprayed on froth

products and transitory mantles. These mantles can be elevated

into place with tracked excavators and then detatched the next

day proceeding to waste placement. Chipped wood and chemi-

cally ‘fixed’ bio-solids are the substitute cover. Since the 20th

century, population is exploding speedily in developed areas; it

is a need of an hour to implement land reprocesses tractics for

completed landfills. The common usages are parks, golf courses.

Office buildings and industrial uses are made of a completed

landfill. Many steps are taken to disperse garbage produced

through communities, Industry and other establishments. At the

end of 20th century, different methods to waste removal to land-

fill and burning have started. The apparent substitutes to landfills

are waste reduction and recycling policies. Incineration is the

180

most effectual technique of plummeting volume and weight of

solid waste by burning in a well designed furnace.

Landfill reclamation is one of the control measures to check

spoilage of landscape. It is the burning of landfill garbage at high

temperature via the plasma-arc gasification procedure. Another

important way to deal with solid waste is composing by which

the organic components of solid waste are biologically decom-

posed under controlled aerobic conditions. In this method,

plastics, rubber and leather are separated from the solid waste

and the remaining organic matter is decomposed aerobically or

an aerobically to end product called compost. Anaerobic

digestion, mechanical biological treatment, pyrolysis and gasifi-

cation have all started to establish themselves in the marketplace.

Optional waste disposal technology is quite expensive than

landfill and mass burn incineration is the sole technology for mixed

waste. India is working to develop clean energy sources that can

yield considerable economic, environmental and health benefits

for people. Methane emissions from the solid waste sector in

India are projected to increase significantly over the next 15 years.

Reusing landfill methane gas for energy purposes has the poten-

tial to mitigate 5.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equiva-

lents, which is equal to the annual emissions from one million

vehicles. Currently, there are no operational landfill gas-to-

energy projects in India but several large sites in Delhi, Mumbai

and other cities could support the clean energy projects.

181

Basically, a landfill is a large area of land or an excavated

site that is a carefully designed structure built into or on top of the

ground. The rubbish collected at the landfill is isolated from the

surrounding environment with a bottom liner and a daily cover-

ing of soil. Though the modern landfill practices are technically

sound but still these proven techniques sometimes fail to meet

challenges. These practices require further precision to secure

public areas. Appropriate removal practices should be adopted

to control environmental contamination. These practices include-

All loads must be alienated when unloading in selected area.

Domestic refuse and small things should be kept in the dustbin.

Removal should be permitted exterior the landfill entrance and

video watch is carried out.

SOLID WASTE GENERATION IN NCT DELHI :

The problem of solid waste management in Delhi is as-

suming serious proportions due to increasing population, urban-

ization, changing lifestyles and consumption patterns. There are

24 existing landfill sites for waste management in NCT Delhi

from 16 are filled up, 4 are in operation and other 4 are newly

operated as shown in Map 5.4. The garbage from unauthorized

developments, slums, JJ settlements, etc. is not collected which

further adds to the environmental degradation. The projected

average garbage generation upto the year 2021 is @ 0.68 kg. per

capita per day and total quantum of solid waste is 15750 tonnes/

day as given in Table - 5.7.

182

TABLE - 5.7

QUANTUM OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE(TONNES / DAY)

Local body area Existing Capacity Projected generation

2001 for 2021

MCD 5250 15100

NDMC 245 550

Cantonment 48 100

TOTAL 5543 15750

Management of solid waste involves waste generation,

segregation and storage; waste collection; waste transfer/ trans-

portation treatment, recycle reuse, recovery; and disposal. For

effective waste management, its segregation at the community and

neighbourhood level is imperative. The waste shall be segre-

gated and collected, in separate chambers at dalaos. For this,

involvement of rag pickers with RWAs, CBOs and NGOs is to be

encouraged.

The projected composition of municipal waste for the plan

period is estimated as given in table - 5.8 for biodegradable and

recyclable waste which is segregated at the source, decentral-

ized treatment at neighbourhood level may be adopted, while for

silt, centralized treatment may be followed.

The other type of specialized waste includes biomedical

waste; hazardous waste from industries; construction debris and

fly ash; meat processing centre etc. Disposal of bio-medical waste

183

is to be as per bio-medical waste rules and hazardous waste

requires special handling rules. Proper dumping, recycling and

reuse of construction debris and fly ash have to be linked. Meat

processing centre waste is to be recycled for chicken feed etc.

TABLE - 5.8

PROJECTED COMPOSITION OFTOTAL MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE FOR 2021

Constituents Quantum (in tons) Percentage to totalwaste

Bio- degradable 6000 38

Silt 6000 38

Recyclable 3750 24

TOTAL 15750 100

Notes :(i) Above figures are based on Report on Solid Waste Management in Delhi

conducted by NEERI, Nagpur through DDA;(ii) Figures of MCD are based on Feasibility study in Master Plan for optimal

waste Treatment & Disposal for the entire state of Delhi, June, 2004, by COWIConsultants appointed by MCD.

Considering the nature of solid waste and the economic

aspects of its disposal, major part of solid waste especially silt

has to be disposed off in sanitary landfills. But wherever recy-

cling is possible, it should be preferred than disposing off the

waste in sanitary landfill sites. More viable alternatives to land-

fills are vermiculture, fossilization, composting etc. Waste Mini-

mization Circles (WMCs) should be constituted and made effec-

tive. Implementation and monitoring & Bio-Medical Wastes (Han-

dling & Management) Rules, 1998, for hospitals, nursing homes,

184

and clinics should be taken up. The sites, which are filled up or

are in operation, given in Table - 5.9. The filled up sites may be

reuse for plantation or as recreational area. The proposed sites

for sanitary landfill and compost plants are to be finalized by

MCD. The Map 5.5 shows the area of existing and proposed

landfill sites.

Keeping in view the fact that finding new sanitary landfill

sites in Delhi is becoming extremely difficult there is no option,

as shown by the Map 5.5 & 5.6 but to resort to alternative and

decentralized methods of waste treatment, reduction, recycle and

use, which include vermiculture, fossilization and composting.

TABLE - 5.9

EXISTING LANDFILL SITES FORWASTE MANAGEMENT

S.N. Location Area (in ha.) Remarks

1. Kailash Nagar, East Delhi 1.8 Filled up

2. Tilak Nagar 16.0 Filled up

3. Subroto Park - Filled up

4. Purana Quila/ Bharion Road 2.7 Filled up

5. Timar Pur 16.0 Filled up

6. Sarai Kale Khan 24.0 Filled up

7. Gopal Pur 4.0 Filled up

8. Chhater Pur 1.7 Filled up

9. S.G.T. Nagar 14.4 Filled up

10. I.P. Depot 1.8 Filled up

11. Sunder Nagar 2.8 Filled up

12. Tuglakabad Ext. 2.4 Filled up

185

13. Haiderpur 1.6 Filled up

14. Mandawali Fazilpur 2.8 --

15. Rohini Phase III 4.8 --

16. Near Hastsal Village in West Delhi 9.6 Filled up

17. Site near Gazipur Dairy Farm 28.0 In Operation

18. Site near Jhangirpur/ Bhalswa 16.0 In Operation

19. Okhla Phase I 12.8 In Operation

20. Crossing on G.T. Karnal Road 3.2 In Operation

21. Jaitpur/ Tajpur 9.84 New

22. Near Puthkhurd 55.0 New

23. Bhawana to Narela Road 28.0 New

24. Sultanpur Dabas (Bawana) 16.0 New

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT :

The dumping of solid waste on land is the cause of follow-

ing problems :

(a) WATER POLLUTION :

Toxic liquid (leachate) that flows from the dumped waste

seeps into surface and groundwater and contaminates postable

water.

(b) SOIL POLLUTION :

Toxins seep into the soil and surrounding vegetation, and

move into the food chain through fruits and vegetables grown in

the area.

(c) DUM FIRES :

When waste decomposes, inflammable methane is released

186

which can result in explosion. The smoke released is also highly

toxic for inhalation and contributes to global warming.

(d) SOURCE OF DISEASE :

Dumpsites breed flies, rodents, and pests, which spread

diseases.

(e) OTHER IMPACTS :

Foul smell, visual ugliness, and bird menace which can be

a hazard to airplanes.

CONCLUSION :

The primary goal of any solid waste management system is

to safeguard the health of the citizens and protect the environ-

ment. This is achieved by ensuring proper collection, transporta-

tion, treatment and finally, safe disposal of waste. However, the

last step is missing in most solid waste management systems

implemented in the country.

REFERENCES :

* Gita Dewan Verma (2002): ‘Slumming India—A Chronicle of

Slums and Their Saviours’. Penguin Books, India.

* Voluntary Health Association of India (1993). ‘Delhi—A Tale of

Two Cities’. 40, Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi.

* Sabir Ali (1991). ‘Slums Within Slums’. Vikas Publications, New

Delhi.

187

* Supriti, Barnhardt S. and Ramanathan R. 2002. Urban Poverty

Alleviation in India : A General Assessment and a Particular

Perspective; Bangalore : Ramanathan foundation.

* Subramaniam. 2003. Inequalities in health in India : The Method-

ological construction of indices and measures- Draft report,

Department of health and social behavior, Harvard School of

Public Health.

* Carmines EG, Zeller RA. 1991. Reliability and Validity assess-

ment. Newbury Park : Sage Publications.

* WHO and UNICEF, 2000 : Global Water Supply and Sanitation

Assessment 2000 Report. WHO and UNICEF.

* GNCT. 2006. Delhi Human Development Report 2006. New

Delhi: Oxford University Press.

* Banerji, Manjistha, Provision of Basic Services in the Slums and

Resettlement Colonies of Delhi, Ensuring public accountability

through community action 2005, Institute of Social Studies Trust,

New Delhi.

* Verma, G.D. (2002), Slumming India : A chronicle of slums and

their saviours, Penguin Books India, Delhi.

—:: O ::—

CHAPTER - 5

CIVIC AMENITIES ANDHEALTH HAZARDS

(A) URBAN BORN INSECTS :

Insects and related arthropods of importance in the urban

environment are broadly covered under the auspices of urban

entomology. Most arthropods in human environments go unno-

ticed. However, some species post significant problems because

they directly affect the health of humans or their domesticated

animals, attack human structures, foods, goods, materials, or plants

that adorn urban settings.

A relatively small number of insect species have been

intentionally introduced into the urban environment. Examples

include the gupsy moth, Lymantria dispar that was intentionally

introduced into Massachustts in 1868. It is highly probable also

that the Asian Lady Beetle, Harmonia axyridis, was intentionally

introduced in 1980s. Many pest species have been accidentally

introduced with human commerce and travel. Some invasive

species have adapted themselves to disturbed human habitats and

have rapidly spread world wide via commerce and human travel.

The German cockroach Blattella germanica, is an excellent

example of such a species. It is rarely found outdoors, preferring

heated and controlled environments typically associated with

human food preparation. Probably native to Eastern Asia, it spread

143

throughout the Eastern Mediterranean Region by Greek or

Phoenician Vessels. It remained in Southern Russia until after the

Thirty years war (1618-1648) spreading into Europe and finally

becoming established in restaurants and other food handling

establishments in the rapid modernization of China.

With the increasing rate of urbanization in NCT Delhi,

problems associated with arthropod pests in urban centers will

continue to grow. In 1951, about 14.37 lac people (82.4%) lived

in urban areas. At the turn of the twenty-first century, this had

increased to greater than 129 lac people (93.18%) in Delhi. By

the year 2021, it is estimated that there will be greater than 230

lac people living in urban areas. The most dramatic increases in

urbanization and challenges in Delhi will occur in development;

the complex of urban invasive species will likely spread to these

urban centers, or attain the problem status now associated with

more developed countries. Many of these countries and develop-

ing urban centres exist in areas endemic to arthropod vector

borne diseases such as malaria, dengue, encephalitis, yellow fe-

ver, and plague the importance of urban and medical entomology

in tropical urban centers will increase in the future.

The urban environment in NCT Delhi is a complex of

habitats developed by human from natural sites. Houses, villages,

towns, cities, buildings, roads and other features that characterize

the urban environment in Delhi have gradually and irrecoverably

changed the landscape of natural and agricultural areas. As a part

144

of this change, some habitats and their associated plants and

animal communities were eliminated, while others were expanded

and new ones were created. Many of the new habitats were

intentional - parks, waterways, street trees, turf grass, food stores

but some were consequential- standing water in road side ditches,

garbage and landfill sites near residential neighbourhoods, the

underground sewer and storm drain network in urban and

suburban areas of Delhi. They all provided habitats for a select

group of insects and other arthropods, some of which attained

pest status.

Local conditions, climate, and available resources deter-

mine the distribution of some arthropods in the urban environ-

ment of Delhi, and for some species their abundance is limited.

Other species are broadly adapted to the resources and harbor-

ages in and around buildings, and these are cosmopolitan in their

distribution and pest status. Stable habitats with resources and

conditions suitable for long-term survival support reservoir popu-

lations of pest species, and from these habitats individuals or

groups move or are transported to establish infestations in

unstable or temporary habitats.

PERIDOMESTIC AND DOMESTIC HABITATS :

Within and around buildings, houses, and other urban struc-

tures are habitats that support individuals or populations of plants

and animals. Peridomestic habitats are outside, around the pe-

145

rimeter of structures. They include the external surfaces of

buildings, the ornamental trees, shrubs, and turf grass that

characterize the urban and suburban landscape. Domestic

habitats are indoors and include the plant and animal based

materials in this controlled, anthropogenic environment.

PERIDOMESTIC :

Harborage substrates, food resources, and environmental

conditions of urban landscapes of Delhi generally support a large

numbers. The soil-inhabiting and nesting arthropods in this envi-

ronment include ants that forage indoors and termites that damage

structural wood, ground nest bees and wasps, and occasional or

nuisance pests such as clover mites, millipedes, centipedes, and

springtails. Plant-feeding insects utilize the cultivated urban and

suburban trees and shrubs, and many are aesthetic pests. Blood

feeding mites (chiggers), ticks, mosquitoes and other biting flies

are associated with domestic and feral vertebrates. Species

utilizing building surfaces or perimeter substrates include the

umbrella wasp, hornets, yellow jackets, spiders and scorpions.

