Housing - Dr. PSN Rao

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 9

Institute of Town Planners, India Journal 13 x 2, April - June 2016

Smart Housing for Smart Cities

P.S.N. Rao, Ph.D.

Abstract
Housing remains one of the critical problems of planning. Modern technology to suit Indian
weather conditions and social acceptability is available and at a cost which is comparable if not
lower than conventional construction systems. In the past it has not worked because appropri-
ate technology was not used. Smart housing is viewed as housing for the masses that can be
created efficiently and effectively if smart technology is interlinked and integrated with HFA.

1. Introduction
Government of India launched the Smart Cities Mission as a flagship program
under the Ministry of Urban Development with a view to meeting the challenge
of urbanization in the country (Ministry of Urban Development, 2015). As per
this policy, ‘smart cities’ are defined as those which have provision of core
infrastructure viz. water supply, electricity, sanitation including solid waste
management, mobility and transport, IT connectivity, e-governance, citizen
participation and safety and security of citizens. The list of smart solutions
includes as many as 21 different solutions. While only 31 percent of the population
of India lives in urban areas, it contributes as much as 63 percent of the Gross
Domestic Product as of the year 2011 and this is slated to rise to 75 percent by
2030. Obviously this requires comprehensive development of physical, social,
economic and institutional infrastructure so as to prepare and manage the
challenges posed by this kind of growth.

The program of smart cities aims to help cities acquire better infrastructure
which includes water supply, electricity, sanitation, mobility, affordable housing,
digital connectivity, sustainable environment, safety and security, health,
education and good governance with citizen participation.

In the whole gamut of things, finances are the key. This has been addressed
by a huge budgetary allocation of nearly Rs.50,000 crore. This works out to
Rs.100 crore for each city every year for 5 years for 100 cities. In addition to this
funding which is to come from central government, funds can be also mobilized
from various other sources including the private sector. In the entire process,
efficiency is the key to achieving smartness. In order to achieve efficiency, use of
modern technology is imperative.

P.S.N. Rao, Ph.D.; Professor and Head, Department of Housing, School of Planning and
Architecture (SPA), New Delhi, Chairman, Delhi Urban Art Commission (DUAC), Government
of India.

P.S.N. Rao, Ph.D. 23


Institute of Town Planners, India Journal 13 x 2, April - June 2016

The official figure of urban housing shortage in India has been estimated to be
around 25 million dwelling units (Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation,
2007). Out of the 24.7 million units housing shortage, a major portion belongs
to the Economically Weaker Section (EWS). EWS is defined as having a family
income of upto Rs.3 lakh per annum, as per the PMAY definition. By any stretch
of imagination, this is a huge target which cannot be met easily. While there
is absolutely no room for doubt that the housing requirement in the country is
humungous, the problem is more acute in the urban areas rather than the rural
areas. Further, the question becomes more complex when we look at the kind
of population segment which is more in need of housing than the others. A large
number of low and middle income families need housing which is reasonably
priced (affordable) while a relatively small number of families can afford to
pay for large or high priced housing. Therefore, the demand is more for budget
housing products where the affordability is limited. Unfortunately, the reality is
that the housing being produced in the market is actually the other way round;
there is very little budget housing and plenty of housing options for high income
groups. This is the housing dilemma in India (Rao, 2015a). Further, the demand –
supply gap only helps in pushing the prices higher and higher. The outcome of this
spiral is that people, particularly the low-income and the poor, have no other
choice but to take to illegal habitat options.

2. PAST IMPERFECT
The Indian housing story over the last sixty years has moved from strong state
interventions in the early years of independence from the 1950's onwards towards
a liberalized regime of private sector initiatives and partnerships towards the
end of the century. In more recent times, however, housing development in India
is being perceived more and more as an activity which cannot be undertaken
without the active participation of the private sector, be it entrepreneurs,
corporate companies, cooperative societies or individuals themselves. This is a
realization that has dawned on Government of India and in the recent past, efforts
have been made to encourage the private housing enterprise, unfortunately with
few safeguards to provide for the masses (Rao, 2006).

