PMAY
As the current Union government completes two terms, one of its flagship programmes was Housing For All (HfA) by 2022, both in urban and rural areas, planned under the PMAY (Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana) scheme in 2015
While the PMAY is a centrally sponsored scheme both the Union and the State governments are supposed to financially contribute to it.
Even though two more years have passed since the supposed completion of the scheme, HfA remains a distant reality.
In 2022, the government approved the continuation of the PMAY-Urban (PMAY-U) up to December 31, 2024
Objectives
Rehabilitation of slum dwellers with private developers’ participation;
Promotion of affordable housing for the weaker sections through Credit Linked Subsidy Schemes (CLSS);
Affordable housing in partnership with public and private sectors;
Subsidy for Beneficiary-led Construction (BLC).
Slum redevelopment
The scheme is euphoric in the participation of the private sector in bridging the gap of public investments in social housing.
The current estimates suggest that in the Indian urban landscape around 40% (according to the World Bank, 49%) of the people are living in both designated and informal slums.
Hence, the success of the PMAY was dependent on addressing the housing question in the slums.
Slum redevelopment
In some of the projects where spaces occupied by the slum dwellers were handed to private players, the vertical growth of such settlements created more problems for the residents rather than addressing them.
For example a multi-storey building with the recurring cost of water, electricity and sewerage utilities which at times went beyond the scope of residents’ expenditure.
Building typologies and linear design with squeezed spaces dissuaded people from occupying such houses.
Slum redevelopment
Land was also a major issue. Land registered under airports, railways, forests, etc., was impossible for In-situ Slum Redevelopment (ISSR)
Moreover, plans for ISSR were drawn up by consultants, without any role from the community
Another major hurdle is the dichotomy existing between the city’s master plans and PMAY-U.
Most of the cities’ plans are now being dictated by big consultants who favour large capital-intensive technological solutions
It does not speak about social housing and states that this must come from market forces.
In such a scenario, almost all verticals of PMAY fail.
Contributions
It is worth noting that the Centre’s contribution to the overall investment expenditure under this scheme is just about 25%, or ₹2.03 lakh crore.
The bulk of the money is shelled out by the beneficiary households themselves, that is 60% or ₹4.95 lakh crore.
State governments (together with Urban Local Bodies) spend ₹1.33 lakh crore on the scheme as well.
The architecture of PMAY does not address the landless and the poor.
Around 62% of the houses sanctioned come under the BLC vertical where the government’s role is limited to just cost sharing with the beneficiaries.
CLSS beneficiaries are supposed to be 21%.
In both the above, the government has a limited role with just the provision for providing interest subsidy, whereas land is owned by the beneficiaries.
Slum-dwelling families that are to be rehabilitated under ISSR make up just about 2.5% of the total beneficiaries
COMMENTS