Underground sewer and storm drainage pipes provide some

cockroach and rodent species access to urban areas. The garbage

disposal network of collection, sorting, and landfill in Delhi

provide harborage and food for cockroaches, flies, rodents, and

pest birds.

Reservoir populations for many of the pest species estab-

lished in peridomestic habitats are in nearby natural or undis-

146

turbed areas. Woodland tracts and other small or large patches of

green space can support populations of biting flies, wasps and

hornets, ticks, and spiders in Delhi. Here are the populations that

provide the individuals or groups that establish or replenish

infestations in less stable habitats, or re-establish populations

lost to habitat destruction.

DOMESTIC :

Environmental conditions in NCT Delhi indoors are

generally stable and the harborages and food resources are some-

what limited. There may be few species, but those adapted to

specialized resources often occur in large numbers. Stored food,

including packaged whole food and vegetables, organic fabrics

and other materials are the most common harborates and food

resources in the domestic habitat. Directly or indirectly associ-

ated with these are dermestid beetles, flour beetles and moths,

flies and cockroaches. The distribution of domestic products and

similar storage environments has contributed to the cosmopolitan

pest status of many of these insects, in both residential and com-

mercial sites in Delhi. Blood and skin feeding species that breed

indoors are limited, but lice, fleas, bed bugs and mites are medi-

cally important pests for more than one socio-economic level of

society. Insects and other arthropods in the living space are

nuisance pest when they are few and their presence brief, but are

not tolerated when they pose a health treat or persist in large

numbers.

147

Natural habitats and populations for some domestic

species, especially those infesting sored food have been lost. Only

populations in the urban environment in NCT Delhi represent

many of these species or they survive only through their link to

humans (bed bugs, lice). Other indoor pests have reservoir popu-

lations in peridomestic and natural areas. Many of the common

species occur in the nests of bird and rodents and from there

have access to indoor habitats.

INSECT DISPERSAL AND DISTRIBUTION :

International transportation, economic exchange, and

globalization have brought a degree of uniformity to the urban

area around the world, and increased the movement and exchange

of arthropods. The majorities of household and store food pests,

including fruit flies, cockroaches, flour beetles, moths and mites,

have moved with infested commercial goods and now have

cosmopolitan distribution. Peridomestic mosquitoes, subterranean

termites and wood-infesting beetles share the same potential for

widespread distribution. Current distribution records for many

household and structural pests are subject to change with increased

movement of people and materials around the world.

Information on pest identification, biology and habits,

compiled on an international basis, is appropriate for the urban

environment. A global census indicates that nearly 2300 insects

and other arthropods have some level of pest status around the

148

world. Some are only occasional invaders of houses and other

buildings, some are closely associated with the foods, fabrics,

and other aspects of dwellings and others are linked to plants and

animals in domestic and peridomestic habitats. Many of these

species are capable of adapting to the soil conditions, climate

and building construction in other regions of the world, and

becoming established in pest populations. Regional conditions

may after some behaviors, but morphological features and the

basic life cycle will remain unchanged and control strategies are

usually transferable from region to region.

URBAN ECOSYSTEM :

Major ecosystems can be broadly classified as natural,

agricultural and urban. Urban ecosystems are primitive sites where

the interacting plant and animal communities have not been

altered by human activity. There are few, if these in the world

today, and a more practical definition of natural ecosystems might

be undisturbed habitats that have had limited human influence

and retain a portion of their original flora and fauna. An impor-

tant feature of these habitats is the populations of native plants

and animals. These are the reservoir populations of many

species that have adapted to agricultural and urban conditions.

Agricultural and urban ecosystems are defined by their use and

the degree to which their biotic and abiotic features have been

altered by human activity. These ecosystems contain few of the

features that characterize their natural origins; many of the

149

features were built or brought there, or designed by humans.

(B) URBAN SLUMS :

Delhi, capital of India, is home to about 3 million people

living in slums and it is estimated that 45% of its population lives

in unauthorized colonies, jhuggi jhompri (JJ) and urban villages.

As the UNHABITAT definition status a slum household is a group

of individuals living under the same roof in an urban area that

lack one of more of the following :

1. Durable housing of a permanent nature that protects against

extreme climate conditions.

2. Sufficient living space which means not more than three

people sharing the same roof.

3. Easy access to safe water in sufficient amounts at an

affordable price.

4. Access to adequate sanitation in the form of a private or

public toilet shared by a reasonable number of people.

5. Security of tenure that prevents forced evictions.

DEFINING THE ISSUE :

For the purpose of Census of India 2001, Slum areas broadly

constitute :

1. All specified areas notified as “slums” by state / local

government and UT administration under any act.

150

2. All areas recognized as “Slums” by State/local government

and UT administration, which may not have been formally

notified as slum under any act.

3. A compact area with a population of at least 300 or about

60-70 households of poorly built congested tenements, in

unhygienic environment usually with inadequate infrastruc-

ture and lacking in proper sanitation and drinking water

facilities.

The slum areas are those that are notified under the Slum

Improvement and Clearance Areas Act of 1956. Building and/or

areas that are considere to be unfit for human habitation may be

declared as the slum areas under section 3 of the act. As such,

they are considered to be legal structures and are eligible for

benefits under the act. The squatter or JJ cluster settlements on

the other hand are considered as encroachments on public and

private lands. They are, therefore, seen as illegal settlements.

According to the United Nations, the proportion of urban

dwellers living in slums decreased from 47 percent to 37 percent

in the developing world between 1990 and 2005. However, due

to rising population, the number of slum dwellers is rising. One

billion people worldwide live in slums and the figure will likely

to grow to 2 billion by 2030.

As India is urbanizing very fast and along with this, the

slum population is also increasing. India’s urban population is

151

increasing at a faster rate than its total population. With over 575

million people, India will have 41% of its population living in

cities and towns by 2030 from the present level of 286 million

and 28%. However, most of them do not have access to basic

facilities like drinking water and sanitation.

Because of the lack at affordable prices to different

categories of residents, various types of unplanned settlements

have come up in Delhi. According to an estimate, the population

residing in different types of settlements in 2006 was as shown in

Figure - 5.1.

Among the urban poor, the slum dwellers are the poorest.

The very definition of slums points at the acute drinking water

and sanitation crisis for the slum dwellers. A slum in India is

defined as “a cluster inside urban areas without having water and

sanitation access.”

The National Sample Survey Organization Survey conducted

in 2002 found that in 84% of the notified slums the main water

Figure - 5.1

152

source is through tap water supply. But these numbers mask

differences across the states of India. In Bihar none of the slums

get water via the tap.

In Chhattisgarh, Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh less than 35%

of slums get tap water. Nearly 44% of non-notified slums do not

have a drainage system of any type whereas only 15% of notified

slums do not have a drainage system.

A similar picture emerges in the case of latrines. Nearly

half of the non-notified slums do not have a latrine of any type. In

contrast only 17% of notified slums do not have a latrine. How-

ever, the past few years have seen significant improvements in

water and sanitation situation in slums. But, that is not a source of

solace as there is still a vast number of slum dweller to be

provided these basic facilities.

CHARACTERIZING LIFE IN SLUMS :

While studying and assessing the feasibility of any policy

it is imperative that there are certain parameters that would help

breakdown the objectives of the policies. Each of these schemes

must be compared with the current situation for slum dwellers

since from their perspective the next best option is starting a new

slum and living in the same conditions as before and thus, the

aforementioned conditions remain. Benchmarks and weightings

to these parameters must also be set before comparison of the

policy objectives so that the methodology is clear. To clearly

153

identify these parameters an understanding of the current situa-

tion and of life as slums dwellers is required. This situation can

be categorized into physical, legal, social, political and economic

characteristics of living in slums as shown in the Figure 5.2.

As can be seen, the physical characteristics of slum life

include shelter but lack a permanent residence, a house and most

of the times even space. The average population density in a shanty

town in Delhi is 3,00,000 people per square kilometer and an

average dwelling houses 6-8 people, yet measures only 6 ft. by 8

ft. Many slums have no latrine facilities, and those that do have

an average of 1 latrine serving 27 households. 1 water pump is

used by 1000 people on average and more often than not water

flows through these pumps only once a day. These low hygiene

and sanitation facilities lead to unhealthy living conditions in the

slums. This, along with illegally high rates for electricity makes

every basic need for slum dwellers is the close proximity of the

slums to most of the resident’s places of work, thus negating

transport costs or reducing it due to convenient transport stations

close by.

Moving onto the economic characteristics, we discuss prob-

ably the main reason for the existence of slums. As mentioned,

people migrate to Delhi from surrounding areas in an attempt to

find employment and improve their own and the lives of their

families. Many a time, these laborers come from their villages on

a contract but end up staying on in Delhi looking to find more

154

work here rather than in their village. Another common case is

that of those who open their own shop or work station in the slum

and operate out of there, such as the local “dhobi” (laundry man)

or tailor. Also because of lack of useable capital many of these

ventures are remain extremely small scale. From the legal aspect,

most of the slums in Delhi are unauthorized i.e. not recognized

and therefore still an illegal encroachment on state land. Because

of this, there is no security of tenure and hardly any dwellers

invest in their houses. Also, in the case that a slum is partially

recognized by the government, i.e. cases when residents before a

certain date are recognized as licensed owners of the land, there

are many hurdles to be faced by the slum dwellers before they

are finally established owners.

For social characteristics, the fact that there are many fairly

good and affordable schools is an important consideration along

with the scene of community and companionship within the slums.

And lastly, the slum dwellers, because of their large numbers,

are eyed by politicians as vote banks where they make many

promises but no one holds them to it.

POVERTY PROFILE OF DELHI :

The Planning Commission estimates the proportion and

number of poor based on the projection of minimum needs and

effective consumption. Such a projection is based on the norm of

2100 calorie per capita per day consumption for an urban area.

155

The calorie norms are invariably expressed in monetary terms

that change with respect to weighted commodity indices of the

consumer price index.

Figure 5.3 shows that the percentage of people below

poverty line (BPL) stood at 52.23% for Delhi in 1973-74. The

figure has been declining steadily to 27.89% in 1983; 16.03 in

1993-94. The percentage of people below poverty line declined

to 10.02% in 2001. Table 5.1 presents the zone wise BPL

population.

TABLE - 5.1

BELOW POVERTY LINE POPULATION

Year Rural BPL %age to Urban BPL %age topopulation Total population Total(in Lakh) (in Lakh)

1973 1.06 24.44 21.78 52.23 1983 0.44 7.66 17.95 27.89 1987 0.10 1.29 10.15 13.56 1993 0.19 1.19 15.32 16.03 2001 0.07 0.40 11.42 9.42

Source : Economic Survey Report, Govt. of Delhi, Delhi.

Figure 5.3

156

SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE OF POOR :

The socio-economic profile of segment of population

categorized as poor is of strategic importance for both planning

purposes, and for managing the habitat and its environmental

up-gradation and improvement.

However, comprehensive data is not available for the whole

of Delhi, although generalization can be made on the following

parameters based on data available from the few available sur-

veys and studies. It is important to keep in perspective however

that inhabitants of LIG/ EWS areas are not homogenous segment.

(a) Income and Expenditure :

The average total monthly income, per household, ranges

from Rs. 1500-2500 among the poor. The expenditure of these

families is around 5-10% more than their incomes. The per capita

monthly income and expenditure is Rs. 245 & Rs. 423 respec-

tively. Poor households, therefore, are increasingly dependent upon

loans from the local moneylenders. The monthly income of around

25-30% households is above Rs. 1500 and around 45-50% house

holds is below Rs. 1000.

(b) Access to Housing :

Housing is a basic need of the poor. Most of the poor do

not have access to secure land tenure. 85% of the poor are squat-

ters, and are vulnerable to frequent eviction. 6% of the poor live

in rented accommodation and have to pay a substantial portion of

157

their income for rent. Most importantly, such rental quarters do

not have even basic infrastructure facilities. The quality of life

led by these people is extremely poor.

(c) Occupation Profile of Poor :

41% of these families work as casual laborers, as most of

them are unskilled. However, one-third of the poor also work in

the service sector and only 20-25% is self-employed. Therefore,

nearly 52% of the poor households do not have access to a

dependable occupation and secure incomes.

(d) Migration Status and Poor :

The employment opportunities (formal and informal) in

Delhi have attracted migrants from all over the country, particu-

larly from the backward state areas due to regional economic

imbalances. In 1961 the annual migration of low income house-

holds into Delhi were estimated to be around 70,000 and that

number has increased every year making it close to an approxi-

mate net addition of around 4 lakh settlers every year, migrating

from various parts of the country in search of livelihood. This

influx of population has resulted in an increased population of

city, pressure on civic amenities, crime, social imbalances, eco-

nomic exploitation, unplanned growth, deterioration of the city

beautification, culture etc.

(e) Access to Infrastructure :

The infrastructure facilities that have been covered are water

158

and sources of energy for the urban poor. A majority of the poor

families (47%) have access to water from community sources.

16% of the families do not have any definite source of water.

With respect to source of light, nearly 30% of the families depend

on kerosene lamps.

(f) Pavement Dwellers :

Around 1 lakh homeless people constitute another

component of the poor in Delhi. They are mostly found in the

Walled City or its surrounding areas and generally sleep on the

pavements. There are around 10 night shelters located at Azadpur,

Subzi Mandi, Paharganj, Jhandewalan, Red Fort, Old Delhi

Railway Station, Azad Market and Roshanara Road. The night

shelters operated by MCD provide accommodation to only male

dwellers.

SHELTER OPTIONS :

The poor typically inhabit unplanned or semi-planned

developments. In Delhi they are classified as :

(a) Notified slums in old walled city area;

(b) Resettlement colonies;

(c) Relocated JJ clusters or squatter settlements.

The section below describe the characteristics of these

areas.

THE OLD WALLED CITY AREA :

In Delhi, areas designated or notified as slums under the

159

act are generally located in the walled city and its adjoining

environs. There are 319 katras in the walled city area with about

3,000 buildings or properties. Out of these, 365 properties have

been identified as dangerous and therefore require resettlement

of inhabitants. In addition, there are 400 properties, which are

with the Evacuee Property Cell of Land and Building Department

of Delhi Government.

