As I started writing this blog-post my memory rushed back to the days when I was working as a Rural Development Officer with Syndicate bank and was posted in Mananthavady, Wynaad District, Kerala. In 1984, I assisted twenty tribal families, under the jurisdiction of our Farm Clinic project, with a dairy unit. This group incidentally happened to be the first exclusive tribal women group under the Pilot project of DWCRA in the country. I took a special interest in the project and with the assistance of my Farm Assistant at the Farm Clinic, all the twenty tribal families were organised and their resources pooled to purchase some of the best cows available at that time. We had also provided them with a loan Rs 2500 for construction of a cowshed. Since resources were pooled and organised by the Farm Assistant, we could purchase cement, wood, tiles for the roof, and other materials at very reasonable rates. The quality of construction of the cowsheds was appreciated by all the stakeholders of the programme. It was a heartening scene to see cows tethered inside the cowsheds.
As days went on we were amazed by the recovery rates; the loans always remained pre-paid at any point of time. In the meantime, the project drew the attention of the government and the staff of the Block Development Office involved in the project received a 'red letter' entry of commendation in their service register. For me, seeing the results of my hard work in front of my eyes was the best commendation. Then came the rains. The south west monsoon started and rain used to be incessant.
During one of the follow-up visits to the tribal village I had the shock of my life. Many of the tribals who were till a few months back living in government built houses had moved lock stock and barrel into the cowsheds. The cows were tethered in a make shift thatched shed nearby! I found that many of the houses which were built by the government were in a dilapidated condition. The thought that ran in my mind at that time was " if only the government had involved the beneficiaries in 'their' house construction like the way we did for the cowsheds this condition would not have occured".
During the past fifteen years I have been watching closely the way social housing is taking its course in the country. I had a chance to repeat the small work i did in 1984 later on during 1998 to 2007 when I was the CEO of a microfinance institution and had a chance to assist over 2500 customers with Housing Microfinance. It is the populism and the inbuilt corruption in administration of the subsidies that is killing such projects.
What provoked me to write this today was this news item in The Hindu dated 31st August 2011.
" The Hindu 31 August 2011.
Dismal progress in social housing
The progress in providing housing for the poor, as revealed by data recently released by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, is way off target. This calls for a serious questioning of the approach and capabilities of government institutions to deliver badly needed social housing. The Interest Subsidy Scheme for Housing the Urban Poor (ISHUP), launched in 2008 to provide an interest subsidy of five per cent on a loan amount of Rs.100,000 to the economically weaker section and lower income group, has so far benefited only 7,805 people as against the 2012 target of 310,000. Although a sum of Rs.1,378 crore was allotted, merely about Rs.6.5 crore has so far been utilised. Progress on the flagship project, the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission, which has a provision of Rs.50,000 crore for the period 2005-2012, is no better. Only about 30 per cent of houses sanctioned for the poor under this scheme have been built. The lack of funds is often projected as the main reason for the dismal situation of social housing. It is now evident that, more than funds, poor conceptualisation of policies, procedural inefficiency, and ineffective construction practices are the major impediments.
ISHUP has failed to deliver because it is conceptually flawed. Policymakers assumed that the poor had access to land and needed only financial support to build their houses. As a result, the focus was on making credit easily available. However, the reality is that neither cheap land nor affordable houses are in good supply. If the demand for social housing is to be met, in addition to rectifying policies, construction practices and performance regimes need to be greatly improved. In particular, State-level housing boards must improve their capacity in order to fully utilise the available funds and deliver more houses. The experience of the United Kingdom offers valuable lessons in this area. Since 1998, after the Construction Task Force set up by the U.K. government published its seminal report ‘Rethinking Construction', local authorities earnestly adopted best building practices. They formed productive alliances with the construction industry and adopted modern methods that increased the production of homes four-fold. Specific annual benchmarks, such as a 10 per cent reduction in cost and construction time, were set and procurement processes were streamlined. The financial gains from these improvements were invested in the housing projects. It is only by adopting such innovative practices and radically changing the approach to the provision of social housing can the vision of making cities slum-free be realised."
P.Uday Shankar
2 Sept 2011.