The public sector housing agencies which were created after independence
of the country to provide reasonably priced housing viz. state housing boards,
corporations and development authorities have left much to be desired. The
housing supply of these agencies has declined substantially in recent times.
These agencies were mostly funded by the Housing and Urban Development
Corporation (HUDCO) and over the years, got embroiled in various difficulties
in servicing the loans taken. To add to the misery, these agencies have actually
now taken to developing high priced housing, obviously catering only to the high
income - high affordability groups of the population. The large number of public-
private partnerships created in the last few decades has mostly catered only to

P.S.N. Rao, Ph.D. 24


Institute of Town Planners, India Journal 13 x 2, April - June 2016

the upper incomes groups and precious little housing has been created for the
low income population. Sadly, the structuring of these partnerships leaves gaping
loop holes in the way governments have played into the hands of the real estate
enterprise. The housing loans released by HUDCO over the last few years has
shown a decline - Rs. 807 crore in 2007-08, Rs. 800 crore in 2008-09 and Rs. 771
crore in 2009-10.

On the other hand, state governments have also been actually promoting high
end housing through township policies and public private partnerships. In fact,
even the entire housing finance system in India is thriving on providing mortgage
housing loans to the well to do salaried formal sector employees taking shelter
under the fact that low income population is not credit worthy. Therefore,
government commitment to housing the large majority has come down drastically.

As a result, there is a glut or oversupply of housing for the high income population
and the middle and low income population has to put up with the burden of the
burnt. Invariably, they end up in high priced rental housing at good locations (to
save on commuting time and money for transportation), far off locations which
are within their affordability (but difficult on commuting time and transportation)
or end up in informal and quasi-legal settlements where the prices are more
affordable, albeit the lack of services. Low income housing projects are hardly
being developed these days in the formal housing sector.

Government of India set up a High Level Task Force in the year 2008 to look
into the various aspects of providing affordable housing (Rao, 2015b). This Task
Force came up with a definition of affordable housing as (a) 300 to 600 square
feet carpet area housing for EWS and LIG with cost not exceeding 4 times the
gross household annual income and EMI or rent not exceeding 30 percent of gross
monthly income; and (b) 1,200 square feet carpet area housing for MIG with
cost of house not exceeding 5 times gross household annual income and EMI or
rent not exceeding 40 percent of gross monthly income. Assuming that this is
correct, if one were to look at the policies and projects being promoted by State
Governments in various states of the country, one can see that few have been
following the recommendations of this Taskforce.

Government of India has been pursuing orthodox policies and programs, the most
recent being the Rajiv Awas Yojana to generate low income housing. There are
no significant departures so as to create a dent in the supply side of the market.
They significantly suffer from the continuance of orthodox bureaucracies and
inadequate capacities for speedy and quality implementation. There are
quite a few real estate companies who have recently entered in this space of
affordable budget housing segment and only time will tell how they are going
to deliver.

P.S.N. Rao, Ph.D. 25


Institute of Town Planners, India Journal 13 x 2, April - June 2016

3. GLOBAL EXPERIENCE
There are many countries where there has been an acute housing problem in
the past and have seriously acted and tided over the same (Tighe, and Mueller,
2013). Singapore and Hong Kong are two South Asian cases in point. Both have
developed housing policies which addressed the needs of the day and pushed
forward enormous housing supply into the market that there is no shortage at
all, there is enough housing for all. Strong political will, active development
mechanisms, clear construction strategies, innovative financial systems and
use of modern technology have all led to ‘smart housing’ (Yeung and Wong,
2003).

Post war housing in Europe is another example of strong state intervention


and political will to reconstruct neighborhoods and communities. Totalitarian
examples exist in the Socialist block where again it was strong political will
which has paved the way for creating huge supplies of housing stock. There are
many other countries with different political ideologies which have all acted
strongly and seriously to solve the housing crisis. We in India do not seem to be
learning any lessons from either of these experiences.