SQUATTER SETTLEMENTS/ JJ CLUSTERS :

The squatter settlements are encroachments on mainly

public land. As such these are illegal clusters (JCs) and are

devoid of any legal entitlements. However, efforts have been made

by the government to extend basic social and environmental

services to them.

LOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF JJ CLUSTERS :

JJ clusters are scattered all over the city. Generally they

are situated on the vacant land along railway lines, roads, drains

and river embankments and also vacant spaces near residential,

industrial and commercial complexes.

Figure 5.4

160

Figure 5.4 shows that around 55 percent of squatters are

near the residential areas and 40% along the road berms as also

shown in the complete picture in Table 5.2.

TABLE - 5.2

AREAWISE STATUS OF JJ CLUSTERS IN DELHI

Areas with Number of squatters %age to total encroachment Residential Areas 34100 55.86 Road Berms 24184 39.62 Park and open spaces 966 1.58 Schools 500 0.82 Market 1093 1.79 Railway Station 200 0.33 TOTAL 61043 100.00

Source : Sabir Ali, Environment Scenario of Delhi Slums, Centre for social Develop

ment Studies - 1998.

It is clear from Table 5.3 that around 70% of clusters have

less than 500 JJ’s. This percentage has remained constant from

1991-2001. The sharp decline in number of JJ clusters (1994-

2001) is attributed to large scale relocation of JJs since 1999.

TABLE - 5.3

SIZE WISE DISTRIBUTION OF JJ CLUSTERS

No. of JJ in 1991 1994 2001 clusters Upto 100 496 396 227 1119 101-500 311 446 295 1052 501-1000 59 121 110 290 1001-1500 30 54 37 121 1500 & above 33 63 59 155Source : (i) Slum Department, MCD Delhi; (ii) Status Report for Delhi-21, Delhi Urban

Environment and Infrastructure Improvement Project (DUEIIP), January 2001.

161

Figure 5.5 shows the size-wise distribution of JJclusters

in NCT Delhi in 2001.

AREAS WITH CONCENTRATION OF JJ CLUSTERS :

The spread of JJ clusters ranges from a plot of 0.4 acres with 8

JJs to JJcs as large as 50 acres with 10,000 households & 45000

populations. The average number of JJ per acre comes to 200

with 193 being the lowest (Najafgarh area) and 206 the highest

(Gole Market and Kalkaji areas) (Refer to Map 5.1). The

average area of JJ is 20m2. Some of the major areas with such

concentrations are given below :

(i) HIGH CONCENTRATION :

(a) Minto Road/ Gole Market/ Matia Mahal (129 clusters, 43388

JJs, 215.08 Acres) - NDMC Area.

(b) Badarpur/ Tuglaqabad/ Saket (79 clusters, 64187 JJs, 79 Acres)-

MCD area.

Figure 5.5

162

(c) Moti Nagar/ Patel Nagar/ Rajendra Nagar (72 clusters, 35,427

JJs, 175.45 Acres) - MCD Area.

(d) Jahangirpuri/ Adarsh Nagar/ Model Town/ Wazirpur (117 clus-

ters, 71538 JJs, 356 Acres) - MCD Area.

(e) Badli/ Shahbad-Daulatpur (21 clusters, 27551 JJs, 137.70 Acres)-

MCD Area.

(ii) MEDIUM CONCENTRATION :

(a) Delhi Cantonment/ Janakpuri/ Tilak Marg (17 clusters, 18,982

JJs, 95.03 Acres) - MCD Area.

(b) Biswas Nagar/ Shahdara/ Babarpur (44 clusters, 18,915 JJs, 88.91

Acres) - MCD Area.

(c) Hauzkhas. R.K. Puram (52 clusters, 14,110 JJs, 70.22 acres) -

NDMC Area.

(iii) LOW CONCENTRATION :

(a) Nazafgarh/ Nasirpur/ Palam (11 clusters, 363 JJs, 1.83 Acres) -

MCD Area.

(b) Sarojini Nagar/ Kalkaji/ Malviya Nagar/ Ambedkar Nagar/

Kasturba Marg (45 clusters, 11,802 JJs, 68.42 Acres) - NDMC

Area.

GROWTH OF SQUATTER SETTLEMENTS :

The squatter settlements or Jhuggi jhopari clusters (JJC)

assume strategic importance as far as issues of unorganized settle-

163

ments are concerned. As mentioned in Table - 5.4 in 1951 Delhi

had 12,749 jhuggi jhoparis (JJS) scattered over 199 clusters. By

1973 the number of JJS had reached 98,483 spread over 1373

clusters. The resettlement scheme pursued in 1962-77, with a

concentrated effort in 1975-77 resulted in the resettlement of 2.4

lakh JJS in different parts of Delhi. In 1977 only 20,000 JJ house-

holds had gone upto 1.13 lakhs. In 2001 the JJ clusters had declined

to (729 from 1080 in 1994) due to relocation of around 300

clusters from Gautampuri, Kingsway Camp, Ashok Vihar, AIIMS

and Hauz Khas etc.

TABLE - 5(4)

YEARWISE STATUS OF JJ CLUSTERS IN DELHI

Year JJ Clusters Jhuggi Area in PopulationHHS HA

1951 199 12749 21.1 63745

1973 1373 98483 164.1 492415

1983 534 113000 188.3 565000

1990 929 259000 431.7 1295000

1997 1100 600000 902.1 3000000

2001 728 429662 650.2 2148310

Source : Slum Deptt., Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi.

LAND OWNING AGENCIES AND JJ CLUSTERS :

The land owning agencies in whose area the JJ clusters are

situated are given in Table 5.5. Eighty three percent of DDA land

is squatted on by 600 JJ clusters.

164

TABLE - 5.5

LAND OWNING AGENCIES & JJ CLUSTERS

LO Agencies NO. of Jhuggies Population Area in Acres1990 1994 1994

DDA 280988 349705 1856683 1865.93

L&Do 21530 29415 132327 149.86

Railway 12161 17346 78929 84.34

MCD 8428 11052 52045 47.29

NDMC 3226 4487 20182 22.52

Gram Sabha 4132 4360 19619 21.31

Cantonment 1570 1700 7064 7.86 Board

Source : Status Report for Delhi- 21 Delhi Urban Environment

and infrastructure Improvement Project (DUEIIP), January 2001

ACCESS TO INFRASTRUCTURE IN SLUMS/ JJ CLUSTERS:

Water and sanitation facilities, in these unorganized

colonies, particularly JJ clusters, are poor. Only 21% of colonies

are covered with piped water supply and 10% are covered by

sanitation. Table 5.6 presents a satisfactory level of infrastruc-

ture availability in unplanned settlements, but these facilities are

non- functional in around 75-80% of the settlements. The average

population served by one PSP ranges from 250-300 against the

standard of 150. Moreover, average waiting at PSP is 20-30

minutes. Around 85-90% of JJ clusters did not have even

community toilets, forcing habitants to defecate in the open near

the water bodies or drainage channels.

165

TABLE - 5.6

WATER AND SANITATION STATUS IN THEUNPLANNED SETTLEMENTS (2004)

Service provision in Piped water supply Sewer facility unplanned settlement No. % of colonies No. % of colonies

Regularized 557 98.2 458 80.7 unauthorized colonies

Resettlement colonies 44 100.0 44 100.0

JJ Clusters 158 21.7 72 9.8

Source : Slum Department, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi.

RESETTLEMENT COLONIES :

Under the schemes for resettlement of JJ clusters 47

resettlement colonies were developed during 1961-77. Around

2.0 lakh plots were developed accommodating about 2.4 lakh

households. These resettlement colonies have degenerated due to

intense population pressure and unorganized development. There-

fore investment towards up-gradation of physical infrastructure

has to be made for improving civic life.

LOCATION OF RESETTLEMENT COLONIES :

The spatial distribution of these colonies indicates that they

are proliferating mainly in the South-East, North-East, North-West,

South-West and Central parts of the NCT of Delhi. These are five

colonies in South-East, eight in North-East, fifteen in North-West,

seven in South-West and twelve in Central Delhi.

166

RELOCATION SITES :

The Map 5.2 shows that there are around 12 relocation

sites as Bhalaswa, Holambi Kalan, Pappan Kalan, Rohini, Narela,

Bakanwar, Madanpur Khadar etc. The most recent relocation has

been made to three principal sites. These are Dwarka (known

also as Pappan Kalan), Rohini, Narela and Savda Ghevara. The

main pockets from where JJ clusters were relocated are Central,

South and East Delhi areas. Thus, during 1999-2000, 3741 squat-

ter households from the JJ clusters at CGO Complex, Chankyapuri,

Kotla Mubarakpur, Andrews Ganj, Sadiq Nagar, Mahaki Sarai,

Shahdara were moved to Narela and Rohini. 27.4 acres of land

has been allotted at Molar Band for shifting of the JJ clusters at

Gautam Nagar behind AIIMS as shown in Map 5.3. In 1997-98,

DDA allocated 32 acres of land in Tehkhand Village for reloca-

tion of squatter families.

These relocation resettlement sites offer no security of

tenure to habitants who begin a new life without security, basic

services, schools and other basic amenities.

SLUM DEVELOPMENT POLICIES IN PLACE :

While evaluating the policies affecting housing for slum

dwellers we take a top down approach by first giving a brief

overview of the National Housing Policy 2007, and laid out for

Delhi’s slums by various authorities.

167

(i) NATIONAL URBAN HOUSING AND HABITAT POLICY 2007:

The National Urban Housing and Habitat Policy 2007 states

its goal as ‘affordable housing for all’ in the country. It promotes

various types of Public Private Partnerships and pays special

emphasis on the urban poor, intending to promote sustainable

development of housing in the country with a view to ensuring

equitable supply of land, shelter and services at affordable prices

to all sections of society. The policy focused on multiple stake-

holders the private sector, the cooperative sector, the industrial

sector for labor housing and the services and institutional sector

for employee housing. To attain the overarching goal of afforable

housing for all, emphasis is laid on urban planning, increasing

supply of land and use of spatial incentives like additional floor

area ratio (FAR), transferable development rights, and increased

flow of funds, effective solid waste management and use of

renewal sources of energy. Encouraging integrated townships and

special economic zones (SEZs), the policy calls for reservation

of 10-15 percent land in every new public and private housing

projects or 20-25 percent FAR whichever is greater to for EWS

and LIG housing through appropriate spatial incentives.

The private sector would be permitted assembling land

within the purview of master plans. The policy also sets action

plans for urban slum dwellers with a special package being

prepared for cooperative housing, labor housing and employees

housing. The primary choice would be to give provision of shelter

168

to urban poor at their present location or near their work place.

The role of housing and provision of basic services to the

urban poor has been integrated into the objectives of the Jawaharlal

Nehru Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM).

(ii) BASIC SERVICES TO THE URBAN POOR, JNNURM :

The Sub Mission II of the JNNURM involves Basic

Services to the Urban Poor (BSUP) including the integrated

housing and slum development programme. The objectives of the

mission are outlined as :

1. Focused attention to integrated development of Basic Services to

the urban poor in the cities covered under the mission.

2. Provision of Basic Services to Urban Poor including security of

tenure at affordable prices, improved housing, water supply,

sanitation and ensuring delivery through convergence of other

already existing universal services of the Government for Educa-

tion, health and social security care will be taken to see that the

urban poor are provided housing near their place of occupation.

3. Secure effective linkages between asset creation and asset man-

agement to that the Basic Services to the Urban Poor created in

the cities are not only maintained efficiently but also become self-

sustaining over time.

4. Ensure adequate investment of funds to fulfill deficiencies in the

Basic Services to the Urban Poor.

169

5. Scale up delivery of civic amenities and provision of utilities

with emphasis on universal access to urban poor.

The Delhi Master Plan 2021 has laid emphasis on improve-

ment of the living conditions of the 45% of Delhities living in

slums and JJ clusters in the next ten years as part of the improve-

ment in the livability of the city for its inhabitants.

(iii) THREE PRONGED APPROACH IN DELHI :

Of the settlements considered as sub-standard slum and

squatter settlements rank among the worst and it is the urban poor

that live predominantly in such settlements. The program of

squatter clearance was discontinued at the end of sixth plan (from

1985). Accordingly no major settlement program was carried out

until 1992 when a Revised Resettlement Policy was formulated

by the DDA. This did not mean that there were no resettlement

works in progress. The general policy adopted by the govern-

ment since then it twofold. One is that no fresh encroachments

shall be permitted on public land and the second is that past

encroachments (those in existence till 30.01.1990) would not be

removed without providing alternatives.

Squatter settlements are to be found throughout the city but

especially on the vacant land along railway lines, roads, drains,

river embankments, and around resettlement colonies. The strat-

egy of the government towards slums/ squatter settlements has

been mainly of clearance.

170

In recent years, however, there have been some changes in

the attitude and strategies. Since 1991 three strategies have been

used in Delhi, which are as follows :

1. Improvement of the slum environment.

2. Relocation of the slums

3. In situ-up-gradation and rehabilitation.

(iv) IMPROVEMENT OF THE SLUM ENVIRONMENT :

Since 1987, in JJ clusters and notified slums which are not

being relocated or developed with the in situ approach, basic

urban services and amenities are being provided under ‘Envi-

ronmental improvement in urban slum scheme’. The facilities are

extended to all JJ clusters even those that developed after 1990.

The facilities being provided under the scheme are :

1. Pay and use Jan Suvidha Complexes containing toilets and bath-

rooms at the community level or the provision of mobile toilet,

vans in all those JJ clusters where the Jan Suvidha Complex can

not be provided.

2. Water supply either through water hydrants, hand pipes or water

tanker.

3. Street lighting.

4. Dusbins for collection of domestic waste.

5. Paved pathways and drains.

171

(v) RELOCATION OF SLUMS :

Jhuggi Jhopri resettlement, relocation scheme was started

in the Union Territory of Delhi for the rehousing of squatters on

government and private lands in 1960. The scheme began with

the allotment of two room tenements to 3,560 JJ households.

Subsequently, partially developed plots of 80 square yards were

allotted under the scheme to the squatters on a nominal rent.

