S Ghafur_Changing Imprints

8/3/2019 S Ghafur_Changing Imprints

1/15

Paper Presented at the International Conference The History Heritage and Urban Issues of Capital Dhaka,

17-19 February, 2010, Dhaka.

Imprints of the Changing Doctrines on Housing in Dhaka

Shayer Ghafur

Professor, Dept. of Architecture

Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology

e-mail: [email protected]

Introduction

The nature and extent of urban house forms are rarely autonomous in the process of their

generation but products of a process emerging and evolving in response to the changing political

and economic forces of society. These forces mediate with culture, climate and technology in

housing production. This paper submits a proposition toward mapping the broad project of the

social production of housing in Dhaka: Broader forces emanate from and are embedded in concrete

doctrines that, among others, leave physical, spatial and social imprints on housing. The notion of

imprints refers to the discrete feature and/or characterization of the product or process of housing.

Discrete doctrine at a given point in time influences the decisions of the authorities in conditioning

communitys capacity as much as guiding public action in marking imprints on housing production

and consumption.

This paper reflects on capital Dhakas four hundred years history as a palimpsest to trace the

changing doctrines, and identify the respective imprints they have had marked in the construction

and reconstruction of housing. It helps explain the existing housings possible linkages to the past,

i.e. whether the changing doctrines tangible imprints have been occurring-recurring, differing or

layering in time. The imprints identified are but exhaustive. This sequential tracing and narrating

the changing doctrines that have had acted upon housing in Dhaka suggests their two major

locations. They are: First, the hegemonic objectives of the distant ruling regimes during the pre-

colonial Mughal and colonial periods that contributed to the Eastern Bengals subjugation and

colonization respectively. Second, the global production of development discourse during the

postcolonial period that has been emerging beyond the sovereign nation-state. The former had led

to its trickle down foundational imprints on housing in Dhaka; while the latter has been acting

upon housing in Dhaka directly through state mediation despite housing policies very late

emergence as a discrete discourse and instrument in guiding public actions for housing production.

Pre-colonial Mughal Period

Revenue collection was a main reason behind the Mughal Empires subjugation of different

regions of India by establishing a number of subah or provinces; each subah was divided into

different sarkars and each sarkarintoparganas or mahals. The Mughal revenue was of two kinds

land revenue and sairduties.iThe stated objectives of the Mughal revenue administration aimed

at collecting revenue as much as possible but by maintaining the general well-being of the peasants

so that they could bring more lands under cultivation.ii

A network of cities and town across India

served the purpose of Empires maintaining authority and control over the subjugated provinces.

There were 120 cities (shahar) and 3,200 townships (qusbah) during Akbars Empire.iii

Mughal

cities and towns were seats of administration and military presence to ensure peace in the

surrounding areas for unhindered collection of revenues as well as sites of manufacture, trade andcommerce. Trade and commerce flourished in these cities and towns under imperial protection and


2/15

2

patronage to the extent of becoming a separate source ofsairduties besides land revenue. We can

safely assume the well-being implications of collecting revenue in land were equally present in

collecting sair duties in cities and towns. That Mughal cities and towns produced only luxury

goods for the consumption by their rulers is an understatement as the producers of a commodity

in small towns arranged with dealers of these goods in a big city to supply them with finished

goods for distribution inland or for export outside.iv

Islam Khan Chisti made Dhaka the capital of Bengal province from Rajmahal in 1610 on strategic

grounds that Dhaka would provide better opportunity to command over the surrounding naval

routs and keep constant vigilance against enemies. Capital Dhaka was suggested to perform two

major tasks: first, to guard the imperial territories and suppress the rebel chiefs; second, to receive

imperial revenues and guard revenue interests.

vTotal land revenue and sair duties collected in

1658 were Rs. 8,800,000; even during the period of Dhaka naibatthe revenue was significant as it

amounts to Rs. 2.700,000.vi

Although pre-Mughal Dhaka was reported by foreign travellers to be a flourishing trading post of

52 galies and 53 bazaars, the capital Dhaka in its early years needed to be prepared for

accommodating the new administrative and military establishments. Spatial ordering and social

mosaic are the major imprints on housing by the Mughal regime in preparing Dhaka as a

provincial capital.

The administration of justice was an added role that ensured public

wellbeing and safety of highways and waterways from robbery. Besides province administration,

Kotwals andMuhtasibs looked after the day-to-day affairs in maintaining citys peace and morals.

These points make a ground to argue that the surplus extracted by the Mughal regime from

different products and land was not totally transferred outside Dhaka, or Bengal, but partly

invested for the improvement and maintenance of Dhaka.

Spatial Ordering: The most significant imprint on housing in Dhaka was arguably the initial

spatial ordering of Dhaka, including the pre-Mughal areas, that followed Mughal way ofhierarchical layering of the public and private realms. S. P. Blake gives an idea of the Mughal

reference, The geographical layout of the residences within the padshahi shahar (imperial city)

centered on mansions of the important amirs and the larger houses of the lesser amirs and rich

merchants. The thatched huts ... spread themselves around the spacious residences of the amirs

and rich merchants.vii

The (Lalbagh) Fort as the place of highest significance spread outwards for the hierarchical

disposition of the city dwellers, while the riverfront had always remained a prime location for the

powerful and the wealthy. The morphological study of the evolution of (old) Dhaka by Iftekher M.

Khan provides insights on how mahal (house), mahalla (neighbourhood) and bazaar (market)

contributed to the development of the socio-spatial order in the native city.

viii

Social Mosaic: Mughal administrators had a policy of inviting and retaining different occupational

group in the city by offering them rent-free lakheraj lands.

He has explained the

ways in which the implantation of the (North Indian) Mughal morphological features ofmahal and

mahalla were mediated by local culture, climate and geographical context of Dhaka. Common

peoples house was most often a household production unit; places of living and working of

different professional groups usually overlapped. The agglomeration of houses with homogenous

occupation into a specialized neighbourhood was evident in their naming, e.g. Shankhari Bazaar or

Tanti Bazaar. The linear form a bazaar had acquired was due to the arrangement of adjacent

shop/workspace frontages of a number of deep plot houses.

ixAll new groups were added to the pre-

existing caste- and occupation-based groups in Dhaka. That each of these groups was initially

formed around a rather homogenous mahalla suggests their living in harmony with each other.


