How Community Mobilization Influences the Political Environment: Reflections on Pune

Yerwada was an in-situ upgrading project aiming to build permanent ground, ground floor +1 and ground floor+2 houses. The cost of each constructed house was Rs 300,000 rupees, with 90% of the costs funded by the different branches of government (local, state and national). The remaining 10%, Rs 30,000, was provided by each household. In total, the project built 1125 houses in 8 different wards.

Mahila Milan in Pune

There are a few elements that made the Yerwada project a success. First, the involvement of the community in all the stages of the project, from design to implementation, guaranteed that the needs and expectations of the households were satisfied. What particularly characterises this case is the key role played by groups of women, who assumed the leadership positions throughout the whole process. Second, by upgrading households and services in-situ rather than relocating them, the government managed to maintain the cohesiveness of the community and improve their conditions faster, as in-situ upgrading is generally deemed to be the most socially and economically desirable strategy for low-income housing. Third, this project created job opportunities for the local community throughout its implementation phase, thus fostering a true sense of community participation in the project and sense of ownership of the households.

Nevertheless, the element that captured our attention the most was how crucial of a role the political environment actually played in allowing the development of this project. The political environment is key in order to enable communities to influence the process of agenda setting. The policy process is a complex interaction of problems, proposals (solutions) and politics (political environment). In order to move a cause higher in the hierarchy of the political agenda, these elements need to come together. When this happens, we are in the presence of a “window of opportunity”. For advocates of a cause, the success of their proposals is determined by how well they can influence, create and identify this window. This means that if the political environment is not ready to focus on a particular problem or to receive a particular solution, the window will be closed for the champions of the cause, and their proposal would not make it to the “short list”. This is why developing a proposal is not enough in the policy game, and advocating, coalition-building and policy-learning are all necessary to influence the conditions that will prepare the political environment to implement any solution.

In the case of Yerwada, SPARC, Mahila Milan and NSDF had been gradually creating the conditions to engage with authority for decades through their enumerations, precedent setting, exhibitions, and other successful projects in line with the general SDI model. These activities slowly built linkages of trust and camaraderie between different members while simultaneously strengthening them as a community. As such, it is important to understand the process by which the women of Mahila Milan empowered themselves politically in their formative stages to truly grasp why the subsequent Yerwada project was a success. 

In Pune, when the women of Mahila Milan first assembled themselves in 1993-1995, their initial socioeconomic surveys identified sanitation to be the most pressing issue. After doing so, with the help of NSDF, they set up various meetings with local politicians that resulted in improved sanitation, not only for the slums but also for the entire city. One important thing to note about this project is that a proposal put forward by the women of Mahila Milan Pune, when received in an enabling political environment, turned into a full-fledged project involving 8 organizations working in over 500 neighborhoods.

Confident by the launch of their sanitation project in 1999, they moved on to secure land for relocation of slum neighborhoods that they had surveyed and that were affected by the recurrence of floods in 1997. Although they had identified a specific piece of land in Hadapsar for their members, a road widening project that was happening simultaneously in Patil Estate led them to alter their plans. 98 houses were to be demolished, and those residents sought the support of Mahila Milan to convince city officials to relocate them rather than face eviction. Mahila Milan chose to offer the land in Hadapsar to the former Patil Estate residents instead of the original members that MM sought to relocate. This project was crucial in legitimizing the actions of Mahila Milan in the eyes of local government because they approached government with an alternate solution to eviction that was feasible and easy to implement. Once again, the political environment along with their community efforts converged into the perfect opportunity window to advance their needs and materialize them, with the commissioner incorporating additional neighborhoods to their plans. The negotiations that were partaken by Mahila Milan turned into a bigger project with three NGOS contracted to contribute on a fixed price basis. In doing so, they emerged as equal partners with the local government in the planning, design, and implementation of these projects. 

Upgraded lane in Yerwada

Around 2008, when JNNURM was launched, Mahila Milan tried to work on upgrading in two slums: Ram Tekdi and Yerwada. Yet, after facing opposition in the former, they requested from the Municipal commissioner that additional subsidies be allocated to the in-situ upgrading project in Yerwada. Their first efforts to upgrade this site consisted of pressing the government for cluster housing for people with less than 100 square feet per household. Cluster housing grouped people together to form groups of land that met the 270 sq. foot requirement to take advantage of the BSUP program. They included more floors in their design to increase the space per household, but grouped households together horizontally so that they met the requirement. Their other task was convincing the residents that BSUP was in their interest. As Savita recalled, when BSUP was to be implemented in Pune, people were skeptical at first due to the failure of earlier government programs and it took them almost 2 years to convince the community to be on board. Mahila Milan finally achieved community agreement and participation with a spatial demonstration of model homes using bamboo and cloth to showcase to the local population that such projects would indeed improve their livelihoods. With the political clout that they had garnered from their previous projects, they were also able to pressure local government to be more transparent with the people. They also had lower-ranked politicians accompany them to better inform residents about their work and convince them that it was in their favor. 