However, due to demand of land in Delhi and the fact that the

allotment procedure was misused, size of plots was reduced to

40 square meters and then 25 square meters. Under the present

situation, Relocation is carried out for only those JJ clusters and

slums that are required by the land owning agency for public

interest projects.

Since the inception of the scheme with effect from 1990-

1991, so far about 70,000 plots have been developed and about

60,000 families have been rehabilitated at Dwarka, Rohini, Narela,

Bawana, Holambi, Molar Band, Madanpur Khaddar & Sawda

Ghevre keeping in view the scarcity of land in Delhi and as per

the directions of the Delhi Government and Government of India.

The Delhi Government has formulated a new policy for the

resettlement of squatter families in Delhi. Under the new policy,

Delhi Government has proposed to provide built up flats instead

of plots to the slum dwellers, economically weaker sections

under the Rajiv Awas Yojna, JNNURM. Under this scheme, the

Delhi Government aims to provide 4 lakh flats by 2012.

172

(vi) IN SITU UP-GRADATION AND REHABILITATION :

There has been a general shift in the approach to slum and

JJ clusters in recent years. The emphasis is now on the improve-

ment of the environment of the JJ cluster and their in situ rehabili-

tation wherever possible. The in situ up gradation is undertaken

after the area has been notified as a slum area under the Slum

Area Act of 1956. The scheme involves replanning of JJ dwell-

ing units in modified layout by redistributing the encroached land

pockets amongst the squatter families. The JJ households are given

sites of 10 to 12.5 square meters for construction of their own

shelters. The housing plots are generally designed in a cluster

around open courtyards. The beneficiary constructs the shelter

under a self help approach with technical extension services

provided by the slum and JJ department of the MCD. So far 5,583

families have been rehabilitated at Prayog Vihar, Ekta Vihar, Shanti

Vihar and Shahbad Daulatpur Phase I. The implementation of the

in situ- up-gradation is very poor due to non availability of the

Notice of Consent from the concerned land owning agency. A

new policy of in situ slum up grading also suggests, as in the case

of relocation, the provision of developed flats on the same

location instead of plots for the slum dwellers.

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) decided to take

up in situ development towards rehabilitation of slum dwelling

units of about 25 square meters will be about 47,500. These will

be taken up on public- private partnership model in which the

173

land occupied by slum dwellers will be made available to de-

velopers, who will construct houses in accordance with the num-

bers identified by the DDA. These houses will be constructed in

same parts of the area while in the remaining areas the developer

will be allowed to carry out commercial exploitation of the land.

This would enable the developer to spill over some of the costs

from building the rehabilitation units to the commercial activity,

thereby reducing the burden on the slum dwellers as well. This

mixed development allows them to get the cross subsidy by way

of targeting two different segments of society.

This model is being applied at the kathputli colony where

residents will have access to 12 storeyed buildings in which the

ground floors will be devoted to promoting artistic and commer-

cial enterprise since most of the residents are puppeteers, crafts-

men or musicians. The constructions will house 2,800 dwelling

units meant for the colony’s residents. The site will also boast of

a separate 2.1 acre commercial space to be developed by private

developers and “high-category residential apartmentments” in 2.4

acres which will help boost the earning of artisans and crafts-

men, according to the DDA’s plans.

In the scheme, modeled on Mumbai’s slum rehabilitation

programme, private players will join hands with the government

and the work of clearing the slums would proceed in phases.

Since residents will be resettled, tents will be pitched to provide

174

temporary accommodation to the people till the project is

completed.

(vii) DRAFT NATIONAL SLUM POLICY 2001 :

Another more specific, policy the “draft” National Slum

Policy is yet to be ratified by the government. The draft National

Slum Policy envisages cities without slums. Towards fulfillment

of this vision, the policy adopts an approach of in situ up gradation

and improvement. It recommends clearance only in exceptional

circumstances. It, therefore, talks of urban growth with equity

and justice and makes plea for greater participation of communi-

ties and civil society in all areas of planning, capacity building

and development. Correspondingly it proposes a series of

interventions with regards to definitions, tenure, planning,

economic empowerment, governance and management, shelter up

gradation etc.

The governing principal of the Draft National Slum Policy

are as follows :

1. The endorsement of an upgrading and improvement approach in

all slums, and the acceptance of the necessity of slum clearance

in an extremely defined circumstances.

2. Recognition that households in all urban informal settlements

should have access to certain basic minimum services, irrespec-

tive of land tenure or occupancy status.

175

3. The goal that planning in all cities should have the objective of

creating cities without slums.

4. The objective of ensuring that urban growth takes place with

equity and distributive justice.

5. The intention that urban local bodies should work in collabora-

tion with all other stakeholders to enhance the impact of slum

development through building the capacities of the poor and

empowering them to improve their own living conditions.

6. The adoption of a more “enabling” approach to the delivery of

basic social services to the poor as a result of more effective

mobilization of community resources and skills to complement

public resource allocations.

7. A greater participation of communities and civil society in all

areas of planning, capacity building and development.

The draft policy is however silent over the ways in which

such goals could be realized. Also, the definition of all under

served serviced lands as slums will hinder and deny the most

needy and vulnerable from having access to resources for up-

gradation and improvement.

POLICY COMPARISON :

A comparative study of these policies and schemes can now

be undertaken, based on the parameters discussed earlier. The

National Urban Housing and Habitat Policy 2007 seems to be a

176

step in the right direction, with focus on affordable housing,

public private partnerships (PPP), sustainable development of

housing in the country, special package being prepared for

cooperative housing, labor housing and employees housing and

prioritizing houses for the urban poor at their present location or

near their work place using the in- situ slum rehabilitation

approach. Using the parameters as tools for analysis we see that

with PPPs and the in situ rehabilitation approach, affordable

housing for slum dwellers at their present location is an option.

This enables them to earn their livelihood just as they did before,

in the slums. The security of tenure objective is also achieved

through the policy. Only the characteristics of housing provided

remains questionable. The quality of houses, its cost and the

allocation can be a hindrance to the residents. Sometimes the

costs are too high for them and at other times the quality of the

houses is compromised. Under the JNNURM, the improved quality

of housing is specifically included and allocation is said to be on

the basis of need (determined through income). As is the case

with both the relocation and the in situ rehabilitation policy, any

worker whose source of livelihood is within the slums (dhobi,

tailor etc.) might be compromised unless there is specific

mention of a workstation being supplied. Thus this would be a

violation of the first parameter and the people affected by this

would prefer to stay in some other slum again. This vary case

would be an important characteristic of the third approach of

177

improvement of the slum environment or up- gradation. The

livelihoods of the residents are maintained even though the slum,

not lacking basic facilities but still an unplanned part of the city,

still exists. The draft national slum policy outlines its objectives

but has not clearly defined how these objectives will be met and

therefore no analysis on the basis of parameters and incentives

for residents can be undertaken. Thus, as is the case with most of

the policies in India, each of these policies, schemes and

approaches looks impeccable on paper but the ground realities

of these projects are often very different from what is claimed

and therefore it is necessary that a follow up mechanism be

incorporated into each of the policies to ensure their efficiency.

(C) URBAN GARBAGE GROUNDS :

Various human processes produce waste. Disposing waste

products is major global problem since last many decades.

Landfill is considered as the primitive way to organized waste

dumping in various parts of earth. It is a method of removing the

refuse on land without creating a hazard to public health or safety.

Landfills may consist of domestic waste dumping sites as well as

sites utilized by several manufacturers. This method is also

adopted for other waste management tasks for example the

momentary storage, consolidation and relocation, or meting out

of waste substance such as sorting, treatment, or recycling. The

landfill is supportive process of waste diminution and has a key

role in resource revival. A landfill also denotes the practice in

178

which ground has been packed in with soil and rocks as an alter-

native of garbage which solves many important purposes such as

for building construction.

Landfill is emerged as the most practicable ecological

substitute for the specific waste removal in various countries.

Today government priority is to set up a waste policy by

applying the ideology in order to deal with environmental risks,

the economic and health dangers of resource degradation. These

strategies are basically planned to maintain landfill practices

which will stabilize the landfill sites in present generation. The

main intent of waste organization is to deal with the garbage

produced by existing generation and do not switch over waste

related harms to next generation. The Landfill Directive is

committed to raise standards and lessen harmful consequences

on the surroundings, groundwater, surface waters, soil, and

restrictions on the universal impact of waste dumping. For

commercial purpose, a landfill technique must meet definite

requirements, which are linked to many important factors. The

first factor is the location. Landfill must have easy access to

transportation via road. It must have stability such as fundamen-

tal geology, earthquake faults, water table. Another factor is

capacity. The existing annulled space must be planned by assess-

ment of the landform with a proposed re-establishment profile.

This computation of capacity is based on density of the wastes,

amount of intermediate and daily cover, and amount of settle-

179

ment. Landfill must have protection of soil and water through

installation of inside layer and collection systems. To handle speci-

fied harmless waste landfills such method must be applied through

which the trash are cramped to small area, compressed to decrease

their quantity, enclosed with layers of soil. Completely lined

landfills reinstate the previous one, unlined deposits that were

earlier used. In the operation of landfill, the garbage collection

trucks are weighed at entrance and their load is checked for wastes.

Then, these vehicles drop their load. After loads are dumped,

compactors or dozers spread and compressed the waste on the

operational field. This flattened waste is enclosed with soil

every day. Other waste wrap materials are sprayed on froth

products and transitory mantles. These mantles can be elevated

into place with tracked excavators and then detatched the next

day proceeding to waste placement. Chipped wood and chemi-

cally ‘fixed’ bio-solids are the substitute cover. Since the 20th

century, population is exploding speedily in developed areas; it

is a need of an hour to implement land reprocesses tractics for

completed landfills. The common usages are parks, golf courses.

Office buildings and industrial uses are made of a completed

landfill. Many steps are taken to disperse garbage produced

through communities, Industry and other establishments. At the

end of 20th century, different methods to waste removal to land-

fill and burning have started. The apparent substitutes to landfills

are waste reduction and recycling policies. Incineration is the

180

most effectual technique of plummeting volume and weight of

solid waste by burning in a well designed furnace.

Landfill reclamation is one of the control measures to check

spoilage of landscape. It is the burning of landfill garbage at high

temperature via the plasma-arc gasification procedure. Another

important way to deal with solid waste is composing by which

the organic components of solid waste are biologically decom-

posed under controlled aerobic conditions. In this method,

plastics, rubber and leather are separated from the solid waste

and the remaining organic matter is decomposed aerobically or

an aerobically to end product called compost. Anaerobic

digestion, mechanical biological treatment, pyrolysis and gasifi-

cation have all started to establish themselves in the marketplace.

Optional waste disposal technology is quite expensive than

landfill and mass burn incineration is the sole technology for mixed

waste. India is working to develop clean energy sources that can

yield considerable economic, environmental and health benefits

for people. Methane emissions from the solid waste sector in

India are projected to increase significantly over the next 15 years.

Reusing landfill methane gas for energy purposes has the poten-

tial to mitigate 5.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equiva-

lents, which is equal to the annual emissions from one million

vehicles. Currently, there are no operational landfill gas-to-

energy projects in India but several large sites in Delhi, Mumbai

and other cities could support the clean energy projects.

181

Basically, a landfill is a large area of land or an excavated

site that is a carefully designed structure built into or on top of the

ground. The rubbish collected at the landfill is isolated from the

surrounding environment with a bottom liner and a daily cover-

ing of soil. Though the modern landfill practices are technically

sound but still these proven techniques sometimes fail to meet

challenges. These practices require further precision to secure

public areas. Appropriate removal practices should be adopted

to control environmental contamination. These practices include-

All loads must be alienated when unloading in selected area.

Domestic refuse and small things should be kept in the dustbin.

Removal should be permitted exterior the landfill entrance and

video watch is carried out.

SOLID WASTE GENERATION IN NCT DELHI :

The problem of solid waste management in Delhi is as-

suming serious proportions due to increasing population, urban-

ization, changing lifestyles and consumption patterns. There are

24 existing landfill sites for waste management in NCT Delhi

from 16 are filled up, 4 are in operation and other 4 are newly

operated as shown in Map 5.4. The garbage from unauthorized

developments, slums, JJ settlements, etc. is not collected which

further adds to the environmental degradation. The projected

average garbage generation upto the year 2021 is @ 0.68 kg. per

capita per day and total quantum of solid waste is 15750 tonnes/

day as given in Table - 5.7.

182

TABLE - 5.7

QUANTUM OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE(TONNES / DAY)

Local body area Existing Capacity Projected generation

2001 for 2021

MCD 5250 15100

NDMC 245 550

Cantonment 48 100

TOTAL 5543 15750

Management of solid waste involves waste generation,

segregation and storage; waste collection; waste transfer/ trans-

portation treatment, recycle reuse, recovery; and disposal. For

effective waste management, its segregation at the community and

neighbourhood level is imperative. The waste shall be segre-

gated and collected, in separate chambers at dalaos. For this,

involvement of rag pickers with RWAs, CBOs and NGOs is to be

encouraged.

The projected composition of municipal waste for the plan

period is estimated as given in table - 5.8 for biodegradable and

recyclable waste which is segregated at the source, decentral-

ized treatment at neighbourhood level may be adopted, while for

silt, centralized treatment may be followed.

The other type of specialized waste includes biomedical

waste; hazardous waste from industries; construction debris and

fly ash; meat processing centre etc. Disposal of bio-medical waste

183

is to be as per bio-medical waste rules and hazardous waste

requires special handling rules. Proper dumping, recycling and

reuse of construction debris and fly ash have to be linked. Meat

processing centre waste is to be recycled for chicken feed etc.

TABLE - 5.8

PROJECTED COMPOSITION OFTOTAL MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE FOR 2021

Constituents Quantum (in tons) Percentage to totalwaste

Bio- degradable 6000 38

Silt 6000 38

Recyclable 3750 24

TOTAL 15750 100

Notes :(i) Above figures are based on Report on Solid Waste Management in Delhi

conducted by NEERI, Nagpur through DDA;(ii) Figures of MCD are based on Feasibility study in Master Plan for optimal

waste Treatment & Disposal for the entire state of Delhi, June, 2004, by COWIConsultants appointed by MCD.