3/15

3

Mughal Dhaka, however, also manifested social divide despite being a site of different social

groups living side-by-side. Traders, merchants and middlemen made profit from manufacturing

activities part of which they spent on building mansions; contemporary travelogues give account

of numerous brick-built mansions often within enclosed walls. But in the case of weavers, who

were made to live on a subsistent level, no profit let alone meagre savings was possible to allow

their construction of houses other than makeshift bamboo-straw huts. T. Raychaudhuri explains,

Virtually every relevant feature of the economy, society and the state was designed to hold the

artisan family firmly down to his lowly place in the scheme of things allowing very little scope for

upward mobility or differentiation.x Peoples gainful living in Dhaka was evident in its

phenomenal population growth during the peak Mughal reign: the reported population of Dhaka

was 900,000 in 1700.xi

Colonial Period

The East India Company came to India for business. The Companys acquisition of Dewani in

1765 had led to the colonization of Bengal, and brought devastating consequences for living and

working conditions in Dhaka; their acquiring of Dewani and subsequent monopoly in trading

created a scope for maximizing their profit. The jubilant reaction of the Court of Directors after

hearing the news of acquisition of Dewani from Kolkata indicates the Companys future role in

Bengal; they asked the Company to enlarge every channel for conveying to us as early as possible

the annual produce of our acquisitions, and to increase the investment of your Company to the

utmost extent you can.xii

The Companys hunt for increasing revenue had ultimately ended by

introducing the Permanent Settlement Act in 1793. Shortly before enacting this Act, in 1790, at

least one-third of the cultivable land of Bengal was reported to have been under junglexiii

, and the

Company was driven by the possibility of bringing more land under cultivation to increase

revenue. The Company looked at the revenue collection as a means of increasing their capital;

transfer of resources from India constituted a form of primitive accumulation contributing to theindustrial capital formation in Britain.

xivCities in Bengal like Dhaka were affected by the

Companys reversal of trade policy from buying finished products for export to buying raw

(agricultural) materials for processing in Kolkata. Later, the Companys introduction of heavy

duties on locally manufactured products alongside importing industrial products from England had

led to an uneven competition that eventually ruined countless artisans and weavers, especially in

and around Dhaka. In short, the Company doctrine aimed at maximizing surplus extraction

through land revenue as much as possible, and its later transfer to England. The Company was

least interested in the investment of the revenue income for the public well-being of the city.xv

Three major imprints on housing in Dhaka can be suggested to have had occurred in the first and

second halves of the nineteenth century; they are housing atrophy, and service provision and

planned land development.

Housing Atrophy: The declining trade and commerce related to the manufacturing sector had

resulted in the drastic reduction of population in and around Dhaka during 1801-1840.

xviii

xviThe

reported population of Dhaka had decreased from 200,000 in 1801 to 75,000 in Walters 1830

census in 1832, and further reduced to 68,610 in 1838.xvii

The departure of the weaver community

and the associated merchants and traders had turned Dhaka into a city of glorious ruins,

pestilential forests and water bodies. Diminishing economy caused housing atrophy. The housing

stock of 44,000 in 1801 was successively reduced to 16,279 and 10,830 respectively in 1830 and

1838. This reduction in quantity was not without implications on the quality of the housing

stock. As the city imploded due to declining population and economic activities and deteriorating


4/15

4

law and order situationxix

, the major parts of Dhaka grew overcrowded as people moved to the

inner Mughal areas. People were reported to build makeshift choppers on the side of the main

roads. During the Company doctrine non-perishable building materials like brick were

prohibitively expensive allowing only the rich to build brick houses. By referring to the

comparative prices of brick to rice, Sirajul Islam has shown how brick in the beginning of the

nineteenth century was ten times expensive than that in 1990.xx

Service Provision: The most significant imprint of the colonial doctrine on housing in Dhaka

relates to the progressive extension of basic urban services sanitation, pure drinking water, metal

roads and much later electricity. These events were documented in utmost details by Sharif uddin

Ahmed.

xxi

Land Development and Detached Residence: Indigenous Bangla gharthe rustic huthad

inspired the British to produce a climatically adaptive house suited to their cultural values and

norms which they called Bungalow.

Implementation of these services, however, had taken place upon the spatial layout of

the pre-existing Mughal mahals and mahallas in Dhaka. These services had positively contributed

to improve the lives of Dhaka dwellers, especially in reducing the incidents of diseases.

xxii

Colonial and post-colonial imaginations were captivated by what was once there as evident in the

ruinous housing. But attentions to what was not there and why in the broader political and

economic contexts of the presidency of Bengal was rare. The melancholic depiction, description

and disposition of the picturesque Mughal ruins in Dhaka during the Company regime created a

mental block; it restricts our going beyond a politics of privies in examining housing in colonial

Dhaka since the second half of the nineteenth century. The accumulation of capital from Dhaka,

Eastern Bangle in the broader sense, had its concrete presence more in the colonial and merchant

mansions in Kolkata than in Dhaka.xxiii

Despite mass production of Bungalow in different parts ofIndia we note a conspicuous absence of Bungalow laden civil lines in Dhaka until the arrival of the

20th

century. Bungalows arrived late because the political significance attached to Dhaka had

always guided the British establishments urban development initiatives in Dhaka. This view

becomes evident when town and landscape planning of Dhaka were initiated in 1905 as capital of

the proposed Eastern Bengal and Assam Province, and then abandoned later. However, emergence

of a new English-educated professional group created a demand for improved and westernized

mode of living conditions. A unique initiative of planned land development for housing the middle

income professionals took place in Wari in 1880 long before building the Bungalows in Ramna.

The extended housing loan and the enforced building control evident in the development of Wari

later proved to be the pre-cursor of all subsequent planned residential area developments in the

post-colonial period.