Keeping the cost of land and infrastructure aside, if one were to only look at the
built housing units, technology comes out as a key focus area to achieve these
monumental numbers in a speedy manner. Housing on a large scale can only be
developed by way of industrialized mass production. Unfortunately, in India we
still continue to build houses, be they stand alone units, walk up apartments or
multi storey apartments, in the conventional ‘a-la-carte’ manner. This will do no
good for us. What we need is systems and procedures which can speed up the
whole process of housing production so that we can achieve scale economies in
production and consequent savings.

4. EFFORTS IN INDIA
Technology scenario for housing production in India has been extremely orthodox
for several decades now. We continue to dabble with conventional materials
and systems of construction. Even though some small advances in terms of few
alternative materials have been made, their adoption and application has been
severely limited to experimental projects which also have been few and far
between. Colleges of engineering and architecture continue to propagate use
of age old materials and methods which are completely obsolete in the global
scenario.

Transfer of technology from laboratory to land has also been very dismal. Most
efforts remain on the drawing boards or in experimental stages. Promotion
of whatever little is there has also not been happening. Government of India
initiated Building Centres which were supposed to promote various technologies

P.S.N. Rao, Ph.D. 26


Institute of Town Planners, India Journal 13 x 2, April - June 2016

have become non-functional and more are on the road to closure. Most civil
engineers and architects are not even made aware of the existence of the
Building Materials and Technology Promotion Council created by Government of
India for promotion of technology.

The whole approach appears to be addressing the issue of housing technology in


India in a very inappropriate and completely out of sync manner in comparison
to what has been happening world over.

4.1 A Case for Industrialized House Production


Globally, mass housing has always been a factory produced product, unlike in India.
The advantages of mass production are several. Firstly, there is standardization
on account of which the benefits are obvious; there is ease of adaptability and no
wastage. Secondly, factory production leads us to enhanced speed of construction.
Time saved is money saved. Thirdly, quality of building products can be easily
monitored and ensured in controlled environments. Fourthly, scale of economy
can be achieved and thereby, affordability is possible. Lastly, in prefab housing,
there is no construction wastage and this again contributes to economy. In most
advanced countries where labour is a problem and weather conditions do not
permit a large number of construction days, housing has to be necessarily put up
in the least possible time. This has necessitated the development of technologies
and systems of production and assembly in a quick manner where houses can be
put up in a matter of days, as compared to years in India!

5. INTERNATIONAL PRACTICES
In all the developed countries, mass housing has always been by way of factory
production. As a matter of fact, this technology was first developed over 100
years ago after the First World War and perfected over the decades. There are
various ways in which these have taken shape as discussed below:

Modular Homes – This system comprises of various housing components


manufactured in a controlled factory environment and simply assembled at
site. Almost 90 percent of the house including walls, flooring, ceiling, stairs and
finishes are made in the factory. The assembly of these at site takes one day for
a house to be build. Besides savings in cost and time, excellent quality and finish
can be obtained.

Panelized Homes – This system involves advanced construction techniques to


develop energy efficient durable houses built in a factory environment. The scope
for customization of design is greater here. With the help of computer assisted
design programs, houses can be designed to suit individual pockets and produced
accordingly in the factory. Wall and roof panels are engineered and fabricated in

P.S.N. Rao, Ph.D. 27


Institute of Town Planners, India Journal 13 x 2, April - June 2016

a manufacturing plant and shipped to the home site for assembly in a few days.
State of the art technology ensures that panels are manufactured with quality
and precision with dimensional accuracy and meeting Building Code provisions.
They are also disaster resistant. Factory assembly means reduced construction
material waste, less job site disturbance and easier clean-up. Panelized building
is an inherently green way to build and is recognized in several green building
certifications. All this saves time, effort and money.

Log Homes – Contrary to the popular belief that timber construction is not
environment friendly, commercial timber production is done without seriously
damaging the environment. Trees are a renewable resource and log home
construction earns points as a green building material. Precut home kits are
designed and delivered at site for assembly. This is an organic and simple way to
build. Such buildings are also energy efficient and thermally comfortable.