Considering the nature of solid waste and the economic

aspects of its disposal, major part of solid waste especially silt

has to be disposed off in sanitary landfills. But wherever recy-

cling is possible, it should be preferred than disposing off the

waste in sanitary landfill sites. More viable alternatives to land-

fills are vermiculture, fossilization, composting etc. Waste Mini-

mization Circles (WMCs) should be constituted and made effec-

tive. Implementation and monitoring & Bio-Medical Wastes (Han-

dling & Management) Rules, 1998, for hospitals, nursing homes,

184

and clinics should be taken up. The sites, which are filled up or

are in operation, given in Table - 5.9. The filled up sites may be

reuse for plantation or as recreational area. The proposed sites

for sanitary landfill and compost plants are to be finalized by

MCD. The Map 5.5 shows the area of existing and proposed

landfill sites.

Keeping in view the fact that finding new sanitary landfill

sites in Delhi is becoming extremely difficult there is no option,

as shown by the Map 5.5 & 5.6 but to resort to alternative and

decentralized methods of waste treatment, reduction, recycle and

use, which include vermiculture, fossilization and composting.

TABLE - 5.9

EXISTING LANDFILL SITES FORWASTE MANAGEMENT

S.N. Location Area (in ha.) Remarks

1. Kailash Nagar, East Delhi 1.8 Filled up

2. Tilak Nagar 16.0 Filled up

3. Subroto Park - Filled up

4. Purana Quila/ Bharion Road 2.7 Filled up

5. Timar Pur 16.0 Filled up

6. Sarai Kale Khan 24.0 Filled up

7. Gopal Pur 4.0 Filled up

8. Chhater Pur 1.7 Filled up

9. S.G.T. Nagar 14.4 Filled up

10. I.P. Depot 1.8 Filled up

11. Sunder Nagar 2.8 Filled up

12. Tuglakabad Ext. 2.4 Filled up

185

13. Haiderpur 1.6 Filled up

14. Mandawali Fazilpur 2.8 --

15. Rohini Phase III 4.8 --

16. Near Hastsal Village in West Delhi 9.6 Filled up

17. Site near Gazipur Dairy Farm 28.0 In Operation

18. Site near Jhangirpur/ Bhalswa 16.0 In Operation

19. Okhla Phase I 12.8 In Operation

20. Crossing on G.T. Karnal Road 3.2 In Operation

21. Jaitpur/ Tajpur 9.84 New

22. Near Puthkhurd 55.0 New

23. Bhawana to Narela Road 28.0 New

24. Sultanpur Dabas (Bawana) 16.0 New

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT :

The dumping of solid waste on land is the cause of follow-

ing problems :

(a) WATER POLLUTION :

Toxic liquid (leachate) that flows from the dumped waste

seeps into surface and groundwater and contaminates postable

water.

(b) SOIL POLLUTION :

Toxins seep into the soil and surrounding vegetation, and

move into the food chain through fruits and vegetables grown in

the area.

(c) DUM FIRES :

When waste decomposes, inflammable methane is released

186

which can result in explosion. The smoke released is also highly

toxic for inhalation and contributes to global warming.

(d) SOURCE OF DISEASE :

Dumpsites breed flies, rodents, and pests, which spread

diseases.

(e) OTHER IMPACTS :

Foul smell, visual ugliness, and bird menace which can be

a hazard to airplanes.

CONCLUSION :

The primary goal of any solid waste management system is

to safeguard the health of the citizens and protect the environ-

ment. This is achieved by ensuring proper collection, transporta-

tion, treatment and finally, safe disposal of waste. However, the

last step is missing in most solid waste management systems

implemented in the country.

REFERENCES :

* Gita Dewan Verma (2002): ‘Slumming India—A Chronicle of

Slums and Their Saviours’. Penguin Books, India.

* Voluntary Health Association of India (1993). ‘Delhi—A Tale of

Two Cities’. 40, Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi.

* Sabir Ali (1991). ‘Slums Within Slums’. Vikas Publications, New

Delhi.

187

* Supriti, Barnhardt S. and Ramanathan R. 2002. Urban Poverty

Alleviation in India : A General Assessment and a Particular

Perspective; Bangalore : Ramanathan foundation.

* Subramaniam. 2003. Inequalities in health in India : The Method-

ological construction of indices and measures- Draft report,

Department of health and social behavior, Harvard School of

Public Health.

* Carmines EG, Zeller RA. 1991. Reliability and Validity assess-

ment. Newbury Park : Sage Publications.

* WHO and UNICEF, 2000 : Global Water Supply and Sanitation

Assessment 2000 Report. WHO and UNICEF.

* GNCT. 2006. Delhi Human Development Report 2006. New

Delhi: Oxford University Press.

* Banerji, Manjistha, Provision of Basic Services in the Slums and

Resettlement Colonies of Delhi, Ensuring public accountability

through community action 2005, Institute of Social Studies Trust,

New Delhi.

* Verma, G.D. (2002), Slumming India : A chronicle of slums and

their saviours, Penguin Books India, Delhi.

—:: O ::—

CHAPTER - 5

CIVIC AMENITIES ANDHEALTH HAZARDS

(A) URBAN BORN INSECTS :

Insects and related arthropods of importance in the urban

environment are broadly covered under the auspices of urban

entomology. Most arthropods in human environments go unno-

ticed. However, some species post significant problems because

they directly affect the health of humans or their domesticated

animals, attack human structures, foods, goods, materials, or plants

that adorn urban settings.

A relatively small number of insect species have been

intentionally introduced into the urban environment. Examples

include the gupsy moth, Lymantria dispar that was intentionally

introduced into Massachustts in 1868. It is highly probable also

that the Asian Lady Beetle, Harmonia axyridis, was intentionally

introduced in 1980s. Many pest species have been accidentally

introduced with human commerce and travel. Some invasive

species have adapted themselves to disturbed human habitats and

have rapidly spread world wide via commerce and human travel.

The German cockroach Blattella germanica, is an excellent

example of such a species. It is rarely found outdoors, preferring

heated and controlled environments typically associated with

human food preparation. Probably native to Eastern Asia, it spread

143

throughout the Eastern Mediterranean Region by Greek or

Phoenician Vessels. It remained in Southern Russia until after the

Thirty years war (1618-1648) spreading into Europe and finally

becoming established in restaurants and other food handling

establishments in the rapid modernization of China.

With the increasing rate of urbanization in NCT Delhi,

problems associated with arthropod pests in urban centers will

continue to grow. In 1951, about 14.37 lac people (82.4%) lived

in urban areas. At the turn of the twenty-first century, this had

increased to greater than 129 lac people (93.18%) in Delhi. By

the year 2021, it is estimated that there will be greater than 230

lac people living in urban areas. The most dramatic increases in

urbanization and challenges in Delhi will occur in development;

the complex of urban invasive species will likely spread to these

urban centers, or attain the problem status now associated with

more developed countries. Many of these countries and develop-

ing urban centres exist in areas endemic to arthropod vector

borne diseases such as malaria, dengue, encephalitis, yellow fe-

ver, and plague the importance of urban and medical entomology

in tropical urban centers will increase in the future.

The urban environment in NCT Delhi is a complex of

habitats developed by human from natural sites. Houses, villages,

towns, cities, buildings, roads and other features that characterize

the urban environment in Delhi have gradually and irrecoverably

changed the landscape of natural and agricultural areas. As a part

144

of this change, some habitats and their associated plants and

animal communities were eliminated, while others were expanded

and new ones were created. Many of the new habitats were

intentional - parks, waterways, street trees, turf grass, food stores

but some were consequential- standing water in road side ditches,

garbage and landfill sites near residential neighbourhoods, the

underground sewer and storm drain network in urban and

suburban areas of Delhi. They all provided habitats for a select

group of insects and other arthropods, some of which attained

pest status.

Local conditions, climate, and available resources deter-

mine the distribution of some arthropods in the urban environ-

ment of Delhi, and for some species their abundance is limited.

Other species are broadly adapted to the resources and harbor-

ages in and around buildings, and these are cosmopolitan in their

distribution and pest status. Stable habitats with resources and

conditions suitable for long-term survival support reservoir popu-

lations of pest species, and from these habitats individuals or

groups move or are transported to establish infestations in

unstable or temporary habitats.

PERIDOMESTIC AND DOMESTIC HABITATS :

Within and around buildings, houses, and other urban struc-

tures are habitats that support individuals or populations of plants

and animals. Peridomestic habitats are outside, around the pe-

145

rimeter of structures. They include the external surfaces of

buildings, the ornamental trees, shrubs, and turf grass that

characterize the urban and suburban landscape. Domestic

habitats are indoors and include the plant and animal based

materials in this controlled, anthropogenic environment.

PERIDOMESTIC :

Harborage substrates, food resources, and environmental

conditions of urban landscapes of Delhi generally support a large

numbers. The soil-inhabiting and nesting arthropods in this envi-

ronment include ants that forage indoors and termites that damage

structural wood, ground nest bees and wasps, and occasional or

nuisance pests such as clover mites, millipedes, centipedes, and

springtails. Plant-feeding insects utilize the cultivated urban and

suburban trees and shrubs, and many are aesthetic pests. Blood

feeding mites (chiggers), ticks, mosquitoes and other biting flies

are associated with domestic and feral vertebrates. Species

utilizing building surfaces or perimeter substrates include the

umbrella wasp, hornets, yellow jackets, spiders and scorpions.

Underground sewer and storm drainage pipes provide some

cockroach and rodent species access to urban areas. The garbage

disposal network of collection, sorting, and landfill in Delhi

provide harborage and food for cockroaches, flies, rodents, and

pest birds.

Reservoir populations for many of the pest species estab-

lished in peridomestic habitats are in nearby natural or undis-

146

turbed areas. Woodland tracts and other small or large patches of

green space can support populations of biting flies, wasps and

hornets, ticks, and spiders in Delhi. Here are the populations that

provide the individuals or groups that establish or replenish

infestations in less stable habitats, or re-establish populations

lost to habitat destruction.

DOMESTIC :

Environmental conditions in NCT Delhi indoors are

generally stable and the harborages and food resources are some-

what limited. There may be few species, but those adapted to

specialized resources often occur in large numbers. Stored food,

including packaged whole food and vegetables, organic fabrics

and other materials are the most common harborates and food

resources in the domestic habitat. Directly or indirectly associ-

ated with these are dermestid beetles, flour beetles and moths,

flies and cockroaches. The distribution of domestic products and

similar storage environments has contributed to the cosmopolitan

pest status of many of these insects, in both residential and com-

mercial sites in Delhi. Blood and skin feeding species that breed

indoors are limited, but lice, fleas, bed bugs and mites are medi-

cally important pests for more than one socio-economic level of

society. Insects and other arthropods in the living space are

nuisance pest when they are few and their presence brief, but are

not tolerated when they pose a health treat or persist in large

numbers.

147

Natural habitats and populations for some domestic

species, especially those infesting sored food have been lost. Only

populations in the urban environment in NCT Delhi represent

many of these species or they survive only through their link to

humans (bed bugs, lice). Other indoor pests have reservoir popu-

lations in peridomestic and natural areas. Many of the common

species occur in the nests of bird and rodents and from there

have access to indoor habitats.

INSECT DISPERSAL AND DISTRIBUTION :

International transportation, economic exchange, and

globalization have brought a degree of uniformity to the urban

area around the world, and increased the movement and exchange

of arthropods. The majorities of household and store food pests,

including fruit flies, cockroaches, flour beetles, moths and mites,

have moved with infested commercial goods and now have

cosmopolitan distribution. Peridomestic mosquitoes, subterranean

termites and wood-infesting beetles share the same potential for

widespread distribution. Current distribution records for many

household and structural pests are subject to change with increased

movement of people and materials around the world.

Information on pest identification, biology and habits,

compiled on an international basis, is appropriate for the urban

environment. A global census indicates that nearly 2300 insects

and other arthropods have some level of pest status around the

148

world. Some are only occasional invaders of houses and other

buildings, some are closely associated with the foods, fabrics,

and other aspects of dwellings and others are linked to plants and

animals in domestic and peridomestic habitats. Many of these

species are capable of adapting to the soil conditions, climate

and building construction in other regions of the world, and

becoming established in pest populations. Regional conditions

may after some behaviors, but morphological features and the

basic life cycle will remain unchanged and control strategies are

usually transferable from region to region.

URBAN ECOSYSTEM :

Major ecosystems can be broadly classified as natural,

agricultural and urban. Urban ecosystems are primitive sites where

the interacting plant and animal communities have not been

altered by human activity. There are few, if these in the world

today, and a more practical definition of natural ecosystems might

be undisturbed habitats that have had limited human influence

and retain a portion of their original flora and fauna. An impor-

tant feature of these habitats is the populations of native plants

and animals. These are the reservoir populations of many

species that have adapted to agricultural and urban conditions.

Agricultural and urban ecosystems are defined by their use and

the degree to which their biotic and abiotic features have been

altered by human activity. These ecosystems contain few of the

features that characterize their natural origins; many of the

149

features were built or brought there, or designed by humans.

(B) URBAN SLUMS :

Delhi, capital of India, is home to about 3 million people

living in slums and it is estimated that 45% of its population lives

in unauthorized colonies, jhuggi jhompri (JJ) and urban villages.

As the UNHABITAT definition status a slum household is a group

of individuals living under the same roof in an urban area that

lack one of more of the following :

1. Durable housing of a permanent nature that protects against

extreme climate conditions.

2. Sufficient living space which means not more than three

people sharing the same roof.

3. Easy access to safe water in sufficient amounts at an

affordable price.

4. Access to adequate sanitation in the form of a private or

public toilet shared by a reasonable number of people.

5. Security of tenure that prevents forced evictions.

DEFINING THE ISSUE :

For the purpose of Census of India 2001, Slum areas broadly

constitute :

1. All specified areas notified as “slums” by state / local

government and UT administration under any act.

150

2. All areas recognized as “Slums” by State/local government

and UT administration, which may not have been formally

notified as slum under any act.

3. A compact area with a population of at least 300 or about

60-70 households of poorly built congested tenements, in

unhygienic environment usually with inadequate infrastruc-

ture and lacking in proper sanitation and drinking water

facilities.