As the company policy depopulated Dhaka, by debasing

from its manufacturing past, why would the Company located at Kolkata, with comfort and pomp,care for investing in a shrinking Dhaka? Could there be any rational justification other than

discrete individual civilian efforts? It seems the takeover of India by the British Empire after the

unsuccessful sipoy revolution in 1857 had made a rational ground to look after the wellbeing of its

cities and towns: sanitation-taxation-pacification.xxiv

It was the period when the western

industrialization was stabilized, and the European countries were in a state of finding new markets

for their industrial products. There was then a need to reconceptualise Indian cities and towns in

their functioning as the distribution centres of industrial products, and docile city dwellers

becoming potential consumers. This need aimed at reorganizing the Indian cities and towns within

an evolving colonial space. Colonial urbanisms linkage to capitalist world economy underpinned

the colonial policys rising above the Companys apathy and neglect toward a morale ground


5/15

5

strengthened by the Victorian zeal for cleaner habitat since the second half of the nineteenth

century.

Development Doctrines during the Post-colonial Period

Decolonization of developing countries did not lead to the end of relationship colonialism once

had with capitalism. Decolonization was rather a natural response in resolving the contradictions

capitalist mode of production had faced to make adaptation in the changing circumstances global

economic pressure, domestic tensions and geopolitical relations.

xxvii

xxvCapitalist world economy

delivered the concept of development during the post World War II scenarios. US President

Harry Truman in his inaugural speech in 1947 referred to the presence of a larger underdeveloped

areas in Asia, Africa and Latin America.xxvi

He envisaged, unlike the old imperialism, a bold new

programme based on the benefits of the developed countries scientific advances and industrial

progress would lead to the improvement and growth of these underdeveloped countries. The notion

development implies deliberate action to specifically promote change and progress in the broader

sense; in critical perspective, (post-colonial) development ideology is doctrinal.

Modernization Theory (1947-70)

The following

sections describe the ways in which postcolonial development discourses have been mediated first

by the formulation of housing policies at the global level followed by their translation at the local

level in marking imprints on housing in Dhaka.

Development Global: Modernization theories the aftermath of decolonization had emerged in

reorganizing the unequal capitalist relationship between the developed core and undeveloped

periphery countries. Modernization theories in essence were how to develop manuals for the

undeveloped countries; they were problem-solving and policy-oriented theories of social change

and economic development.xxviii

Underdeveloped countries relative location at the lower ends of a

five-stage hierarchy of development had underpinned rationale of and approaches to

development.xxix

Housing Global: Public provision of conventional housing was the hallmark of housing in

developing countries under modernization paradigm. Housing was seen as an item of welfare and

social control whose provision was a state responsibility. Developing countries assumed that they

would adequately address the housing needs of the government employees and the formal

industrial sector workers. Features of state provision include: capital intensive, high standard,

industrial technology, and centralized management systems. There was an absence of global

agency of housing and settlements during the 1950-60 periods in mediating modernization

agendas translation into housing in the national context. This led to grand experimentations for

modern cities epitomized by Nehrus celebrated phrase for Chandigarh - unfettered by the

traditions of the past. Modern cities like Chandigarh in India and Brasilia in Brazil are the notable

modern experiments in outlining the master plan for urban living with one of its most enduring

features separation of the places of living from the places of working through zoning.

Development policy regime had expected underdeveloped countries to pursue

economic growth through industrialization in their efforts to proceed towards advanced

developed stages by emulating the experiences of the Western industrialized countries.

Housing Local: Pakistan emerged as an independent nation state after decolonization of the

British India in 1947; the new-born nation was split into Eastern and Western provinces with an

alleged unity by religion but separated by different cultures and languages. During the initial years

of high hopes and optimism since 1947, the provincial capital of Dhaka had assumed a prominentrole to contribute to the nation state building schemes. In this scheme, modernization of Dhaka had


6/15

6

become an immediate necessity. But the centuries-long colonial legacy had effectively limited

Dhakas capacity to develop and function as a provincial capital of a new nation state. Major

problems that Dhaka had faced as a performing provincial capital are: inheritance of an inadequate

urban infrastructure and services of the colonial regime; shortage of public and private housing to

accommodate an increasing urban population; a great influx of displaced persons from India after

1947 requiring additional places of living and scopes of working; and lack of industrial setup to

substitute production of commodities whose import from India had stopped overnight.

Housing had predominantly been a private sector activity, confined within Old Dhaka. Public

housing in Dhaka, prior decolonization, had mainly been limited by constructing Bungalows for

the high-ranking government officials. As Dhaka became the provincial capital, the government

took the responsibility of housing provision and address the prevailing housing shortage. In East

Pakistan, the estimated housing shortage in 1958 was 150,000 dwelling units.xxx

Justification of

undertaking a low-cost public housing programme has an economic overtone, especially, in its

contribution to the reproduction of labour amidst ongoing industrialization. A government

document made explicit its intention; it states, Investment in housing increases labour output. A

worker who can spend most of his spare time in a comfortable house does not feel repressed and

can resume his daily task with renewed vigour, thus being able to work more and produce

more.xxxi

Concerted housing development hardly takes place without guided by Town Planning. Dhaka was

no exception. The Dhaka Master Plan in 1959 was the first significant attempt to tap on western

modernity, and initiate a process of peoples transition from traditional to modern housing. In

terms of housing, what Dhaka Master Plan had proposed in fact were pockets of new development

and redevelopment of existing localities.xxxii

Imprints of modernization theory on housing in Dhaka are: township and neighbourhood

development, rationalization of housing design, and squatter formation.

The Master Plan detailed out its development scheme

in seven different localities; development outcome would create housing for 490,530 people in

place of the existing 65,900 people. In the case of redevelopment, however, it identified parts of

the old Dhaka as slum in presence of high density (i.e. overcrowding), service deficiencies and

lack of open spaces; suggested slum clearance was to be followed by their redevelopment in line

with the Western precedents.