It is interesting to draw a contrast between these successful projects and the experience of Mahila Milan in Ram Tekdi where the political environment obstructed their progress in that area. Even though they tried to implement the same strategy, they did not receive the support of local politicians. Instead, the local politicians initiated a campaign to convince the community that they shouldn’t respond to SPARC surveys and that an alternate SRA project conducted by a private builder was in their best interest. As a result, the population demanded the SRA project over the SPARC one-house-per-household proposition as they thought they could get more than one unit per household. Since SPARC and MM act based on the interests of the community, they pulled out of that area and failed to move past the negotiation phase.

The work of Mahila Milan Pune showcases the need to have a groundswell of organized people utilizing local assets and resources for collective and participatory problem solving, yet what ultimately determined their success was the existence of an enabling political environment that reverberated their requests on a wider scale and implemented them at a broader urban level. As such, the contrasting experiences of Mahila Milan Pune highlight the importance of the policy environment in materializing their projects. In Ram Tekdi, MM implemented the same strategies, yet the difference in the receptivity and endorsement of the local politicians obstructed their progress. In Yerwada, problems, proposals and politics came together and proved that when all the parts are involved and their interests align, solutions are easier to implement and their impacts are deeper and longer lasting.

Jehane Akiki and Dafne Regenhardt,

The New School, Graduate Program in International Affairs

Exhibition at Indian Oil by New School Interns

In June and July 2015, we conducted an oral history project to document the lived experiences of women leaders in Mahila Milan. As Mahila Milan inevitably faces change in its leadership, we focused, in particular, on the transfer of knowledge from generation to generation. Our project is, in a sense, its own transfer of knowledge; it aims to capture and pass on Mahila Milan’s legacy. 

Jahyshree Mane excited to show 

Malti Ambre her photograph. 

Throughout the years, international agencies, academic institutions, and NGOs have come to Mumbai to learn from these women and to hear their stories. This, however, often results in  a unilinear exchange of knowledge, in which the women contribute their professional experience and personal histories, but receive little in return. With that in mind, we decided to celebrate these women with a genuine, albeit small, tribute.

On Saturday, July 26, 2015, we held the “soft opening” of an exhibition, at which a few Indian Oil Nagar leaders were present. The exhibition consisted of portraits of women we interviewed and accompanying quotes that highlighted major themes, trends, and accomplishments in Mahila Milan’s trajectory. While we thought we had done a good job representing the women with their portraits and quotes, the response was more than what we could have envisioned.  The smiles and excitement of the women finding their pictures were priceless.

What happened next was true to the ethos of the organization: as we unpacked the photos, women gathered and began to pass around and discuss the pieces. One unforeseen hiccup was insufficient wall space in the Mahila Milan office to hang the portraits, so we arranged the photos on the floor around the office along with the corresponding quotes. The women immediately voiced their thoughts on where each of the pieces should hang -- there was talk of each woman taking the ones that were more relevant to her story. To us, the excitement in those first few moments replaced any plan we had for how the exhibition should be displayed. It was then decided that we should hold another exhibition in the Dharavi office to enable women from all communities to attend the exhibition in a central location.

Meena Ramani explained that “both experience and education are necessary. They [the photographs and quotes] will show the current younger generation. This is how we have continued from generation to generation.”

 

Malti Ambre summed up the exhibit by saying, “A lot of people come to us and learn from us, we also go and teach others … There is always an exchange of knowledge going on. Many people call us, that this is the training center where we come and train ourselves. What you did, actually they also think that they got to learn how their generation is going ahead, how they are moving. That is also because of your exhibition that they came to know and they will want to continue this later in the future.”

This exhibition showcases the wisdom of key leaders we spoke with in Mahila Milan. This exhibition is intended as a genuine tribute to the personal sacrifice, perseverance, and dedication of Mahila Milan and the Federation’s women.

By Christopher Green, Chiara Passerini, Kate Segal, and Tanya Welsh

James Westcott from OMA

James Westcott, from OMA in Rotterdam, is researching material for his book called “Elements of Architecture,” for which he is researching the history and the current status of elements like the floor, the door, the wall, the ceiling, the roof, and of course the toilet. The book is part of the Venice Architecture Biennale this June, directed by Rem Koolhaas.  James is focusing on Dharavi as a demonstration of how the western model of flush toilet + sewage system isn’t achievable or sustainable in most parts of the world. He has asked SPARC for assistance and for the map that SPARC is making of the toilets built by SPARC. 