The slum areas are those that are notified under the Slum

Improvement and Clearance Areas Act of 1956. Building and/or

areas that are considere to be unfit for human habitation may be

declared as the slum areas under section 3 of the act. As such,

they are considered to be legal structures and are eligible for

benefits under the act. The squatter or JJ cluster settlements on

the other hand are considered as encroachments on public and

private lands. They are, therefore, seen as illegal settlements.

According to the United Nations, the proportion of urban

dwellers living in slums decreased from 47 percent to 37 percent

in the developing world between 1990 and 2005. However, due

to rising population, the number of slum dwellers is rising. One

billion people worldwide live in slums and the figure will likely

to grow to 2 billion by 2030.

As India is urbanizing very fast and along with this, the

slum population is also increasing. India’s urban population is

151

increasing at a faster rate than its total population. With over 575

million people, India will have 41% of its population living in

cities and towns by 2030 from the present level of 286 million

and 28%. However, most of them do not have access to basic

facilities like drinking water and sanitation.

Because of the lack at affordable prices to different

categories of residents, various types of unplanned settlements

have come up in Delhi. According to an estimate, the population

residing in different types of settlements in 2006 was as shown in

Figure - 5.1.

Among the urban poor, the slum dwellers are the poorest.

The very definition of slums points at the acute drinking water

and sanitation crisis for the slum dwellers. A slum in India is

defined as “a cluster inside urban areas without having water and

sanitation access.”

The National Sample Survey Organization Survey conducted

in 2002 found that in 84% of the notified slums the main water

Figure - 5.1

152

source is through tap water supply. But these numbers mask

differences across the states of India. In Bihar none of the slums

get water via the tap.

In Chhattisgarh, Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh less than 35%

of slums get tap water. Nearly 44% of non-notified slums do not

have a drainage system of any type whereas only 15% of notified

slums do not have a drainage system.

A similar picture emerges in the case of latrines. Nearly

half of the non-notified slums do not have a latrine of any type. In

contrast only 17% of notified slums do not have a latrine. How-

ever, the past few years have seen significant improvements in

water and sanitation situation in slums. But, that is not a source of

solace as there is still a vast number of slum dweller to be

provided these basic facilities.

CHARACTERIZING LIFE IN SLUMS :

While studying and assessing the feasibility of any policy

it is imperative that there are certain parameters that would help

breakdown the objectives of the policies. Each of these schemes

must be compared with the current situation for slum dwellers

since from their perspective the next best option is starting a new

slum and living in the same conditions as before and thus, the

aforementioned conditions remain. Benchmarks and weightings

to these parameters must also be set before comparison of the

policy objectives so that the methodology is clear. To clearly

153

identify these parameters an understanding of the current situa-

tion and of life as slums dwellers is required. This situation can

be categorized into physical, legal, social, political and economic

characteristics of living in slums as shown in the Figure 5.2.

As can be seen, the physical characteristics of slum life

include shelter but lack a permanent residence, a house and most

of the times even space. The average population density in a shanty

town in Delhi is 3,00,000 people per square kilometer and an

average dwelling houses 6-8 people, yet measures only 6 ft. by 8

ft. Many slums have no latrine facilities, and those that do have

an average of 1 latrine serving 27 households. 1 water pump is

used by 1000 people on average and more often than not water

flows through these pumps only once a day. These low hygiene

and sanitation facilities lead to unhealthy living conditions in the

slums. This, along with illegally high rates for electricity makes

every basic need for slum dwellers is the close proximity of the

slums to most of the resident’s places of work, thus negating

transport costs or reducing it due to convenient transport stations

close by.

Moving onto the economic characteristics, we discuss prob-

ably the main reason for the existence of slums. As mentioned,

people migrate to Delhi from surrounding areas in an attempt to

find employment and improve their own and the lives of their

families. Many a time, these laborers come from their villages on

a contract but end up staying on in Delhi looking to find more

154

work here rather than in their village. Another common case is

that of those who open their own shop or work station in the slum

and operate out of there, such as the local “dhobi” (laundry man)

or tailor. Also because of lack of useable capital many of these

ventures are remain extremely small scale. From the legal aspect,

most of the slums in Delhi are unauthorized i.e. not recognized

and therefore still an illegal encroachment on state land. Because

of this, there is no security of tenure and hardly any dwellers

invest in their houses. Also, in the case that a slum is partially

recognized by the government, i.e. cases when residents before a

certain date are recognized as licensed owners of the land, there

are many hurdles to be faced by the slum dwellers before they

are finally established owners.

For social characteristics, the fact that there are many fairly

good and affordable schools is an important consideration along

with the scene of community and companionship within the slums.

And lastly, the slum dwellers, because of their large numbers,

are eyed by politicians as vote banks where they make many

promises but no one holds them to it.

POVERTY PROFILE OF DELHI :

The Planning Commission estimates the proportion and

number of poor based on the projection of minimum needs and

effective consumption. Such a projection is based on the norm of

2100 calorie per capita per day consumption for an urban area.

155

The calorie norms are invariably expressed in monetary terms

that change with respect to weighted commodity indices of the

consumer price index.

Figure 5.3 shows that the percentage of people below

poverty line (BPL) stood at 52.23% for Delhi in 1973-74. The

figure has been declining steadily to 27.89% in 1983; 16.03 in

1993-94. The percentage of people below poverty line declined

to 10.02% in 2001. Table 5.1 presents the zone wise BPL

population.

TABLE - 5.1

BELOW POVERTY LINE POPULATION

Year Rural BPL %age to Urban BPL %age topopulation Total population Total(in Lakh) (in Lakh)

1973 1.06 24.44 21.78 52.23 1983 0.44 7.66 17.95 27.89 1987 0.10 1.29 10.15 13.56 1993 0.19 1.19 15.32 16.03 2001 0.07 0.40 11.42 9.42

Source : Economic Survey Report, Govt. of Delhi, Delhi.

Figure 5.3

156

SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE OF POOR :

The socio-economic profile of segment of population

categorized as poor is of strategic importance for both planning

purposes, and for managing the habitat and its environmental

up-gradation and improvement.

However, comprehensive data is not available for the whole

of Delhi, although generalization can be made on the following

parameters based on data available from the few available sur-

veys and studies. It is important to keep in perspective however

that inhabitants of LIG/ EWS areas are not homogenous segment.

(a) Income and Expenditure :

The average total monthly income, per household, ranges

from Rs. 1500-2500 among the poor. The expenditure of these

families is around 5-10% more than their incomes. The per capita

monthly income and expenditure is Rs. 245 & Rs. 423 respec-

tively. Poor households, therefore, are increasingly dependent upon

loans from the local moneylenders. The monthly income of around

25-30% households is above Rs. 1500 and around 45-50% house

holds is below Rs. 1000.

(b) Access to Housing :

Housing is a basic need of the poor. Most of the poor do

not have access to secure land tenure. 85% of the poor are squat-

ters, and are vulnerable to frequent eviction. 6% of the poor live

in rented accommodation and have to pay a substantial portion of

157

their income for rent. Most importantly, such rental quarters do

not have even basic infrastructure facilities. The quality of life

led by these people is extremely poor.

(c) Occupation Profile of Poor :

41% of these families work as casual laborers, as most of

them are unskilled. However, one-third of the poor also work in

the service sector and only 20-25% is self-employed. Therefore,

nearly 52% of the poor households do not have access to a

dependable occupation and secure incomes.

(d) Migration Status and Poor :

The employment opportunities (formal and informal) in

Delhi have attracted migrants from all over the country, particu-

larly from the backward state areas due to regional economic

imbalances. In 1961 the annual migration of low income house-

holds into Delhi were estimated to be around 70,000 and that

number has increased every year making it close to an approxi-

mate net addition of around 4 lakh settlers every year, migrating

from various parts of the country in search of livelihood. This

influx of population has resulted in an increased population of

city, pressure on civic amenities, crime, social imbalances, eco-

nomic exploitation, unplanned growth, deterioration of the city

beautification, culture etc.

(e) Access to Infrastructure :

The infrastructure facilities that have been covered are water

158

and sources of energy for the urban poor. A majority of the poor

families (47%) have access to water from community sources.

16% of the families do not have any definite source of water.

With respect to source of light, nearly 30% of the families depend

on kerosene lamps.

(f) Pavement Dwellers :

Around 1 lakh homeless people constitute another

component of the poor in Delhi. They are mostly found in the

Walled City or its surrounding areas and generally sleep on the

pavements. There are around 10 night shelters located at Azadpur,

Subzi Mandi, Paharganj, Jhandewalan, Red Fort, Old Delhi

Railway Station, Azad Market and Roshanara Road. The night

shelters operated by MCD provide accommodation to only male

dwellers.

SHELTER OPTIONS :

The poor typically inhabit unplanned or semi-planned

developments. In Delhi they are classified as :

(a) Notified slums in old walled city area;

(b) Resettlement colonies;

(c) Relocated JJ clusters or squatter settlements.

The section below describe the characteristics of these

areas.

THE OLD WALLED CITY AREA :

In Delhi, areas designated or notified as slums under the

159

act are generally located in the walled city and its adjoining

environs. There are 319 katras in the walled city area with about

3,000 buildings or properties. Out of these, 365 properties have

been identified as dangerous and therefore require resettlement

of inhabitants. In addition, there are 400 properties, which are

with the Evacuee Property Cell of Land and Building Department

of Delhi Government.

SQUATTER SETTLEMENTS/ JJ CLUSTERS :

The squatter settlements are encroachments on mainly

public land. As such these are illegal clusters (JCs) and are

devoid of any legal entitlements. However, efforts have been made

by the government to extend basic social and environmental

services to them.

LOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF JJ CLUSTERS :

JJ clusters are scattered all over the city. Generally they

are situated on the vacant land along railway lines, roads, drains

and river embankments and also vacant spaces near residential,

industrial and commercial complexes.

Figure 5.4

160

Figure 5.4 shows that around 55 percent of squatters are

near the residential areas and 40% along the road berms as also

shown in the complete picture in Table 5.2.

TABLE - 5.2

AREAWISE STATUS OF JJ CLUSTERS IN DELHI

Areas with Number of squatters %age to total encroachment Residential Areas 34100 55.86 Road Berms 24184 39.62 Park and open spaces 966 1.58 Schools 500 0.82 Market 1093 1.79 Railway Station 200 0.33 TOTAL 61043 100.00

Source : Sabir Ali, Environment Scenario of Delhi Slums, Centre for social Develop

ment Studies - 1998.

It is clear from Table 5.3 that around 70% of clusters have

less than 500 JJ’s. This percentage has remained constant from

1991-2001. The sharp decline in number of JJ clusters (1994-

2001) is attributed to large scale relocation of JJs since 1999.

TABLE - 5.3

SIZE WISE DISTRIBUTION OF JJ CLUSTERS

No. of JJ in 1991 1994 2001 clusters Upto 100 496 396 227 1119 101-500 311 446 295 1052 501-1000 59 121 110 290 1001-1500 30 54 37 121 1500 & above 33 63 59 155Source : (i) Slum Department, MCD Delhi; (ii) Status Report for Delhi-21, Delhi Urban

Environment and Infrastructure Improvement Project (DUEIIP), January 2001.

161

Figure 5.5 shows the size-wise distribution of JJclusters

in NCT Delhi in 2001.

AREAS WITH CONCENTRATION OF JJ CLUSTERS :

The spread of JJ clusters ranges from a plot of 0.4 acres with 8

JJs to JJcs as large as 50 acres with 10,000 households & 45000

populations. The average number of JJ per acre comes to 200

with 193 being the lowest (Najafgarh area) and 206 the highest

(Gole Market and Kalkaji areas) (Refer to Map 5.1). The

average area of JJ is 20m2. Some of the major areas with such

concentrations are given below :

(i) HIGH CONCENTRATION :

(a) Minto Road/ Gole Market/ Matia Mahal (129 clusters, 43388

JJs, 215.08 Acres) - NDMC Area.

(b) Badarpur/ Tuglaqabad/ Saket (79 clusters, 64187 JJs, 79 Acres)-

MCD area.

Figure 5.5

162

(c) Moti Nagar/ Patel Nagar/ Rajendra Nagar (72 clusters, 35,427

JJs, 175.45 Acres) - MCD Area.

(d) Jahangirpuri/ Adarsh Nagar/ Model Town/ Wazirpur (117 clus-

ters, 71538 JJs, 356 Acres) - MCD Area.

(e) Badli/ Shahbad-Daulatpur (21 clusters, 27551 JJs, 137.70 Acres)-

MCD Area.

(ii) MEDIUM CONCENTRATION :

(a) Delhi Cantonment/ Janakpuri/ Tilak Marg (17 clusters, 18,982

JJs, 95.03 Acres) - MCD Area.

(b) Biswas Nagar/ Shahdara/ Babarpur (44 clusters, 18,915 JJs, 88.91

Acres) - MCD Area.

(c) Hauzkhas. R.K. Puram (52 clusters, 14,110 JJs, 70.22 acres) -

NDMC Area.

(iii) LOW CONCENTRATION :

(a) Nazafgarh/ Nasirpur/ Palam (11 clusters, 363 JJs, 1.83 Acres) -

MCD Area.

(b) Sarojini Nagar/ Kalkaji/ Malviya Nagar/ Ambedkar Nagar/

Kasturba Marg (45 clusters, 11,802 JJs, 68.42 Acres) - NDMC

Area.

GROWTH OF SQUATTER SETTLEMENTS :

The squatter settlements or Jhuggi jhopari clusters (JJC)

assume strategic importance as far as issues of unorganized settle-

163

ments are concerned. As mentioned in Table - 5.4 in 1951 Delhi

had 12,749 jhuggi jhoparis (JJS) scattered over 199 clusters. By

1973 the number of JJS had reached 98,483 spread over 1373

clusters. The resettlement scheme pursued in 1962-77, with a

concentrated effort in 1975-77 resulted in the resettlement of 2.4

lakh JJS in different parts of Delhi. In 1977 only 20,000 JJ house-

holds had gone upto 1.13 lakhs. In 2001 the JJ clusters had declined

to (729 from 1080 in 1994) due to relocation of around 300

clusters from Gautampuri, Kingsway Camp, Ashok Vihar, AIIMS

and Hauz Khas etc.