Township and Neighbourhood Concept: The government undertook a number of projects for

building townships in areas like in Dhanmondi and Gulshan, and housing estates as Azimpur,

Motijheel and Lalmatia. By employing the neighbourhood concept, modern housing was

conceived, planned and implemented in its most generic terms in sites and service schemes like

Dhanmondi, Gulshan, Banani and Lalmatia; leaving aside the design merits, one can locate in

them the presence of residential plots, roads with setbacks for footpath and trees, community open

spaces, non-residential uses like shops etc. Western priority for ensuring health and hygiene, as a

pre-condition of modern living, were markedly present in the buildings judicious setback from the

road and other buildings to allow ample air, light and green.

Rationalization of Housing Design: Modernization of social life had influenced the design of

housing. In the case of public housing, the relative allocation and organization of different

domestic spaces taking into account the difference in household heads income had resulted into

different types of residences, often in multi-storey and multi-family flats. Flat types usually varied

in size although containing generic domestic spaces of modern house like living room, bed room,

dining room, kitchen and toilets. Employment hierarchy began to determine an employees access


7/15

7

to dwelling unit. Dhakas first generation urbanites were given a modern setup to dwell and make

adaptation from their traditional modes of dwelling.

Squatter Formation: Squatter settlements in and around Dhaka did not formed to the extent of a

township like African and Latin American countries. Illegal squatter settlements, however, were

formed inside Dhaka but usually alongside rail tracks and in isolated pockets close to the squatters

places of work. City authority had tolerated the temporary squatters to ensure the continued supply

of cheap construction labours. It was in the interest of modern Dhaka building that this pool of

cheap labour was left undisturbed but unaddressed in the provision of basic urban services.

Redistribution with Growth and Basic Needs (1971-1990)

Development Global: By the late 1960 it became apparent that the objectives of modernization

theory in pursuit of development through industrialization in developing countries had failed.

Rural migrants continued pouring into the cities and the squatter settlements began to proliferate

as the benefits of growth generated by such industrialization policy didnt trickle down to the poor.

As a result, a case for achieving growth with equity had led to formulate a new set of policies.Chenery et al, among others, had argued for increased growth and alleviation of poverty; they had

taken a view that economic growth can be achieved by focusing attention to the pressing problems

of poverty, unemployment and inequality. Improvements in the absolute income of the poor could

be achieved through transfers and subsidies, and improved access to essential goods and services

(e.g. water, electricity, sewerage, housing, health facilities and schools etc.).xxxiii

The emerged policy package became known within the rubrics of Redistribution with Growth

(RWG) and Basic Needs. The main goals of RWG strive to make an improvement in the absolute

income of the poor rather than an attack on relative inequality; a distribution of income increments

rather than a redistribution of existing incomes and assets; labour-intensive approaches were

devised to increase the productivity, output and employment opportunities of the poor.xxxiv

RWGand Basic Needs strategies aspired to alleviate poverty, unemployment and inequality through first,

balancing growth with redistributive measures; second, the stimulation of small-scale enterprises

and labour-intensive technologies; third, the deregulation of the urban informal sector; and lastly,

the introduction of transfer strategies in public service expenditure.xxxv

Housing Global: Implications of RWG and Basic Needs strategies for housing was the realization

that the governments should move from its direct provision to assisted self-help housing initiatives.

The World Bank emerged as a major lending agency that began to expand from its traditional

sector loans for basic economic infrastructure to address the strategies of the redistribution with

growth goals. The Habitat conference in 1976 at Vancouver had made a ground for preparing

policies to guide housing for the poor. Sites and service schemes and settlement upgrading werethe key forms of assisted self-help housing that the World Bank and the newly formed United

Nations Centre for Human Settlements (UNCHS) had provided finance and technical assistance in

cities in developing countries. Lending was provided by a project by project basis. The World

Bank became the dominant actor in the urban areas with its lending programme for housing and

infrastructure projects. The model World Bank followed in its urban projects was affordability-

cost-recovery-replicability. Case studies, however, had shown that the model was not replicable

and had limitations in achieving a wider coverage.

The voluminous works on informal housingxxxvi

, urban informal sectorxxxvii

xxxviii

and intermediate

technology had provided essential supports for formulating policy goals in the fields of

housing, services and employment. Aspects of John Turners work that matched with the World

Bank policies for RWG are: the need for self-help contributions; the incorporation of progressive


8/15

8

development procedures; the reduction in housing standards; access to financial resources; and

access to and development of appropriate technologies and building materials. The initiatives that

developed from these policy objectives are: sites-and-service and self-help housing projects; core

housing, slum and squatter upgrading; the stimulation of informal sector activities and small-scale

enterprises in project areas; access to financial, managerial and technical assistance; regularization

of tenure and the extended provision of public services. Housing intervention became inter-

sectoral in response to the urban poor households physical, social and economic needs.xxxix

Housing Local: Bangladeshs involvement in the new development paradigmRWG and Basic

Needswas disrupted and delayed for two main reasons; first, the war-reconstruction efforts

under severe financial constraints; second, the adoption of a socialist economy in the First Five

Year Plan (1973-1978) leading to the nationalization of the private industries. A highly restrictive

trade regime was put into practice alongside nationalization of the private industries toward an

import-substitution industrialization strategy of the government.

xl

Partly entangled by the promise and high hopes of independence euphoria, partly handicapped by a

local policy vacuum, the state in Dhaka had continued the path of the earlier public housing

provision approach. The state in its formative years attempted to address the housing problem in

Dhaka through the supply-side. From 1972 to 1973, the state had constructed 27,000 dwelling

units throughout the country of which 4303 units were built in Mirpur; after 700 units were

occupied, the entire project was invaded. While a survey report

But a change of political regime

in 1975 led the national economys gradual shifting from the earlier nationalization to privatization

of the industries. The shift from the import-substitution to export-oriented industrialization had

taken place in response to the structural transformation of the global economy. A brief review of

the implications of the pre- and post-1975 economic scenario for housing is outlined below to later

elaborate their identified imprints on housing.

xlion the state of the squatters in

three major cities in Bangladesh, carried out in 1974, was submitted in 1976 the Dhaka city

authorities had already completed a squatter eviction drive in 1975. An estimated 172,589

squatters comprising 24,757 families in 119 locations were forcibly evicted followed by their

planned rehabilitation in three different peripheral locations around Dhaka.xlii

In the post-1975 economic scenario, export-oriented industrialization was most evident in the

expanding Readymade Garments (RMG) units in Dhaka. Under pervasive rural poverty, RMG

industries had attracted an influx of cheap urban labour force, women in particular, in Dhaka.

