Lack of subsidies for cheap construction material, high prices of land, limited possibilities for private sector participation, absence of development authorities in many underdeveloped regions to execute housing schemes and usurpation of land reserves in the form of newly popularized real estate schemes were cited as vital hurdles related to housing provision.
In a surprise move, under the given “mandate” of implementing the NHP, the National Housing Authority was chosen as the core institution to deal with housing provision in the entire country.
The HAB deliberations thus failed as usual to address the prevailing issues that affect the allocation, planning, design, development, delivery and management of housing to various cross sections of the society.
Despite the formulation of several housing policies during the past, a sizable population is either still shelterless or forced to live in sub-standard dwellings. A review of the pertinent issues shall be useful to understand the national housing scenario as it exists today.
Housing is an ongoing process and it has many ingredients. With reference to Pakistan, these ingredients include land, infra-structure, building materials, technology and means of access to housing stock.
Housing is the third most essential human need after food and clothing. Therefore, many worthwhile researches in social sciences have regarded housing as a basic human right.
The UN Conference on Human Settlements held in Istanbul during 1996 stopped short of declaring housing as a basic human right. Some industrialized countries feared that housing provision will become an integral state responsibility if declared a ‘right’ by the UN. This account clearly establishes the vital significance of housing in the overall domain of development.
In Pakistan, housing needs are dependent on four factors. Natural growth of population automatically generates the need for a corresponding increase in the housing stock. In the same reference, the growing break down of joint family system into nuclear family set-up gives rise to an additional necessity for enhanced housing provision.
Population migration also generates a demand for moving households to settle down. Initially the migrations from rural to urban areas were the main reasons for rise in housing demand. But these days, population movement is also taking place in between cities of various scale, sizes and profiles. For instance, during 1990s, many upper middle and middle income families left Karachi to take up residence in Lahore and else where due to deteriorating law and order condition in the city.
A third factor in housing needs is the backlog or the unmet demand. Each year, the housing needs rise and add up to the factor which represents the unfulfilled needs for housing. And finally, there is a need for replacement of old and worn-out housing stock.
Like many other finite commodities, housing has a life factor. When that life time is completed, it must be replaced by fresh stock. The housing need is difficult to calculate for rural areas for lack of indigenously developed technical standards, poor availability of baseline information and rapidly changing socio-physical circumstances. The urban housing need has been estimated to be over 2.7 million units up till now.
As a sector, housing has faced a policy dilemma ever since the independence. Housing has been conceived as a product, not a process. Policies, programmes and projects have been found to carry this fundamental misconception since a long time. The first (1955-60) and second (1960-65) five year development plans laid down major proportion of public spending on housing. But merely 10 per cent of total development budget was allocated for it.
Private sector was later encouraged to participate in housing provision. However, public sector continued to play the controlling role until the fifth five year plan period (1978-83). During and after the sixth five year plan, it was realized that housing was a capital intensive exercise where government alone could not play a direct role.
Thereafter, direct support to the housing sector started declining. Since 1999 to date, various annual plans prepared by the Planning Commission have marginally addressed housing. Most of these attempts have completely missed out the core issues. Public investments, through public sector development programme (PSDP) showed a decline from 8.32 per cent in 1999-2000 to 3.96 per cent in 04-05.
Token emphasis has remained on stereo-typical sub-sectors. Provision of urban residential plots (3-5 marlas ) to a minimal deserving households; urban water supply, drainage and sewerage schemes in a few settlements; government servants housing and slum/kutchi abadis improvement in a few locations and development of federal capital territory of Islamabad were some of the isolated attempts.
At best, they may have served the departmental objectives. Such attempts hardly coincided with the enormity of the national housing needs. A facilitating mechanism could hardly be created for benefiting the under privileged sections of the society that comprise around 40 per cent of the population. National Housing Policy of 2001 was also no exception.
Housing sector needs sound and objective analysis to take stock of the ground realities. One of the foremost issues to deal with is the access to land. Previously, land was conceived and dealt as a communal asset that was safeguarded and judiciously used according to pressing social requirements. Now it is traded as a commodity.
Land markets have become strong and contending recipients of capital investments by middle and upper middle income groups, real estate entrepreneurs and even international port folio investors.
The low income groups cannot benefit from these parcels of land due to their financial constraints. Unless land access option is developed for the poor to acquire land at affordable and acceptable conditions, little improvement is expected in the prevailing status of those without shelter.
Planning, construction and development dynamics of housing for the poor follow very different course than what is normally subscribed. Lower income groups build houses incrementally according to needs, scales of affordability and social conditions. Formally constructed housing stock is unaffordable and un-accessible for the poor due to high initial costs and modes of payment both of which are incompatible to the employment profile of the poor.
Credit facilities and options at the formal scale are not accessible due to unachievable formalities of collateral and guarantees. They acquire credit from informal money lenders at high interest rates. Fully-serviced plots become unaffordable for the poor as costs of services raises the initial cost of land acquisition.
Water, transportation, sanitation, electricity and natural gas is the usual sequence of amenities needed by the poor. Researches have shown that people are capable of managing lane and cluster level infrastructure themselves. Trunk/main infrastructure needs to be provided by the concerned public sector institutions.
Many drastic steps pertaining to housing need to be taken up. Housing policy should be integrated with the larger social policies. Technical and physical aspects of housing should be rationally blended with the socio-economic conditions of the concerned communities. Target oriented information campaigns should be designed to reach the urban poor in ways and means congruent to their habitat.
Flexible terms and conditions should be devised to match the socio-economic status of the poor. Support mechanisms must be created for design, scheduling, construction and management of housing. Pilot projects be developed for demonstration. Public sector should restrict itself to regulatory role.
Formal (and informal) private sector be encouraged to play their implementing role within the regulatory framework. Main policies may be made at the upper tiers. Execution must be managed locally. It must be remembered that for achieving a stable society, housing provision is a prime pre-requisite which needs to be addressed on top priority basis.