TABLE - 5(4)

YEARWISE STATUS OF JJ CLUSTERS IN DELHI

Year JJ Clusters Jhuggi Area in PopulationHHS HA

1951 199 12749 21.1 63745

1973 1373 98483 164.1 492415

1983 534 113000 188.3 565000

1990 929 259000 431.7 1295000

1997 1100 600000 902.1 3000000

2001 728 429662 650.2 2148310

Source : Slum Deptt., Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi.

LAND OWNING AGENCIES AND JJ CLUSTERS :

The land owning agencies in whose area the JJ clusters are

situated are given in Table 5.5. Eighty three percent of DDA land

is squatted on by 600 JJ clusters.

164

TABLE - 5.5

LAND OWNING AGENCIES & JJ CLUSTERS

LO Agencies NO. of Jhuggies Population Area in Acres1990 1994 1994

DDA 280988 349705 1856683 1865.93

L&Do 21530 29415 132327 149.86

Railway 12161 17346 78929 84.34

MCD 8428 11052 52045 47.29

NDMC 3226 4487 20182 22.52

Gram Sabha 4132 4360 19619 21.31

Cantonment 1570 1700 7064 7.86 Board

Source : Status Report for Delhi- 21 Delhi Urban Environment

and infrastructure Improvement Project (DUEIIP), January 2001

ACCESS TO INFRASTRUCTURE IN SLUMS/ JJ CLUSTERS:

Water and sanitation facilities, in these unorganized

colonies, particularly JJ clusters, are poor. Only 21% of colonies

are covered with piped water supply and 10% are covered by

sanitation. Table 5.6 presents a satisfactory level of infrastruc-

ture availability in unplanned settlements, but these facilities are

non- functional in around 75-80% of the settlements. The average

population served by one PSP ranges from 250-300 against the

standard of 150. Moreover, average waiting at PSP is 20-30

minutes. Around 85-90% of JJ clusters did not have even

community toilets, forcing habitants to defecate in the open near

the water bodies or drainage channels.

165

TABLE - 5.6

WATER AND SANITATION STATUS IN THEUNPLANNED SETTLEMENTS (2004)

Service provision in Piped water supply Sewer facility unplanned settlement No. % of colonies No. % of colonies

Regularized 557 98.2 458 80.7 unauthorized colonies

Resettlement colonies 44 100.0 44 100.0

JJ Clusters 158 21.7 72 9.8

Source : Slum Department, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi.

RESETTLEMENT COLONIES :

Under the schemes for resettlement of JJ clusters 47

resettlement colonies were developed during 1961-77. Around

2.0 lakh plots were developed accommodating about 2.4 lakh

households. These resettlement colonies have degenerated due to

intense population pressure and unorganized development. There-

fore investment towards up-gradation of physical infrastructure

has to be made for improving civic life.

LOCATION OF RESETTLEMENT COLONIES :

The spatial distribution of these colonies indicates that they

are proliferating mainly in the South-East, North-East, North-West,

South-West and Central parts of the NCT of Delhi. These are five

colonies in South-East, eight in North-East, fifteen in North-West,

seven in South-West and twelve in Central Delhi.

166

RELOCATION SITES :

The Map 5.2 shows that there are around 12 relocation

sites as Bhalaswa, Holambi Kalan, Pappan Kalan, Rohini, Narela,

Bakanwar, Madanpur Khadar etc. The most recent relocation has

been made to three principal sites. These are Dwarka (known

also as Pappan Kalan), Rohini, Narela and Savda Ghevara. The

main pockets from where JJ clusters were relocated are Central,

South and East Delhi areas. Thus, during 1999-2000, 3741 squat-

ter households from the JJ clusters at CGO Complex, Chankyapuri,

Kotla Mubarakpur, Andrews Ganj, Sadiq Nagar, Mahaki Sarai,

Shahdara were moved to Narela and Rohini. 27.4 acres of land

has been allotted at Molar Band for shifting of the JJ clusters at

Gautam Nagar behind AIIMS as shown in Map 5.3. In 1997-98,

DDA allocated 32 acres of land in Tehkhand Village for reloca-

tion of squatter families.

These relocation resettlement sites offer no security of

tenure to habitants who begin a new life without security, basic

services, schools and other basic amenities.

SLUM DEVELOPMENT POLICIES IN PLACE :

While evaluating the policies affecting housing for slum

dwellers we take a top down approach by first giving a brief

overview of the National Housing Policy 2007, and laid out for

Delhi’s slums by various authorities.

167

(i) NATIONAL URBAN HOUSING AND HABITAT POLICY 2007:

The National Urban Housing and Habitat Policy 2007 states

its goal as ‘affordable housing for all’ in the country. It promotes

various types of Public Private Partnerships and pays special

emphasis on the urban poor, intending to promote sustainable

development of housing in the country with a view to ensuring

equitable supply of land, shelter and services at affordable prices

to all sections of society. The policy focused on multiple stake-

holders the private sector, the cooperative sector, the industrial

sector for labor housing and the services and institutional sector

for employee housing. To attain the overarching goal of afforable

housing for all, emphasis is laid on urban planning, increasing

supply of land and use of spatial incentives like additional floor

area ratio (FAR), transferable development rights, and increased

flow of funds, effective solid waste management and use of

renewal sources of energy. Encouraging integrated townships and

special economic zones (SEZs), the policy calls for reservation

of 10-15 percent land in every new public and private housing

projects or 20-25 percent FAR whichever is greater to for EWS

and LIG housing through appropriate spatial incentives.

The private sector would be permitted assembling land

within the purview of master plans. The policy also sets action

plans for urban slum dwellers with a special package being

prepared for cooperative housing, labor housing and employees

housing. The primary choice would be to give provision of shelter

168

to urban poor at their present location or near their work place.

The role of housing and provision of basic services to the

urban poor has been integrated into the objectives of the Jawaharlal

Nehru Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM).

(ii) BASIC SERVICES TO THE URBAN POOR, JNNURM :

The Sub Mission II of the JNNURM involves Basic

Services to the Urban Poor (BSUP) including the integrated

housing and slum development programme. The objectives of the

mission are outlined as :

1. Focused attention to integrated development of Basic Services to

the urban poor in the cities covered under the mission.

2. Provision of Basic Services to Urban Poor including security of

tenure at affordable prices, improved housing, water supply,

sanitation and ensuring delivery through convergence of other

already existing universal services of the Government for Educa-

tion, health and social security care will be taken to see that the

urban poor are provided housing near their place of occupation.

3. Secure effective linkages between asset creation and asset man-

agement to that the Basic Services to the Urban Poor created in

the cities are not only maintained efficiently but also become self-

sustaining over time.

4. Ensure adequate investment of funds to fulfill deficiencies in the

Basic Services to the Urban Poor.

169

5. Scale up delivery of civic amenities and provision of utilities

with emphasis on universal access to urban poor.

The Delhi Master Plan 2021 has laid emphasis on improve-

ment of the living conditions of the 45% of Delhities living in

slums and JJ clusters in the next ten years as part of the improve-

ment in the livability of the city for its inhabitants.

(iii) THREE PRONGED APPROACH IN DELHI :

Of the settlements considered as sub-standard slum and

squatter settlements rank among the worst and it is the urban poor

that live predominantly in such settlements. The program of

squatter clearance was discontinued at the end of sixth plan (from

1985). Accordingly no major settlement program was carried out

until 1992 when a Revised Resettlement Policy was formulated

by the DDA. This did not mean that there were no resettlement

works in progress. The general policy adopted by the govern-

ment since then it twofold. One is that no fresh encroachments

shall be permitted on public land and the second is that past

encroachments (those in existence till 30.01.1990) would not be

removed without providing alternatives.

Squatter settlements are to be found throughout the city but

especially on the vacant land along railway lines, roads, drains,

river embankments, and around resettlement colonies. The strat-

egy of the government towards slums/ squatter settlements has

been mainly of clearance.

170

In recent years, however, there have been some changes in

the attitude and strategies. Since 1991 three strategies have been

used in Delhi, which are as follows :

1. Improvement of the slum environment.

2. Relocation of the slums

3. In situ-up-gradation and rehabilitation.

(iv) IMPROVEMENT OF THE SLUM ENVIRONMENT :

Since 1987, in JJ clusters and notified slums which are not

being relocated or developed with the in situ approach, basic

urban services and amenities are being provided under ‘Envi-

ronmental improvement in urban slum scheme’. The facilities are

extended to all JJ clusters even those that developed after 1990.

The facilities being provided under the scheme are :

1. Pay and use Jan Suvidha Complexes containing toilets and bath-

rooms at the community level or the provision of mobile toilet,

vans in all those JJ clusters where the Jan Suvidha Complex can

not be provided.

2. Water supply either through water hydrants, hand pipes or water

tanker.

3. Street lighting.

4. Dusbins for collection of domestic waste.

5. Paved pathways and drains.

171

(v) RELOCATION OF SLUMS :

Jhuggi Jhopri resettlement, relocation scheme was started

in the Union Territory of Delhi for the rehousing of squatters on

government and private lands in 1960. The scheme began with

the allotment of two room tenements to 3,560 JJ households.

Subsequently, partially developed plots of 80 square yards were

allotted under the scheme to the squatters on a nominal rent.

However, due to demand of land in Delhi and the fact that the

allotment procedure was misused, size of plots was reduced to

40 square meters and then 25 square meters. Under the present

situation, Relocation is carried out for only those JJ clusters and

slums that are required by the land owning agency for public

interest projects.

Since the inception of the scheme with effect from 1990-

1991, so far about 70,000 plots have been developed and about

60,000 families have been rehabilitated at Dwarka, Rohini, Narela,

Bawana, Holambi, Molar Band, Madanpur Khaddar & Sawda

Ghevre keeping in view the scarcity of land in Delhi and as per

the directions of the Delhi Government and Government of India.

The Delhi Government has formulated a new policy for the

resettlement of squatter families in Delhi. Under the new policy,

Delhi Government has proposed to provide built up flats instead

of plots to the slum dwellers, economically weaker sections

under the Rajiv Awas Yojna, JNNURM. Under this scheme, the

Delhi Government aims to provide 4 lakh flats by 2012.

172

(vi) IN SITU UP-GRADATION AND REHABILITATION :

There has been a general shift in the approach to slum and

JJ clusters in recent years. The emphasis is now on the improve-

ment of the environment of the JJ cluster and their in situ rehabili-

tation wherever possible. The in situ up gradation is undertaken

after the area has been notified as a slum area under the Slum

Area Act of 1956. The scheme involves replanning of JJ dwell-

ing units in modified layout by redistributing the encroached land

pockets amongst the squatter families. The JJ households are given

sites of 10 to 12.5 square meters for construction of their own

shelters. The housing plots are generally designed in a cluster

around open courtyards. The beneficiary constructs the shelter

under a self help approach with technical extension services

provided by the slum and JJ department of the MCD. So far 5,583

families have been rehabilitated at Prayog Vihar, Ekta Vihar, Shanti

Vihar and Shahbad Daulatpur Phase I. The implementation of the

in situ- up-gradation is very poor due to non availability of the

Notice of Consent from the concerned land owning agency. A

new policy of in situ slum up grading also suggests, as in the case

of relocation, the provision of developed flats on the same

location instead of plots for the slum dwellers.

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) decided to take

up in situ development towards rehabilitation of slum dwelling

units of about 25 square meters will be about 47,500. These will

be taken up on public- private partnership model in which the

173

land occupied by slum dwellers will be made available to de-

velopers, who will construct houses in accordance with the num-

bers identified by the DDA. These houses will be constructed in

same parts of the area while in the remaining areas the developer

will be allowed to carry out commercial exploitation of the land.

This would enable the developer to spill over some of the costs

from building the rehabilitation units to the commercial activity,

thereby reducing the burden on the slum dwellers as well. This

mixed development allows them to get the cross subsidy by way

of targeting two different segments of society.

This model is being applied at the kathputli colony where

residents will have access to 12 storeyed buildings in which the

ground floors will be devoted to promoting artistic and commer-

cial enterprise since most of the residents are puppeteers, crafts-

men or musicians. The constructions will house 2,800 dwelling

units meant for the colony’s residents. The site will also boast of

a separate 2.1 acre commercial space to be developed by private

developers and “high-category residential apartmentments” in 2.4

acres which will help boost the earning of artisans and crafts-

men, according to the DDA’s plans.

In the scheme, modeled on Mumbai’s slum rehabilitation

programme, private players will join hands with the government

and the work of clearing the slums would proceed in phases.

Since residents will be resettled, tents will be pitched to provide

174

temporary accommodation to the people till the project is

completed.

(vii) DRAFT NATIONAL SLUM POLICY 2001 :

Another more specific, policy the “draft” National Slum

Policy is yet to be ratified by the government. The draft National

Slum Policy envisages cities without slums. Towards fulfillment

of this vision, the policy adopts an approach of in situ up gradation

and improvement. It recommends clearance only in exceptional

circumstances. It, therefore, talks of urban growth with equity

and justice and makes plea for greater participation of communi-

ties and civil society in all areas of planning, capacity building

and development. Correspondingly it proposes a series of

interventions with regards to definitions, tenure, planning,

economic empowerment, governance and management, shelter up

gradation etc.

The governing principal of the Draft National Slum Policy

are as follows :

1. The endorsement of an upgrading and improvement approach in

all slums, and the acceptance of the necessity of slum clearance

in an extremely defined circumstances.

2. Recognition that households in all urban informal settlements

should have access to certain basic minimum services, irrespec-

tive of land tenure or occupancy status.

175

3. The goal that planning in all cities should have the objective of

creating cities without slums.

4. The objective of ensuring that urban growth takes place with

equity and distributive justice.

5. The intention that urban local bodies should work in collabora-

tion with all other stakeholders to enhance the impact of slum

development through building the capacities of the poor and

empowering them to improve their own living conditions.

6. The adoption of a more “enabling” approach to the delivery of

basic social services to the poor as a result of more effective

mobilization of community resources and skills to complement

public resource allocations.

7. A greater participation of communities and civil society in all

areas of planning, capacity building and development.