During the initial years of the liberalized trade regime, new housing demands of the labourers as

well as the entrepreneurs were created in the informal and formal sector housing respectively. The

formal housing market duly met the entrepreneurs effective demand but failed the labourers only

to be catered by the informal sector squatters. Reference to an absence of the distributionalconsequences of economic growth is essential for discussing imprints on housing. Divestiture of

public sector enterprises and cheap credit through Development Finance Institutions (DFI) were

the two major state interventions in promotion of the private sector industrialization.xliii

But a

section of the entrepreneurs deliberate failure to repay the loansdefaultingled to a situation

which the economists declined to identify as primitive accumulation of capital.xliv

A part of the

usurped loans ended up as investments in and consumptions of housing. Economists incisive note

reveals that A part [of loans] went into local real estate investment, and financing of a lavish life

style quite incommensurate with the modest social origins of a large section of this class (authors

emphasis).xlv

Distinct imprints on housing in Dhaka made under the RWG and Basic Needs strategy relate to thefollowing expansion, upgradation and transformation of housing.


9/15

9

Expansion of Housing: The earlier sites-and-service housing schemes for the high- and upper-

middle income groups in Dhaka were continued through state land acquisition and development.

Supply of land through Uttara and Baridhara planned residential area developments were made

with state subsidy. State initiated squatter eviction followed by planned resettlement programme in

the peripheries of Dhaka had indeed contributed to the supply of land for self-help housing of the

low-income people. As most of the rehabilitated poor households were seen to return Dhaka to live

close to their place of work, the allotment of the land changed hands several times.

Upgradation of Housing: City-wide steady formation of slums and squatter settlements since

independence in 1971 has had made Dhaka appeared a city of slums; slums proliferated due to

urban poor households failure to access housing either through state provision or formal market.

A 1996 survey reports the formation of slums in Dhaka during the 1971-1980 and 1981-1990

periods were 26 and 45.5 per cent respectively; the figures for the pre-1971 and post-1990 are 10.5

and 18 per cent respectively.xlvi

Transformation of Housing: Since the mid 1980s, private real estate developers were gradually

gaining momentum in the scale of their operation. At the advent of the private sector developers,

multi-storey and multi-family apartment as a specific housing typology emerged in Dhaka.

Apartment construction initiated a transformation of housing from the earlier low-rise single-user

to walk-up multi-family housing. This transformation of housing, however, had not yet gained

momentum in different planned residential areas, Dhanmondi in particular, as late as in 1991.xlvii

Dhakas initial reaction to the slum formation was eviction by

rehabilitation; later responses, however, were directed toward provision of urban basic services;

UNICEF-Dhaka had played a vital role in focusing the urban poors needs, womens in particular,

for urban basic services than shelter per se. Instead of assisted self-help housing schemes slum

upgradation emerged as a key form of intervention in Dhaka but without tackling the land tenure

issue.

Neo-liberalism (1990 - )

Development Global: A global economic slump during the early 1980s had significantly reduced

the growth rates in developing countries due to the following conditions: reduced demand in

developing countries; high interest rates on ever-increasing debts; a dramatic decline in foreign

capital inflows; and declining foreign investment rates.xlviii

They produced a decline in standards of

living, and worsening rates and levels of unemployment, poverty and inequality in cities in

developing countries. As a way out of this crisis a new macroeconomic development strategy had

emerged. Structural Adjustment Policies (SAP) became dominantxlix

, and was based on the neo-

liberal supply-side theories of development. The basic goals of structural adjustment strategies set

for developing countries include: to restore the countrys balance of payments situation; toincrease its debt-service capacity; to attract foreign investment; to achieve economic growth by

restructuring trade and financial flows.l

Developing countries had shifted from their earlier import-substitution to export-oriented

industrialization strategies to produce goods and provide services for the developed country

markets. Transnational corporations, and their local agents, engaged the cities and their cheap

labours in developing countries for producing goods for export to the west. In contrast to the

earlier urban bias perception, a renewed interest was placed on cities. A growing realization that

the primacy of market in generating economic growth had not been tackling urban povertycontributed to provide exclusive focus on urban poverty.

Loans to developing countries by the International

Monetary Fund and the World Bank were made conditional upon their acceptance of these

adjustment measures.

liAcknowledging the significance of


10/15

10

cities, global development agencies came to a consensus to harmonize urban policies and national

development policies by devising strategies to increase urban productivity, alleviate urban poverty

and ensure good governance.lii

Housing Global: In the late eighties global housing policy scenario changed significantly from the

earlier Habitat I policies under the neo-liberal development doctrine. A neo-liberal analysis of thefailure of the earlier affordability-cost-recovery-replicability model had provided a basis for a

new set of (urban) policies. Significance was now attached to policy, institutional, and managerial

reforms instead of the earlier brick and mortar approach for housing the poor. A shift from the

earlier site specific project to sector- or city-wide programme consideration came into place. UN-

Habitat and World Bank initiated housing policy measures reflected the general goals of the neo-

liberal analysis: elimination of supply- and demand-side constraints; withdrawal of the state and

encouragement of privatization; elimination and targeting of subsidies; deregulation and regulatory

reforms; institutional capacity-building; increased participation; and political/administrative

decentralization.

liii

The concept of enablement attained a central position in the neo-liberal thought on housing. The

earlier problem of up-scaling the housing projects to meet the growing need was thought to be

addressed through market enablement. Housing was left to the market to be taken care of as the

principle demand- and supply-side constraints on the housing market arise due to direct state

provision or production. The state, therefore, ought to withdraw from the direct production and

provision, and facilitate or enable the private sector, formal and informal, to provide land, housing

and services. The state should assume the regulatory and coordinating roles. Previous experiences

and a series of UN conferences during the first half of the 1990s made a ground to shift from