Concrewall - One of the most popular European systems which have recently
made inroads into India is the Concrewall system. This construction system is
based on modular elements made of shaped polystyrene panels that are contained
between two sheets of galvanized welded meshes. The vertical mesh wires are
set along the polystyrene ‘waves’ thus creating reinforced concrete micro-pillars
once the panel is coated with concrete. The above wires are bound to each other
by the mesh horizontal wires and joined orthogonally by the links which keep the
two meshes together. Joint twisting is prevented by welding. In other words, as
these joints are all welded, all transversal and longitudinal motion is prevented
resulting in absolute inde-formable panels.

One would be quick to argue that we did try industrialized housing in India and
failed. Therefore, there is no place for the same here. This line of argument
does not hold water since the Hindustan Housing Factory experiment in the early
decades of India’s independence was like any typical loss making PSU toying
with outdated panel technology which was already discarded for much better
technologies. It is therefore, high time that we bring about a complete shift in
the fundamental paradigm of housing construction.

6. HOUSING FOR ALL (HFA) - URBAN: IS IT ENOUGH?


In order to address the issue of housing, Government of India announced the
Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana or Housing for All (Urban) scheme recently. In this
yojana, there are four verticals or four approaches to tackle the housing problem
(Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, 2016). The first approach
is "in-situ slum redevelopment". Here, the approach relies on private sector
participation where developers would be given FAR or TDR and other incentives
to redevelop slum areas whereby they would give housing to the slum dwellers

P.S.N. Rao, Ph.D. 28


Institute of Town Planners, India Journal 13 x 2, April - June 2016

on a portion of the land and on the remaining, sell housing to the upper income
groups to make the entire project viable. A slum rehabilitation grant of Rs.1 lakh
per house is envisaged here. Essentially, in this approach, land is being used as a
resource to generate funds to self-fund the entire project.

The second approach is "housing through credit linked subsidy". Here, interest
subvention subsidy for EWS and LIG families for new house or for incremental
housing. Here, the householder would get a home loan at the rate of 6.5 percent
for loan amounts upto Rs.6 lakh with the house size not exceeding 30 sq m
for EWS and 60 sq m for LIG respectively. Here, financial support is the key
intervention.

The third approach is "affordable housing in partnership". In this approach, it


is envisaged that public housing agencies would develop housing in partnership
with the private sector. Central assistance of Rs.1.5 lakh would be provided for
each EWS family.

The fourth approach is "beneficiary-led individual house construction". Here, if


there are EWS families who own land and desire to construct houses or upgrade
houses, they can approach the local body and avail of this assistance of Rs.1.5
lakh.

What is interesting to note that in addition to all the above four approaches, there
is also a "Technology Sub-Mission" which would facilitate the adoption of modern,
innovative materials and technologies for faster and quality construction.

7. EMERGING ISSUES
There are many issues that are left unattended in the above scenario. The first is
that while there is an emphasis on physical infrastructure, social infrastructure
has not been addressed. As a result, in the absence of schools, families may not
like to shift to the new housing areas; even slum dwellers send their children
to school. Second is the question of connectivity with mass public transport. In
the absence of cheap bus or rail connectivity, the housing areas would remain
unoccupied. Connectivity between the parent city and the distant new housing
areas is imperative. The third issue is the question of availability of land for
development. With the land acquisition law remaining unresolved, acquiring
land for development would be a big question and the envisaged housing may
never come up in the first place. Fourth is the limited availability of drinking
water in urban areas. Unless macro infrastructure issues are addressed (as
against city level infrastructure), it would be difficult to bring additional water
to the city from distant sources along with all the appurtenances. Fifth, delays
in implementation would defeat the very purpose of affordable housing, more

P.S.N. Rao, Ph.D. 29


Institute of Town Planners, India Journal 13 x 2, April - June 2016

so in the absence of speedy adjudication processes, particularly with disputes in


partnerships with the private sector. Lastly, illegal colonization which is happening
in a rampant manner in all cities would still continue since the products available
in such areas are always cheaper than those in the other areas. As a result of
this haphazard sprawl, the basic objective of bringing spatial order and minimum
level of access to facilities would remain a distant dream.

