have more living space and better amenities than
has been highlighted by several parties.
before(Rao, S.G.B., 2012). It should be noted that the redevelopment projects by the developer, have been stated to be conceived based on participation
d) Performance
with the local residents of Dharavi. There has been no attempt or plan in the DRP to evaluate the project post its construction and b) Simplification:
occupation. It also does not incorporate lessons from other redevelopment schemes in order to
The DRP has a very top-down mechanism for
learn, how the post-occupancy works in similar
redevelopment, with the sector divisions formed
attempts. This is a major gap, where the DRP and
by the Slum Redevelopment Authority of India, in
the state government need to revise its approach.
consultation with Mukesh Mehta. Although citizen participation from Dharavi is encouraged, it plays a limited role in the initial stages. Once the sectors
e) Financial Instruments used:
have been allotted its private developers, it is up to them, how to redevelop it in order to generate profit
There has been no attempt or plan in the DRP
for rehabilitation schemes. Therefore, although
to evaluate the project post its construction and
the decision making process of the DRP is simple,
occupation. It also does not incorporate lessons
it largely ignores discourses from other actors,
from other redevelopment schemes in order to learn,
especially the inhabitants. What is also missing
how the post-occupancy works in similar attempts.
is a sense of transparency in the decision making
This is a major gap, where the DRP and the state
process, which is illustrated in the grey area of
government need to revise its approach, as only a
eligibility conditions for the low income housing
post-occupancy evaluation can ensure a inclusive
generated.
and socially sustainable redevelopment project. Note: The future of the DRP in its limbo, with no
c) Differentiation:
bids being received from the private developers for any of the 5 sectors of Dharavi (Bardhan, R. et
A large portion of Dharavi’s inhabitants along with
al., 2015). The main factors contributing to it were
several academicians have raised several arguments
tough eligibility conditions for the developers,
against the DRP. The most visible missing element
concerns over protests from the inhabitants and
is the consideration of current livelihoods and socio-
height restrictions by the state. This led to the
economic networks and whether these livelihoods
allotment of one sector to the state to develop
can be sustained in a post-redevelopment scenario.
(which is contradictory to the original plan), in
Along with that, a lack of consideration of existing
order to jump-start the project and attract other
social structure and economic system in the DRP
fresh investors.
76
Figure 3.9: The current system of the Dharavi Redevelopment Project, illustrating the relationship between the different stakeholders and the project.; Source: Interpretation by author