The draft policy is however silent over the ways in which

such goals could be realized. Also, the definition of all under

served serviced lands as slums will hinder and deny the most

needy and vulnerable from having access to resources for up-

gradation and improvement.

POLICY COMPARISON :

A comparative study of these policies and schemes can now

be undertaken, based on the parameters discussed earlier. The

National Urban Housing and Habitat Policy 2007 seems to be a

176

step in the right direction, with focus on affordable housing,

public private partnerships (PPP), sustainable development of

housing in the country, special package being prepared for

cooperative housing, labor housing and employees housing and

prioritizing houses for the urban poor at their present location or

near their work place using the in- situ slum rehabilitation

approach. Using the parameters as tools for analysis we see that

with PPPs and the in situ rehabilitation approach, affordable

housing for slum dwellers at their present location is an option.

This enables them to earn their livelihood just as they did before,

in the slums. The security of tenure objective is also achieved

through the policy. Only the characteristics of housing provided

remains questionable. The quality of houses, its cost and the

allocation can be a hindrance to the residents. Sometimes the

costs are too high for them and at other times the quality of the

houses is compromised. Under the JNNURM, the improved quality

of housing is specifically included and allocation is said to be on

the basis of need (determined through income). As is the case

with both the relocation and the in situ rehabilitation policy, any

worker whose source of livelihood is within the slums (dhobi,

tailor etc.) might be compromised unless there is specific

mention of a workstation being supplied. Thus this would be a

violation of the first parameter and the people affected by this

would prefer to stay in some other slum again. This vary case

would be an important characteristic of the third approach of

177

improvement of the slum environment or up- gradation. The

livelihoods of the residents are maintained even though the slum,

not lacking basic facilities but still an unplanned part of the city,

still exists. The draft national slum policy outlines its objectives

but has not clearly defined how these objectives will be met and

therefore no analysis on the basis of parameters and incentives

for residents can be undertaken. Thus, as is the case with most of

the policies in India, each of these policies, schemes and

approaches looks impeccable on paper but the ground realities

of these projects are often very different from what is claimed

and therefore it is necessary that a follow up mechanism be

incorporated into each of the policies to ensure their efficiency.

(C) URBAN GARBAGE GROUNDS :

Various human processes produce waste. Disposing waste

products is major global problem since last many decades.

Landfill is considered as the primitive way to organized waste

dumping in various parts of earth. It is a method of removing the

refuse on land without creating a hazard to public health or safety.

Landfills may consist of domestic waste dumping sites as well as

sites utilized by several manufacturers. This method is also

adopted for other waste management tasks for example the

momentary storage, consolidation and relocation, or meting out

of waste substance such as sorting, treatment, or recycling. The

landfill is supportive process of waste diminution and has a key

role in resource revival. A landfill also denotes the practice in

178

which ground has been packed in with soil and rocks as an alter-

native of garbage which solves many important purposes such as

for building construction.

Landfill is emerged as the most practicable ecological

substitute for the specific waste removal in various countries.

Today government priority is to set up a waste policy by

applying the ideology in order to deal with environmental risks,

the economic and health dangers of resource degradation. These

strategies are basically planned to maintain landfill practices

which will stabilize the landfill sites in present generation. The

main intent of waste organization is to deal with the garbage

produced by existing generation and do not switch over waste

related harms to next generation. The Landfill Directive is

committed to raise standards and lessen harmful consequences

on the surroundings, groundwater, surface waters, soil, and

restrictions on the universal impact of waste dumping. For

commercial purpose, a landfill technique must meet definite

requirements, which are linked to many important factors. The

first factor is the location. Landfill must have easy access to

transportation via road. It must have stability such as fundamen-

tal geology, earthquake faults, water table. Another factor is

capacity. The existing annulled space must be planned by assess-

ment of the landform with a proposed re-establishment profile.

This computation of capacity is based on density of the wastes,

amount of intermediate and daily cover, and amount of settle-

179

ment. Landfill must have protection of soil and water through

installation of inside layer and collection systems. To handle speci-

fied harmless waste landfills such method must be applied through

which the trash are cramped to small area, compressed to decrease

their quantity, enclosed with layers of soil. Completely lined

landfills reinstate the previous one, unlined deposits that were

earlier used. In the operation of landfill, the garbage collection

trucks are weighed at entrance and their load is checked for wastes.

Then, these vehicles drop their load. After loads are dumped,

compactors or dozers spread and compressed the waste on the

operational field. This flattened waste is enclosed with soil

every day. Other waste wrap materials are sprayed on froth

products and transitory mantles. These mantles can be elevated

into place with tracked excavators and then detatched the next

day proceeding to waste placement. Chipped wood and chemi-

cally ‘fixed’ bio-solids are the substitute cover. Since the 20th

century, population is exploding speedily in developed areas; it

is a need of an hour to implement land reprocesses tractics for

completed landfills. The common usages are parks, golf courses.

Office buildings and industrial uses are made of a completed

landfill. Many steps are taken to disperse garbage produced

through communities, Industry and other establishments. At the

end of 20th century, different methods to waste removal to land-

fill and burning have started. The apparent substitutes to landfills

are waste reduction and recycling policies. Incineration is the

180

most effectual technique of plummeting volume and weight of

solid waste by burning in a well designed furnace.

Landfill reclamation is one of the control measures to check

spoilage of landscape. It is the burning of landfill garbage at high

temperature via the plasma-arc gasification procedure. Another

important way to deal with solid waste is composing by which

the organic components of solid waste are biologically decom-

posed under controlled aerobic conditions. In this method,

plastics, rubber and leather are separated from the solid waste

and the remaining organic matter is decomposed aerobically or

an aerobically to end product called compost. Anaerobic

digestion, mechanical biological treatment, pyrolysis and gasifi-

cation have all started to establish themselves in the marketplace.

Optional waste disposal technology is quite expensive than

landfill and mass burn incineration is the sole technology for mixed

waste. India is working to develop clean energy sources that can

yield considerable economic, environmental and health benefits

for people. Methane emissions from the solid waste sector in

India are projected to increase significantly over the next 15 years.

Reusing landfill methane gas for energy purposes has the poten-

tial to mitigate 5.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equiva-

lents, which is equal to the annual emissions from one million

vehicles. Currently, there are no operational landfill gas-to-

energy projects in India but several large sites in Delhi, Mumbai

and other cities could support the clean energy projects.

181

Basically, a landfill is a large area of land or an excavated

site that is a carefully designed structure built into or on top of the

ground. The rubbish collected at the landfill is isolated from the

surrounding environment with a bottom liner and a daily cover-

ing of soil. Though the modern landfill practices are technically

sound but still these proven techniques sometimes fail to meet

challenges. These practices require further precision to secure

public areas. Appropriate removal practices should be adopted

to control environmental contamination. These practices include-

All loads must be alienated when unloading in selected area.

Domestic refuse and small things should be kept in the dustbin.

Removal should be permitted exterior the landfill entrance and

video watch is carried out.

SOLID WASTE GENERATION IN NCT DELHI :

The problem of solid waste management in Delhi is as-

suming serious proportions due to increasing population, urban-

ization, changing lifestyles and consumption patterns. There are

24 existing landfill sites for waste management in NCT Delhi

from 16 are filled up, 4 are in operation and other 4 are newly

operated as shown in Map 5.4. The garbage from unauthorized

developments, slums, JJ settlements, etc. is not collected which

further adds to the environmental degradation. The projected

average garbage generation upto the year 2021 is @ 0.68 kg. per

capita per day and total quantum of solid waste is 15750 tonnes/

day as given in Table - 5.7.

182

TABLE - 5.7

QUANTUM OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE(TONNES / DAY)

Local body area Existing Capacity Projected generation

2001 for 2021

MCD 5250 15100

NDMC 245 550

Cantonment 48 100

TOTAL 5543 15750

Management of solid waste involves waste generation,

segregation and storage; waste collection; waste transfer/ trans-

portation treatment, recycle reuse, recovery; and disposal. For

effective waste management, its segregation at the community and

neighbourhood level is imperative. The waste shall be segre-

gated and collected, in separate chambers at dalaos. For this,

involvement of rag pickers with RWAs, CBOs and NGOs is to be

encouraged.

The projected composition of municipal waste for the plan

period is estimated as given in table - 5.8 for biodegradable and

recyclable waste which is segregated at the source, decentral-

ized treatment at neighbourhood level may be adopted, while for

silt, centralized treatment may be followed.

The other type of specialized waste includes biomedical

waste; hazardous waste from industries; construction debris and

fly ash; meat processing centre etc. Disposal of bio-medical waste

183

is to be as per bio-medical waste rules and hazardous waste

requires special handling rules. Proper dumping, recycling and

reuse of construction debris and fly ash have to be linked. Meat

processing centre waste is to be recycled for chicken feed etc.

TABLE - 5.8

PROJECTED COMPOSITION OFTOTAL MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE FOR 2021

Constituents Quantum (in tons) Percentage to totalwaste

Bio- degradable 6000 38

Silt 6000 38

Recyclable 3750 24

TOTAL 15750 100

Notes :(i) Above figures are based on Report on Solid Waste Management in Delhi

conducted by NEERI, Nagpur through DDA;(ii) Figures of MCD are based on Feasibility study in Master Plan for optimal

waste Treatment & Disposal for the entire state of Delhi, June, 2004, by COWIConsultants appointed by MCD.

Considering the nature of solid waste and the economic

aspects of its disposal, major part of solid waste especially silt

has to be disposed off in sanitary landfills. But wherever recy-

cling is possible, it should be preferred than disposing off the

waste in sanitary landfill sites. More viable alternatives to land-

fills are vermiculture, fossilization, composting etc. Waste Mini-

mization Circles (WMCs) should be constituted and made effec-

tive. Implementation and monitoring & Bio-Medical Wastes (Han-

dling & Management) Rules, 1998, for hospitals, nursing homes,

184

and clinics should be taken up. The sites, which are filled up or

are in operation, given in Table - 5.9. The filled up sites may be

reuse for plantation or as recreational area. The proposed sites

for sanitary landfill and compost plants are to be finalized by

MCD. The Map 5.5 shows the area of existing and proposed

landfill sites.

Keeping in view the fact that finding new sanitary landfill

sites in Delhi is becoming extremely difficult there is no option,

as shown by the Map 5.5 & 5.6 but to resort to alternative and

decentralized methods of waste treatment, reduction, recycle and

use, which include vermiculture, fossilization and composting.

TABLE - 5.9

EXISTING LANDFILL SITES FORWASTE MANAGEMENT

S.N. Location Area (in ha.) Remarks

1. Kailash Nagar, East Delhi 1.8 Filled up

2. Tilak Nagar 16.0 Filled up

3. Subroto Park - Filled up

4. Purana Quila/ Bharion Road 2.7 Filled up

5. Timar Pur 16.0 Filled up

6. Sarai Kale Khan 24.0 Filled up

7. Gopal Pur 4.0 Filled up

8. Chhater Pur 1.7 Filled up

9. S.G.T. Nagar 14.4 Filled up

10. I.P. Depot 1.8 Filled up

11. Sunder Nagar 2.8 Filled up

12. Tuglakabad Ext. 2.4 Filled up

185

13. Haiderpur 1.6 Filled up

14. Mandawali Fazilpur 2.8 --

15. Rohini Phase III 4.8 --

16. Near Hastsal Village in West Delhi 9.6 Filled up

17. Site near Gazipur Dairy Farm 28.0 In Operation

18. Site near Jhangirpur/ Bhalswa 16.0 In Operation

19. Okhla Phase I 12.8 In Operation

20. Crossing on G.T. Karnal Road 3.2 In Operation

21. Jaitpur/ Tajpur 9.84 New

22. Near Puthkhurd 55.0 New

23. Bhawana to Narela Road 28.0 New

24. Sultanpur Dabas (Bawana) 16.0 New

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT :

The dumping of solid waste on land is the cause of follow-

ing problems :

(a) WATER POLLUTION :

Toxic liquid (leachate) that flows from the dumped waste

seeps into surface and groundwater and contaminates postable

water.

(b) SOIL POLLUTION :

Toxins seep into the soil and surrounding vegetation, and

move into the food chain through fruits and vegetables grown in

the area.

(c) DUM FIRES :

When waste decomposes, inflammable methane is released

186

which can result in explosion. The smoke released is also highly

toxic for inhalation and contributes to global warming.

(d) SOURCE OF DISEASE :

Dumpsites breed flies, rodents, and pests, which spread

diseases.

(e) OTHER IMPACTS :

Foul smell, visual ugliness, and bird menace which can be

a hazard to airplanes.

CONCLUSION :

The primary goal of any solid waste management system is

to safeguard the health of the citizens and protect the environ-

ment. This is achieved by ensuring proper collection, transporta-

tion, treatment and finally, safe disposal of waste. However, the

last step is missing in most solid waste management systems

implemented in the country.

REFERENCES :

* Gita Dewan Verma (2002): ‘Slumming India—A Chronicle of

Slums and Their Saviours’. Penguin Books, India.

* Voluntary Health Association of India (1993). ‘Delhi—A Tale of

Two Cities’. 40, Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi.

* Sabir Ali (1991). ‘Slums Within Slums’. Vikas Publications, New

Delhi.

187

* Supriti, Barnhardt S. and Ramanathan R. 2002. Urban Poverty

Alleviation in India : A General Assessment and a Particular

Perspective; Bangalore : Ramanathan foundation.

* Subramaniam. 2003. Inequalities in health in India : The Method-

ological construction of indices and measures- Draft report,

Department of health and social behavior, Harvard School of

Public Health.

* Carmines EG, Zeller RA. 1991. Reliability and Validity assess-

ment. Newbury Park : Sage Publications.

* WHO and UNICEF, 2000 : Global Water Supply and Sanitation

Assessment 2000 Report. WHO and UNICEF.

* GNCT. 2006. Delhi Human Development Report 2006. New

Delhi: Oxford University Press.

* Banerji, Manjistha, Provision of Basic Services in the Slums and

Resettlement Colonies of Delhi, Ensuring public accountability

through community action 2005, Institute of Social Studies Trust,

New Delhi.

* Verma, G.D. (2002), Slumming India : A chronicle of slums and

their saviours, Penguin Books India, Delhi.

—:: O ::—