Global Shelter Strategys (GSS) market-based approach to Habitat Agendas right-based

approach adopted in Habitat II in 1996. Global housing policy goals have now been realigned

within a neo-liberal perspective in Habitat II in 1996 by taking into account the emerging concernsof sustainability.

liv

Housing Local: Dhaka grew in significance for national development as a location of economic

growth producing sectors since the late 1980s; notable among the private sector include: the

rapidly growing RMG in the industrial and housing in the construction sectors. Their respective

contributions to the national GDP were significant. The share of real estate and housing sector and

construction sector as percentage of GDP during the financial year 2002 were 8.3 and 8.0

respectively

lv

The first concrete step towards adopting a neo-liberal housing strategy was the preparation of the

National Housing Policy (NHP); the draft NHP was completed in 1993, and later amended in

2004. The formulation of NHP was initiated in compliance with the state commitment to GSS. The

making of a neo-liberal housing strategy was further consolidated with the completion of two

major policy documents in the same year. The first document was the Urban Shelter Sector

Review carried out with UNDP and UNCHS technical and financial assistance;

. While the growth of GDP in Bangladesh during 1992-2002 was 4.6 the growths of

real estate and housing sector and construction sector during the same period were 3.4 and 7.5

respectively. Investments in housing and construction sector accounted for 47.3 per cent of the

total private investments. Liberalization of trade and commerce, as adjustment measures, helped

the private sectors importing foreign as well as producing local building materials.

lvithe second

document was the ADB assisted Housing Sector Institutional Strengthening Project.lvii

It became apparent, again, that the economic growth through increasing global integration has had

failed to abolish poverty and arrest income disparity in Dhaka. The benefits of trade liberalization


11/15

11

and privatization had accrued within a small section of society in the context of the

commercialization of politics.lviii

Although urban poverty had reduced in percentage of total urban

population but increased in absolute numbers. Manifest concentration of poverty in slums and

squatters has been a constant reminder to the international donors and national policy makers for

urgent intervention. Concern for urban poverty, especially the urban poors access to basic urban

services remained as important as in the previous development paradigms. The neo-liberal scheme

for the alleviation of poverty in Dhaka became more comprehensive than the past efforts as

evident in the following two ADB assisted efforts: the Urban Poverty Study in Bangladesh in

1995lix

and the Urban Poverty Reduction Project in 1996.lx

The first half of the 1990s had been a busy period of policy formulations and institutional reforms

in tune with the neo-liberal (global) policy objectives in facilitating the private housing sector. The

produced documents are objective, egalitarian and politically correct; they are an idealization of

what should and ought to be in ensuring peoples access to housing. The problem, however, is the

gap between what has been spelled out in the document and what actually happened in reality.

While they assign the task of meeting the housing need to the market by giving the regulatory and

coordinating roles to the state, market failure in absence of enablers has been the reality as far as

low-income peoples access to housing is concerned. Donor-assisted government efforts aim

toward policy and institutional reforms to prepare Dhaka's operating in a neo-liberal development

scenario. The state involvement as a major provider of land contradicts its enabling intentions.

Understanding of and actions for the

urban poor living and livelihoods are among the key issues addressed in these documents.

In development planning terms, neo-liberalism has set an agenda for Dhaka to increase

productivity through provision of infrastructure and alleviation of poverty with support of good

governance. As Bangladesh hinged toward an export-oriented industrialization policy, RMG sector

had made significant expansion of its share of the total national export earnings. The number of

readymade garments firm increased from 4 in 1976 to 2313 in 1997.lxi

In 1997, RMG sector

contributed nearly three billion US dollars or 68 per cent of the national export earnings. It became

apparent since the early 1980s that to maintain a competitive edge at the global market RMG units

have to be located in and around Dhaka, among others, for their cheap labour force had to be

accommodated within slums and squatters. Presence of cheap labour force for RMG and other

formal and informal sector activities is increased at the cost of the quality of their living.Economic

success of the entrepreneurs in the RMG and other sectors had created an effective demand for

housing in Dhaka that has mainly been catered by the private sector real estate developers. A 2000

study reported the need of 20,000 better housing units for the RMG middle and high ranking

managers.lxii

We would now discuss the specific imprints the neo-liberal development strategies have on

housing in Dhaka under the auspices of a series of institutional reforms.

If other cases in the industrial and service sectors, besides RMG sector, are

considered then the effective housing demand in the private sector increases many-folds.

De-Housing of the Urban Poor: Since the late 1990s, continuous squatter evictions without

rehabilitation have reduced the absolute space available for the urban poor housing (Table 1). As a

result, the urban poor are pushed to the peripheral area and forced either to floating homelessness

or over-crowding in the inner-city slums and squatters. An indication of over-crowding is evident

in the increasing number of households living in lesser average floor area. In 1974 around 41 per

cent households lived in less than 100 sq.ft area; this figure has increased successively from 65 per

cent to 81 per cent in 1995 and 2005 respectivelylxiii

. Besides floor space, squatter evictions had

abolished the slum improvement initiatives provision of urban basic services to the urban poorhouseholds.


12/15

12

Table 1: Declining Profile of the Squatter Settlements in Dhakalxiv

Note: DMA and DMC refer to Dhaka Metropolitan Area and Dhaka Metropolitan Corporation respectively.

Distortion of Land Supply: Land in Dhaka is a scarce commodity, and the most important factor

of production than capital, labour and technology. The public supply of developed land for housing

has been limited, and argued to cause market distortion by its selling below the market price. The

distortion of land supply by the private housing sector in Dhaka, on the other hand, is caused by its

observed nature of supply land piracy, land poaching and wet-land filling. In land piracy, land

becomes an item of illegal encroachment of government land by the vested interest group, oftenmediated by rampant corruption and political protection. In land poaching, large private land

developers force small land owners to sell off their lands. In land filling, large private land

developers fill up designated wet-lands surrounding Dhaka for township developments. The

distortion of private land supply creates environmental externalities by defying existing law.

Reorganization of Formal Housing: The high effective demand for formal housing that has been

created by the affluence of the neo-liberal regime contributed to the reorganization of formal

housing in Dhaka to the extent of redefining the urban landscape. Market led densification initiates

this reorganization that is most evident in the near complete transformation of Dhakas planned

residential areas from low-rise single user residences to multi-storied and multi-family apartments.

Private formal housing became a packaged commodity in this reorganization.

Endnote

This paper traced and narrated the changing doctrines, and the imprints they have had marked on

housing in Dhaka. It has shown how the local housing in Dhaka has increasingly been linked to the

broader global situations. Discussion of this paper provides a basis toward mapping the broad

project of the social production of housing in Dhaka.

i During Mughal period sair duties included various duties like those imposed on buying and selling of

products in markets and trade, on produce of rivers and tanks, duties on salts and elephants and receipt from

zakats. See for details A. Karim, Mughal Revenue System, in S. Islam (ed.)History of Bangladesh 1704-

1971. Vol. 2 Economic History (Dhaka, 1992), p. 166.ii See excerpt fromAin-i-Akbari, vol. II, 46 cited in A. Karim, ibid, p. 165.iii

A. H. Kidwai, Urban Atrophy in Colonial India: Some Demographic Indicators, in I. Banga (ed.) The

City in Indian History (New Delhi, 2005), p. 152.iv K. M. Ashraf,Life and Conditions of the People of Hindustan, New Delhi, 1970, p. 124-125 cited in J. S.

Grewal, Historical Writing on Urbanization in Medieval India, in I. Banga (ed.) The City in Indian History

(New Delhi, 2005), p. 70.v

A. Karim, Origin and Development of Mughal Dhaka, in S. U. Ahmed (ed.)Dhaka. Past Present Future(Dhaka, 1991), p. 28.

Year Slum Population Total Land

(in acre)

Density

(person per acre)

Slums inPublic and Private Land

(in percentage)

2005a

3,420,321 (DMA) 3840 891 9.0 and 89.8

1995b

1,104,600 (DMA) 1038 1064 22.5 and 77.4

1988c 1,010,042 (DMC) 1340 665 29.2 and 65.1

1982d

730,000 (DMC) 600 1216 29.4 and 63.9


13/15

13

vi S. U. Ahmed,Dacca. A Study in Urban History and Development(London, 1986), p. 24.vii See S. P. Blake, Dar-ul-Khilafat-i-Shahjahanabad; The Padshahi Shahar in Mughal India: 1556-1739

(Chicago, 1974), p. 15 cited in H. Spodek Studying the History of Urbanization in India,Journal of Urban

History, Vol. 6 (3), pp.251-295.viii

I. M. Khan, Alternative Approach to the Redevelopment of Old Dacca, Ph.D. thesis (KatholiekeUniversiteit Leuven,, 1982).ix

S. U. Ahmed, ibid, p. 11.x T. Raychaudhuri, Non-Agricultural Production: Mughal India, in T. Raychaudhuri and I. Habib. (eds.)

The Cambridge Economic History of India, Vol. 1: c.1200-c.1750 (Cambridge, 1982), p. 284.xi See S. Hossain, Echoes From Old Dhaka, Bengal Past and Present, 111, (April-June, 1909), p. 231

quoting Rahman Ali Taish, Tarikh-i-Dhakha cited in S. U. Ahmed, ibid, p. 13.xii B. Chaudhuri, Agrarian Relations: Eastern India, In D. Kumar and M. Desai (eds.) The Cambridge

Economic History of India, Vol. 2: c.1757-c.1970 (Cambridge, 1983), p. 88.xiii

S. Islam, Permanent Settlement and Peasant Economy, in S. Islam (ed.)History of Bangladesh, 1704-

1971, Vol. 2 Economic History (Dhaka, 1992), p. 248.xiv

I. Habib, Bharat Barsher Itihas Prasanga (Essays in Indian History-Towards Marxist Perception)(Kolkata, 2004).xv

From total revenue of 19.8 million pound, collected during 1851-52, only 0.17 million pounds was

invested on roads, embankments, bridges and other public well being projects. See Marxs New York

Herald-Tribune letter on 23rd July, 1858. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1858/07/23.htm

retrieved on 12.10.2009.xvi

S. U. Ahmed, ibid, p.129.xviiibid, p. 125.xviiiibid, p. 147.xix

S. Islam, Social Life in Dhaka, 1763-1800, in S. U. Ahmed (ed.)Dhaka. Past Present Future (Dhaka,

1991).

xx See Note No. 12, ibid, p. 87.xxi

S. U. Ahmed, ibid.xxii A. D. King, The Bungalow: the Production of a Global Culture (London, 1984).

xxiii For an account of Garden Houses ( Bagan Bari) see S. Chattopadhyay (2007), The Other Faces of

Primitive Accumulation, in P. Scriver, and V. Prakash (eds.) Colonial Modernities. Building, Dwelling and

Architecture in British India and Ceylon (London, 2007).xxiv

V. T. Oldenburg, Peril, Pestilence and Perfidy: The Making of Colonial Lucknow, 1856-1877, Ph.D.

dissertation (University of Illinois, 1979) cited in H. Spodek, ibid, p. 162.xxv For a detail discussion see A. Hoogvelt, Globalization and the Postcolonial World. The new political

economy of development(Baltimore, 2001).

xxviD. Harrison, The Sociology of Modernization and Development(London, 1988).

xxvii See D. Slater, Geopolitics and the Post-colonial. Rethinking North-South Relations (Oxford, 2004); A.

Escobar, Encountering Development: Making and Unmaking of the Third World(Princeton, 1995); W.

Sachs (ed.), The Development Dictionary. A Guide to Knowledge and Power(London, 1996).xxviii

A. Hoogvelt, ibid, p.35.

xxix W. W. Rostow, The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto (London, 1960).xxx

Works Department,Low Cost Public Housing Programme (Dhaka, 1968).xxxiIbid.xxxii S. Minoprio and P. W. Macfarlen,Master Plan for Dhaka (London, 1959).xxxiii

H. B. Chenery, J. H. Duloy, and R. Jolly (eds.),Redistribution with Growth: Policies to Improve Income

Distribution in Developing Countries in the Context of Economic Growth (Oxford, 1974).

xxxiv R. Burgess, Helping Some to Help Themselves: Third World Housing Policies and Development

Strategies, in C. Mathey (ed.)Beyond Self Help Housing (London, 1992).


