Blog Archives

Baby steps forward! First reactions to Haryana Affordable Housing Policy 2013







How the policy is to work




Out of the subsidy mindset, finally!










Dovetail with other schemes critical for a sustainable and viable solution


Appalled by government apathy towards providing affordable shelter: The case of Gurgaon

The longer I work in the low-income housing sector, the more appalled I am by government apathy towards providing shelter, one of the most basic human rights upheld by the Constitution of India as well as in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which India is not merely a signatory but a nation that has played an active role in drafting the declaration!

Over the years, governments have distanced themselves from the role of provider of housing, citing the need for private investment. The bald truth is that private developers have no reason to build homes for lower income groups as long as the middle and high income markets continue to offer good returns. Government intervention is therefore essential. Various models to deliver affordable homes are being adopted by States across India. However, much distance lies between promises made and achievements on ground.

Take Haryana for instance. In 2009, the Haryana government declared it would build 100,000 low cost homes across the state- 40,000 in Gurgaon, and 30,000 each in Faridabad and Panchkula. These are urban centers in the state that border the cities of Delhi and in the last case, Chandigarh.

In Gurgaon, the State government intended to build homes on 200 acres of land and these homes were to be prices between Rs 4 and 16 lakhs. Unit sizes were to be 270 and 520 square feet. Clearly, these homes were targeting LIG households in the city.

In a departure from the way governments have traditionally acted in building homes themselves (DDA in Delhi, for example), the Haryana government decided to distribute licenses to private builders to construct these affordable homes. A planning department official has told the media that about five such licenses have been granted, but refused to divulge the locations of these projects or any other details. The land for these projects, however, has not been acquired. The state town planning department’s website apparently shows that only 21 acres out of the total 200 (11.26 acre at Sector 67 and 10.06 acre at Sector 93) are actually available for this scheme. Meanwhile, developers have rapidly acquired land in the sectors demarcated in the Gurgaon Manesar Master Plan 2031 and it seems that the government is playing into the hands of the builder lobby rather than protecting the interests of the citizens.

Citizens groups and the media has alleged that HUDA has not acquired any land to build government housing or sell plots that would be affordable to the middle class either, leave alone provide shelter options to the poor. The last time plots were auctioned at affordable rates was in 2008 in Sector 57.

My fellowship research is attempting to study the possibilities of evolving an inclusive approach to housing in this city. My initial sense is that there has been a definite (and deliberate?) failure of the government to do its duty. Now, with land prices extremely high on the back of anticipated rapid development of the demarcated sectors in the city, there is little hope of the poor being accommodated easily. How is this city going to survive if it continues to deny shelter and even the most basic living conditions to its supply of labor, that essential workforce that is an important pillar that supports the city’s economy? My research attempts to prove that the poor have a stake in this city’s story, that they do have the resources to survive and they will, if only they were given a chance and recognized as stakeholders rather than as nuisances to be swept under the carpet!








Snapshots from visiting ‘affordable’ housing projects in Bangalore- May 31, 2012

Affordability is relative, for sure. But when those who profess to be socially inclined build ‘affordable’ projects that are clearly catering to techies and professionals, I wonder who they think they are fooling. It is far easier to accept and understand mistakes in judgement made by a social developer when you clearly see their affordable projects are designed for low-income people. Yes, it is a hard market, but no, playing with nomenclature isn’t really fair. Yet, they say all is fair in low, war and business. And when profits get hit, strategies are known to go haywire and even the vision statement changes.

We saw two projects in Bangalore. The first, by Janaagraha, is an impressive project. One that appeals and invites even as you approach it, one that has tried its best to play fair, but also one with many loose ends (no electricity supply, stilted parking that cannot be accessed really because of crazy slope designs). The quality of construction is commendable and families we interviewed were thrilled to live here.

The second, by VBHC, was swank, used an efficient aluminum formwork technology to achieve efficiency, speed and quality. Safety, excellent finishes and the planning of the site smacked of middle class customers and sure enough, the prices range between 7 and 20 lakhs, with few units at the lower end and many more at the higher end of the price spectrum. Young IT professionals seems to be the target customer here; no auto drivers or factory workers would live here I think.

It was very interesting to see both these projects. The baby steps to what is hopefully set to grow into a more robust, well developed market in the future, to which the ratings we are working on will contribute. Here are a few snapshots from the site visits. Keep in mind- What I click is what I feel, not what I want to show you, the reader!

The skeleton

Satisfied customer #1

Satisfied customer #2

Hard hats

Nipesh with his inimitable grin!

Barefaced lie- The smallest apartment cost 9.2L. Talk about hidden costs!



A vibrant construction industry based on shoddy treatment of laborers? Shame! 1 May, 2012

At work, I’m part of a team working to set up a system for certifying affordable housing projects. The initiative is that of the Ashoka Innovators for the Public and we at mHS are working on the aspects of the rating system that would impact the low-income community.

Anyway, during our discussions, we often come to the point where we wonder if the rating should consider whether the contractor uses ethical and legal practices for treatment and payment meted out to labor working on the project. If they use child labor, for instance, or use sub-standard shelter to house their labor, they should drop lower in the ratings, we think.

Today, on the occasion of Labor Day, The Hindu carried an excellent editorial written by Moushumi Basu on the subject. She spells out clearly the Acts contractors and construction companies violate when they pay lower wages, do not build decent shelter, do not ensure safe conditions for work, etc. Moreover, developers and construction companies who have ridden the wave of India’s GDP growth (and continue to do so despite slower growth) have no business to do this at the cost of the labor that works for them. It is a sad tale of mistreatment of those who have no voice. Besides the legality, where’s the humanity here? Would it really hurt to pass on a tiny bit of your profits towards improving the lives of those that made your projects possible, often risking their lives, migrating far from their homes?

So in our ratings projects, we’re really wondering….how do we factor in the humanity/ethics (or lack of these) of developers into ratings for affordable housing, where profit margins are lower than regular projects, when they fail to factor in regular projects where profit margins are decent?



%d bloggers like this: