Local governments and other implementing agencies must be well-equipped in terms of human

resources and be empowered by institutionally and legally protected mandates to intervene within
the domain of slums. Capacity building of implementing agencies and local government staff is
critical, particularly the development of city-to-city cooperation to enhance exchange of
experience and transfer of know-how from those cities that have managed to go to scale, while
also boosting skill development and appropriation of lessons learned. A citywide scale approach
is fundamental to enhancing the economic outcome generated by the opening of prioritised and
multiple streets in different settlements, increasing connectivity, circulation and mobility also
provide the opportunity for the ultimate physical integration of slums and informal settlements
into their surrounding neighbourhood. Streets are the first step to integrating the economic
resourcefulness of slum dwellers into wider urban and national markets. As security of tenure
follows street patterns and the formalisation of a settlement’s urbanlayout, so does physical
mobility and economic access. This fullintegration strategy uniquely benefits from the
coordination of upgrading policies with an overall urban development strategy. At this scale, slum
upgrading brings about tangible physical results in the form of streets, accessibility, infrastructure
improvements, urban layout design and legalisation/regularisation of land tenure.
The process is incremental, by phase, taking into account the peclarities of a site, of its population
and the financial, logistical, planning and managerial capacity of city governments. The design of
such a programme obviously requires a well informed policy drawn on good mapping and
reliable data about the scale, size, location, income, population, housing quality, and level of
services available as well as adequate knowlwdge about the specific problems about the
settlement.

Urbanization in most low-income and lower-middle-income developing countries has been

characterized by environmental degradation, deepening economic divide and rampant
proliferation of slum settlements. Slum dwellers have a poor quality of life and are deprived of
access to basic services in the area of water and sanitation, electric power, street lights, healthcare
and education. Slum settlements have also been reported to have become breeding grounds for
criminal incidents and other unlawful activities thus jeopardizing public safety in the
neighborhood. Urban slum dwellers suffer from a persistent digital and financial exclusion that
prevents the fruits of larger economic growth from truly percolating to them.

COVID-19 has exposed the vulnerability of cities and its failure to inclusively plan for the
informalities within them. Globally, the worst hit areas in cities with high population densities are
the slums. From kuccha tenements that barely provide any social distancing, poor access to
drinking water and sanitation, uncontrollable migrant movements and a massive loss of livelihood
— governments are seen battling with COVID-19 numbers and its consequences in these hitherto
neglected areas. The pandemic experience will push every global city with high slum densities to
think of how the situation could be turned.

For years, several governments across the world have attempted at solving the issues of informal
housing, and there are more failures than successes. The famed Dharavi slum in Mumbai — one
of the largest in Asia — is a great example of a burgeoning informal economy with people living
and working in sub-human conditions. With no social or economic security and uncertainties of
livelihoods, an area glorified in movies is calling for attention. Multiple attempts for its
redevelopment over the past 14 years have failed, and none of those plans, were ever inclusive or
even community driven, in the true sense.
While examples of land-based solutions for housing have resulted in worse housing for poor and
seem to have only benefited everyone else, we need to talk about solutions that will lead to
comprehensive planning of such areas. Innovative and inclusive solutions will need to be drawn
up that will not compromise on the quality of life and livelihoods of people and create better
homes and infrastructure. Policies will need to be re-imagined, finances reworked.

• Slums must be comprehensively and inclusively dealt with from the planning, livelihoods,
financial and climate aspects. What will be the priority tasks within these pillars for reimagining
slums?

• Is uncompromised urban planning, and in turn providing housing, in informal settlements and
slum formations possible in high density areas? Should rental and affordable housing be replacing
concepts like free housing for the poor?

• Retaining livelihoods and community well-being is an integral part of habitation planning. How
do we achieve these targets along with rehabilitation that is financially feasible?

• Climate change directly impacts informal settlements exposing them to hazards like air
pollution, flooding due to rains and rising sea levels, diseases emerging out of them, leading child
mortality among other issues. What are the efforts that need to be taken to build resilience against
climatic impacts?

CASE STUDY INTRODUCTION

Slums, squatters, shanti houses, favela, have been becoming an increasing issue in the cities.
More than one billion people of the urban population live in these informal settlements. It is
estimated that by 2050, the number would be triple, making it 30% of the total urban population.
However, are these informal settlements really an issue? Are they really as bad as they are
advertised to be? I believe not.

So what causes the stigma against informal settlements? Slums are believed to be places that no
one wants to live in. They have The reputation of being dirty and dangerous. However, is that
true? Are all informal settlements just a burden to the cities? Do they not contribute to making the
cities function better?

Image can be a tricky thing. People often judge by that is on the surface than what is inside.
Dharavi, an informal settlement in Mumbai, is one of the examples of how one should not judge a
book by its cover. This informal settlement is seen as dirty and dangerous by the rest of the world.
Dharavi however, is a hidden gem of the city.

Dharavi, Asia’s largest and world’s third largest slum, is situated in Mumbai, India. Spread over
525 ares of land, Dharavi houses about 700,000 to one million people, making it one of the
densest places on Earth. However, whatever image one might have of a slum, Dharavi is not it. It
is a self contained city within a city. Whether is schools, hospitals, pharmacies, restaurants, bars,
clothing shops, electronics or groceries; Dharavi has it all. Besides consisting of temporary tin or
ply sheet houses, Dharavi also has some of the nicest houses made of brick and concrete and
decorated with patterned tiles. Houses range from one to three stories and range from 200 sq.ft.
To 1500sq.ft in area. Originally a fishing village, Dharavi now consists of over 20,000 industries
with 80% of its population working within the slum. It has one of the various genuine leather
industries and textile industries manufacturing for large interntional clothing brands. The pottery
unit in Dharavi is one of the biggest potters settlements in Mumbai. It also has over 300 bakeries
and various other dry snak manufacturing units. Not only that, 80% of Mumbai’s plastic being
recycled in Dharavi, making it Idia’s biggest recycling unit. The world’s most complicated
lunchbox delivery and return system ‘dabbawalas’, which are renowned for having more than
99% accuracy, are also based in Dharavi. All in all, Dharavi is less of a slum and moe of a city
within city.

While rich in culture, residents of Dharvi live in very poor conditions. The government wats to
push its dwellers aside and replace theirdwellings with offices and towers. This research argues
that Dharavi, a place that formed one of the original islands in Mumbai, where thousands of
families have been living f generations, is worth saving. Dharavi’s residents need facilities to be
upgraded, not uprooted.