14/15

14

xxxv R. Burgess, M. Carmona and T. Kolstee (eds.) The Challenge of Sustainable Cities. Neoliberalism and

Urban Strategies in Developing Countries (London, 1997).xxxvi

J. F. C. Turner did pioneering works on informal housing; see J. F. C. Turner, Barriers and Channels

for housing Development in Modernising Countries,Journal of the American Institute of Planners, Vol. 33

(3), pp. 354-63; J. F. C. Turner,Housing by People (London, 1976).xxxviiInternational Labuor Office (ILO),Meeting Basic Needs (Geneva, 1975).xxxviii

E. Schumacher, Small is Beautiful (London, 1974).xxxix

See for a review of the issues in S. Ghafur, Beyond Homemaking: The Role of Slum Improvement in

Home-based Income Generation in Bangladesh, Third World Planning Review, Vol. 23 (2), 2001, pp. 111-

135.xl S. Raihan, Trade liberalization and poverty in Bangladesh, Macao Regional Knowledge Hub, Working

Papers, No. 15, 2008.xli

Urban Development Directorate (UDD), Squatters in Bangladesh Cities. A survey of urban squatters in

Dacca, Chittagong and Khulna 1974 (Dhaka, 1976).xlii The squatter resettlement projects at Tongi, Damra and Bhashantek had been designed at sites of 100, 103

and 88 acres respectively; the number of plots developed in these projects was 4063, 4000 and 4000respectively. For details see C. L. Chouguill,New Communities for Urban Squatters. Lessons from the Plan

that Failed in Dhaka, Bangladesh (New York, 1987).xliii A. Abdullah (ed.),Modernisation at Bay. Structure and Change in Bangladesh (Dhaka, 1991), p. 21.xliv

Ibid, p. 25.xlv

A. Abdullah, ibid, p. 26.xlvi ADB-GOB-LGED, Urban Poverty Reduction Project, Draft Final Report (Dhaka, 1996), p. 5.xlvii An observation on 39 developers in 1991 reports only 9 out of their total 89 projects were located in

different planned residential areas in Dhaka 6 and 3 in Dhanmondi and Banani respectively. T. M. Seraj

and M. S. Alam, Housing Problem and Apartment Development in Dhaka City, in S. U. Ahmed (ed.)

Dhaka. Past Present Future (Dhaka, 1991).xlviii

R. Burgess, M. Carmona and T. Kolstee, Contemporary Macroeconomic Strategies and Urban Policiesin Developing Countries: A Critical Review, in R. Burgess et al, ibid.xlix P. Streeten, Structural Adjustment: A Survey of Issues and Options, World Development, Vol. 15 (12),

1987, pp.1469-82.lR. Burgess et al, ibid, p. 18.

li One influential critique of SAP was offered by G. A. Cornia, R. Jolly and F. Stewart, Adjustment with a

Human Face (Oxford, 1987).lii The most significant documents are UNCHS, Global Shelter Strategy to the Year 2000 (Nairobi, 1991);

UNDP, Cities, People and Poverty: Urban Development Cooperation for the 1990s (New York, 1991);

World Bank, Urban Policy and Economic Development, an Agenda for the 1990s (Washington D.C, 1991).liii R. Burgess, M. Carmona and T. Kolstee, Contemporary Spatial Strategies and Urban Policies in

Developing Countries: A Critical Review, in Burgess et al, ibid, pp.114-115.liv UN-Habitat, The Habitat Agenda and Istanbul Declaration, Second United Nations Conference on

Human Settlements(New York, 1996).lv CPD, Strengthening the Role of Private Sector Housing in Bangladesh Economy: The Policy Challenges,

paper presented to the dialogue organised by Real Estate & Housing Association of Bangladesh (REHAB)

and Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD), March 11 (Dhaka, 2003).lvi UNDP-UNCHS,Bangladesh Urban and Shelter Sector Review (Dhaka, 1993).lvii GOB-ADB,Housing Sector Institutional Strengthening Project. Final Report(Dhaka, 1993).lviii

M. Hossain, R. Afsar and M. L. Bose, Growth and Distribution of Income and Incidence of Poverty inDhaka City (Dhaka, 1999); R. Sobhan, From Two Economics to Two Societies, The Daily Star, 25 August

(Dhaka, 1998); S. Ghafur, For Whom are Our Cities?, The Daily Star, October 7(Dhaka, 1999).lix

N. Islam, N. Huda, F. B. Narayan and P. B. Rana (Eds.), Addressing the Urban Poverty Agenda inBangladesh. Critical Issues and the 1995 Survey Findings (Dhaka, 1997).


15/15

15

lx ADB-GOB-LGED, Urban Poverty Reduction Project. Draft Final Report(Dhaka, 1996).lxi K. Mainuddin, Case of the Garment Industry of Dhaka, Bangladesh, Urban Partnership Background

Series 6 World Bank (Dhaka, 2000).lxii

ibid, p.21.

lxiii Figures are taken from the following sources: UDD, ibid, p.65; N. Islam et al, ibid, p. 205; CUS et al,ibid, p.40.lxiv

The figures are the taken from the following sources in order of citations: (a) CUS, Measure Evaluation

and NIPORT, Slums of Urban Bangladesh: Mapping and Census, 2005. Draft Report (Dhaka, 2006); (b)

ADB-GOB-LGED, ibid; (c) A. Q. M.Mahbub and N. Islam, The Growth of Slum in Dhaka City: A Spatio-

Temporal Analysis, in S. U. Ahmed (ed.) Dhaka. Past Present Future (Dhaka, 1991); (d) CUS, Slums inDhaka City. A Socio-economic Survey for Feasibility of Slum Clearance and Urban Renewal Programme in

Dhaka City (Dhaka, 1983).

S Ghafur_Changing Imprints

Documents

Transcript of S Ghafur_Changing Imprints