What to do in case of forced evictions?

In pursuance of the struggle to stall the processes of eviction, Housing and Land Rights Network (HLRN), Delhi, has published a handbook in Hindi, English and Tamil titled, “What to do in case of a forced eviction”. The handbook, released by men and women who have faced forced eviction or are on the verge of it, elaborates upon the right to adequate housing and is a step towards educating the slum-dwellers about their rights. The book has sections that covers the rights of people in purview of state, national and international policies. It also details what compensation can be sought in case of forced evictions, steps that can be taken to prevent or counter forced evictions, and some contacts that can come in handy in case the affected dwellers need directions or help. Though the publication is produced considering the settlements in Delhi, it can be extended to support communities countering similar issues in rest of the country.

Exploring working together with MIT - Sheela Patel

Below is a summary of the meeting with MIT Dept of Urban Studies + Planning faculty and SDI, held on May 1, 2013.

The meeting was called by Bish Sanyal, as there has long been talk between he and Sheela about a possible collaboration between the two institutions, and Sheela was in town for the MIT IDG (international development group) conference.

Participants:

Eran Ben-Joseph, Larry Vale, Phil Thompson, Shomon Shamsuddin, Bish Sanyal, Balakrishnan Rajagopal (Raj), Gabriella Carolini, Sheela Patel, Ben Bradlow

· MIT is launching a new Resilient Cities Housing Initiative, anchored by Larry Vale, which will restore visibility and focus of housing research at MIT. Shomon Shamsuddin is also working on this.

· Gabriella Carolini does research focused on re-conceptualizing public responsibility and associated practices of governance.

· Bish Sanyal is focused on evaluating and building new technologies for development.

· Raj is focused on re-conceptualizing human rights, law, and social movements. Has begun a large research project on development-induced displacement.

· Phil Thompson is focused on linking housing and livelihoods-based organizing strategies in US, with a focus on historically dispossessed communities, including people of color).

· Sheela introduced history of Indian Alliance and SDI. In particular, she noted the extent to which major innovations of SDI projects do not get documented and integrated into the practices of major development institutions. Similarly, she said, "we have changed the face of community organizing," but the SDI model doesn't have recognition or a name" (in comparison to the Alinsky model, for example).

· Phil Thompson noted possibilities of working with new US ambassador to SA, Patrick Gaspard, who is interested in SDI's work, and also new chair of Ford Foundation (both personal friends of Phil). He also suggested the possibility of building projects through alternative funding mechanisms. e.g.. large pension funds of major unions in SA (COSATU, SATAWU).

· Over the course of the week, multiple faculty expressed enthusiasm about these possibilities. Ben and Sheela discussed challenges of partnering with institutions like MIT, and noted that we should continue to explore this, but that it would take steps to build trust and understanding, in order to make such a relationship mutually beneficial.

Next steps:

· It was agreed in principle that the basis for partnership should be a 5-10 year partnership based on 2-3 sub-themes. 

· Ben will work with DUSP faculty to identify what research areas they are currently working on that would overlap with work and interests of SDI. Together, will begin to see whether there are some foundational interest areas that could work for a sustained partnership.

· MIT could also work with SDI to partner with a local university in a SDI-affiliate country, along the lines of the UC-Berkeley/U of Nairobi/Muungano model.

KIM DOVEY FROM MELBOURNE UNIVERSITY IN SPARC, AUGUST 2012

Prof. Kim Dovey, an architect from Melbourne University, revisited with SPARC, NSDF, and MM for a week in August 2012. Although his earlier trip was focused on Dharavi, his current trip was to explore other dimensions while working with us.

Even though numerous issues were explored, the one which was significant and linked to our present strategy was ways to improve our ability to support incremental housing. The following issues were discussed:

Firstly, why incremental housing is crucial to develop and support both at policy and financial level to help a larger number of the poor manage and develop their own housing.

Secondly, to explore how to deal with possible conflicts between private households choices versus collective needs for settlements about community spaces. Clearly the challenge was to develop simple rationale that would appeal in logic and simplicity for collectives to maintain.

Finally, the challenge was to see if the professionals, architects, planners, and others could make real contribution to this process, or whether this should be left to the evolution that emerges from community incremental construction.

The Dharavi development options were also discussed and the realization that delayed responses to solutions only leads to more compromises as densities and populations keep growing was acknowledged.