8. CONCLUSIONS
Today modern technology to suit Indian weather conditions and social acceptability
is available and at a cost which is comparable, if not lower than conventional
construction systems. If one takes into account other factors such as time saved,
quality, etc., benefits are many more. All we need to do now is to create the
facilitative environment: the appropriate legal, fiscal and techno - regulatory
regimes for international companies to plant these technologies in India so that
we can achieve the much needed paradigm shift in housing construction from the
age old ‘a la carte’ system to a more sophisticated factory production system.
Both the MoUD as well as the MoHUPA need to initiate serious steps for solving
the housing crisis in the country.

We need a slew of measures that can make a housing revolution happen in India.
Firstly, what we need is supply and that will happen only by way of speedy
construction. Modern construction techniques are today available to make this
happen. Prefabrication construction technology has undergone tremendous
advancements in the recent past. Many companies are doing the rounds in
India today trying to sell these technologies. Unfortunately, our governments
are blissfully ignorant of these, and forget about implementing them. Secondly,
to make supply happen, we need land, the most crucial input at a reasonable
price. This is where governments need to subsidize. Alternatively, governments
need to come out with creative models of land sharing and bring in more land
in urban development. Very high densities need to be permitted. Today what
we have is a completely low density and inefficient way of utilizing urban land,
thanks to the outdated regulations. Thirdly, we need financial intermediation
so as to achieve inclusion. Most middle class and low income population who
do not meet the usual requirements of credit-worthiness need to be roped in
through innovative methodologies which are already being tried out by some
micro-housing finance corporations. With these strategies in place, we can surely
make some headway and satiate some of the demand in the coming decades, if
not completely. Lastly, housing estates without good transportation connectivity
and infrastructure in terms of water, etc.; would only give us ghost townships.
Therefore, the connect between the Smart Cities Mission and the Housing for All
Mission is extremely important. While there is no mandate on this, the extent

P.S.N. Rao, Ph.D. 30


Institute of Town Planners, India Journal 13 x 2, April - June 2016

to which this connect will happen entirely depends on local governments. In the
absence of this connect the proliferation of illegal land sub-division, unoccupied
houses and all the other urban problems would only remain. This connect can be
made possible by proper hand holding by governments.

Housing is an economic activity which has backward and forward linkages with
as many as 260 industries. More than the skilled employment which it would
provide in any case, a majority of the employment it would generate would be in
the semi-skilled and unskilled sector. Rural unemployed, women labour, seasonal
and marginal workers would find gainful employment for a greater part of the
year. Housing deserves to be rightfully at the centre of any economic strategy
for development, more so in the Smart Cities Mission. One of the best ways of
achieving high growth rates is by giving a strong impetus to the housing sector.
Unfortunately, fiscal incentives and tax breaks are yet to be given to this sector
in a big bang way to start an upturn. Unless and until we learn the lessons from
success stories in our geo-political neighborhood, we will not be able to make
significant progress in imparting smartness to our cities. Without smart housing,
we cannot have smart cities (see Yeung and Wong, 2003).

REFERENCES
Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation (2007) National Urban Housing and
Habitat Policy, Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Government of India,
New Delhi.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation (2016) Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana -
Housing for All (Urban), Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Government
of India, New Delhi.
Ministry of Urban Development (2015) The Smart Cities Mission, Ministry of Urban
Development, Government of India, New Delhi.
Rao, P.S.N. (2006) Transformation of Housing Policy in India : the trend towards market
mechanisms in P.S.N. Rao (ed.) Urban Governance and Management in India, Kanishka
Publications, New Delhi.
Rao, P.S.N. (2015a) Affordable Housing for Low Income Groups in Urban India: A prognosis
of policy and practice, SPACE, Journal of the School of Planning and Architecture, New
Delhi, Vol. 18, No.2, pp.82-97.
Rao, P.S.N. (2015b) Report of the Research Project on Affordable Housing and Climate
Change, School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi
Tighe, R.J. and Mueller, E.J. (eds.) (2013) The Affordable Housing Reader, Routledge,
London.
Yeung, Y.M. and Wong, T.K.Y. (eds.) (2003) Fifty Years of Public Housing in Hong Kong,
Chinese University Press, Hong Kong.

P.S.N. Rao, Ph.D. 31

You might also like