Page 71 - Shelter-October-2022
P. 71
POLICY REVIEW
verticals. On the policy delaying the gestation period. across the verticals. Since
design front, several factors Conversely, no private ISSR is the least performing
affect the policy outcome. players are involved in BLC scheme, there is an urgent
First, the supply-push top- implementation, and private need to revive it on design
down strategy (as in ISSR lenders for implementing the and implementation levels.
and AHP) heavily banking CLSS scheme need minimum
on the PPP model involving participation only for means- Lastly, invoking the central-
multiple agents leads to a testing. This translates into state-local relationship
longer gestation period due to a lean implementation through designing Centrally
multi-institutional conflicts. Sponsored Schemes (ISSR,
On the contrary, the demand- framework that positively AHP, and BLC) and Central
pull bottom-up strategy (as contributes to the scheme Sector Schemes (CLSS)
in BLC and CLSS) offers a uptake. brings its own challenges.
comparatively lean policy Third, if we profile the In the case of CLSS, the
implementation leading to a economic characteristics of central government directly
shorter gestation period. It
is not to say that supply-side the target group beneficiaries transfers the interest subsidy
policies have a bad design, for each vertical, there is a to the beneficiaries without
rather, it needs reassessment contrasting pattern. CLSS any involvement of state or
of in-depth engagement by targets homebuyers, BLC local authorities. While it
all the policy agents towards targets homeowners who want reflects a relatively seamless
a single goal of successful to build/extend their homes, policy strategy, it tends to
policy delivery. and AHP targets prospective circumvent the needs of the
low-income homebuyers who state and local authorities. As
Second, the extent of private can afford a home through the housing is a state subject in
participation embedded in housing market. These three India, all the housing policy
the policy tools or instruments schemes target households decisions necessitate the
creates a conflict of interest who are slightly better off recognition of local housing
for the public and private economically to afford to markets and needs. Central
parties involved. For buy a home through formal Sector Schemes like CLSS
example, ISSR and AHP work markets. On the contrary, tend to overlook these local
on a PPP model that cannot ISSR is the scheme that level needs undermining the
take off until the interests of caters to the needs of slum already strained central-state-
private parties are sufficiently dwellers at the bottom of local relationship.
met. The lack of interest the Indian income pyramid.
shown by private players This target group has the In sum, the uneven
has been one of the reasons lowest housing affordability, performance of the PMAY–U
behind the reduced uptake severely restricting their verticals can be partly
of the verticals (Kumar and access to formal housing explained by variations in
Chattopadhyay, 2022). Unless markets. The affordability policy designs, as discussed
the private players find the and accessibility constraint in the paper. Some verticals
specific project profitable and that pushes the urban poor like ISSR and AHP are bound
aligned with their interests, into informal housing makes to have a longer gestation
the implementation gets them the most vulnerable period, multi-institutional
stuck in the planning stage, among all the target groups conflicts, and lower uptake
October, 2022, Volume 23. No.2 - SHELTER 69
