Page 66 - SHELTER
P. 66
POLICY REVIEW
the case of Dharavi as well as mixed nature of Dharavi. Amita to understand the need of
for slums in the city, where only Bhide’s report draws examples livelihood. Women who are
ground structures were counted of various earning groups and constantly engaged in papad
in the ‘MASHAL’ - an NGO’s communities to understand making over the years in
survey, which did not give a deeper connections with the Dharavi, believe in stabilizing
clarity on how many families space. One of the examples is the household economy which
were residing in Dharavi. So, that of the broom makers, a is acting as a supporting
this is a lacuna in analysing nomadic tribe whose traditional income to run the house. Their
affordability as well as deriving occupation is broom making views were contradicting the
the exact need of housing stock. and begging. This community ideologies of redevelopment as
migrated to Bombay in 1930 open spaces would squeeze the
GROUND REALITIES after a drought in Karnataka papad making activities and
OF SPATIAL from where they originally hail threatening their supportive
DEPENDENCIES from. The community settled income earning capacity.
in Dharavi for shelter and
Dharavi did not emerge The recyclers of Dharavi have
yesterday. It existed since continued their livelihood of achieved growth in their
Mumbai was known as Bombay, broom making over the years. businesses over a period of
in the 1800s. There has been The community improved their time. In spite of growth and
a considerable gap between conditions financially as the opportunities they do not aspire
‘legal’ and ‘illegal’ but this younger generations believe in the occupation to move to the
place has also been a hub for securing their jobs in private and next generation (Amita Bhide,
different communities living government sectors where they 2013; Kalpana Sharma, 2000).
together. One should look inside earn little but ensure adequate The social groups and their
Dharavi’s ground realities to lifestyle. The older generation livelihood activities would differ
understand and see that Dharavi believed in continuing according to their needs and
is more than just a slum. This also their traditional livelihood. aspirations developed over a
applies to many other slums in Thus there is a difference in time period. As an urban thinker,
the country which are unnamed. perception between the two one must understand to give a
The report ‘Dharavi-Ground up’ generations creating possibilities thought over the community’s
by Amita Bhide opens up various of transformations in livelihood spatial necessities and desire for
realities that coexist in Dharavi and living conditions. These two quality of life. To understand
relating to spatial characteristics generation gaps also reflected in these needs and promote the
and people. The research is aspirations of redevelopment, quality of life, the groups within
a collection of interviews of as older ones believe the the communities can act as a
different communities that redevelopment vision can cause development promoter to cater
can give us a glimpse of life in a loss of their livelihood while those needs.
Dharavi. Dharavi being a land the younger ones aspire to stay in
of diversity of different ethnic apartments in order to enhance CONCLUSION
and religious groups developed their life and be recognised in The major reason for the
diverse earning options as the society. complexity of Dharavi
livelihood which often requires The example of papad makers redevelopment scenario is the
deep attention to understand this gives another dimension number of people residing
4 Amita Bhide: A Professor and a researcher deeply involved in the issues of urban poverty, livelihoods and advocacy from Mumbai and also involved in
various social movements.
64 HUDCO-HSMI Publication
