Past, Present, and Future through the Lens of Cities: Perspectives from South Asia
Photo credit: Nazia Hussain
This event summary is reproduced from UTokyo IFI’s description of an event that I organized at UTokyo IFI. In the event titled “Past, Present, and Future through the Lens of Cities: Perspectives from South Asia” at IFI, Univ. of Tokyo, discussed the nature of challenges facing South Asia in general and Pakistan in particular.
Prof. Fujiwara welcomed panelists and participants. He introduced the topic at hand—the need to understand the nature of complex challenges posed by migration, climate change, epidemics, and resource depletion in an increasingly urban world. With this overture, he opened the conversation to the three speakers.
Keynote Speech by Dr. Nazia Hussain (Project Assistant Professor, Institute for Future Initiatives, The University of Tokyo)
In her presentation titled, ‘Past, Present, and Future through the Lens of Cities’, Dr. Nazia Hussain pointed out that multiple interconnected stresses of climate change, movement of people within and across borders, and water depletion were coming together in a world where more people are living in cities. Cities are thus key reference points to study social, political, and economic processes.
It is not easy to make sense of urban processes, however. Some scholars perceive cities as geographic containers representing concentration of economic activities, clustering of industry and employment, large-scale infrastructure, and diffusion of cultural and technological learning. Negative effects may manifest in congestion, inequality, social conflicts, and rise in crime etc. Other scholars point out that there is nothing natural about cities. Neoliberal processes organize social and geographical spaces that privilege few and exclude others. Moreover, the overpopulation argument distracts from the real concern of inequality through maldistribution of resources. Then there are other strands of literature that bring to attention that societies experience inequality not only based on class and income, but also along ethnicity, gender, religion, race, caste, sexual orientation, etc. These divides deepen when combined with poor economic conditions of individuals and social groups.
It is within this complexity in urban contexts that interactions among new stresses and pre-existing dynamics are shaping urban spaces, including responses from the top-down and bottom-up. What may be the social, political, and economic implications of these challenges (and responses) for local and global policymakers as well as ordinary people? Here as well, answers depend on one’s research methodology. Whichever ontology one adheres to, the task is to make sense of complex ground realities in cities. In this search for answers, local narratives including everyday stories of competition and struggle hold the key.
Tracing local narratives in Karachi, Pakistan and Metro Manila, Philippines, Dr. Hussain found that water inequalities are common in both cases despite their different contexts. Underprivileged populations remain at the losing side of the equation when it comes to water shortages on account of inequalities in access. It is imperative to open black boxes of dynamic local contexts.
Keynote Speech by Mr. Arif Hasan (Chairperson, Urban Resource Center, Advisor Research Cell, Department of Architecture and Planning, Dawood University, Karachi, Pakistan)
Dr. Hussain was followed by Mr. Arif Hasan, the keynote speaker of the event. In his presentation titled, ‘Past, Present, and Future of South Asia Through the Lens of Cities: Perspectives from Pakistan and India’, Mr. Hasan provided insights in the dynamic ground realities of Karachi, Pakistan.
The roots of Pakistan’s urbanization in general, and Karachi’s in particular, lie in the partition of British India in 1947. Many people migrated across both sides of the border (to India from Pakistan, and to Pakistan from India). According to the 1951 census, 48% of the urban population in Pakistan could be attributed to migrants from India. In the 1980s and 1990s, another wave of migrants, this time from Afghanistan, arrived in Pakistan and Karachi as refugees. At present, Karachi houses 1.7 million Afghans and over 650,000 Bengalis and Rohingya refugees. These figures are indicative of the trends of urbanization in Karachi and the country.
Karachi is the most populous city of Pakistan. It is home to 62% of Sindh’s urban population, 30% of Sindh’s entire population, and 22% of Pakistan’s urban population. With its significant contribution to GDP (15-20%) and total federal revenue (55%), it attracts investments and generates employment opportunities more than any other city in the province.
Housing figures are messy but provide a window in the city’s ground realities. While the annual housing demand is 350,000 units, the formal supply of housing is 150,000 units per year. This gap in housing is met through formal and informal ways. Low-income groups may settle on: government lands (although the risks of evictions, receding availability and increasing costs, location issues etc. remain), informal subdivisions of agricultural land (risks of security of tenure, speculation on lands, location issues etc. persist), and living in existing settlements and old city centers abandoned by the rich. Middle-income groups increasingly purchase housing from developers and may be able to secure bank loans. High-income groups increasingly live in gated settlements in city fringes.
These housing trends reveal increasing inequality. 71.32% live on less than 100 square yard plots while 24.27% live on 100 – 120 square yard plots. 62% of Karachiites live in informal sub-divisions on 23% of the city’s residential lands. Densities in these settlements are between 1,500 – 4,500 persons per ha and continue to increase. In the absence of pro-poor policies, it is difficult for low-income groups to access housing. Since 72% of the population is involved in the informal economy, it lacks means to secure bank loans. Self-help measures are leading to densification of informal settlements. On the other hand, 36% of Karachiites live in “planned” settlements on 77% of the city’s residential lands. Densities can be as low as 80 persons per ha and continue to decrease in new settlements.
In pursuit of world class city visions and because of market liberalization, gentrification, building of ‘investment-friendly infrastructure’, flyovers and signal-free roads is taking place. These policies are neither people-friendly nor take in account the ecological, social, and economic effects on the majority. Moreover, direct foreign investment has replaced urban planning with projects—as a result, housing has to be delivered by market. These developments are taking place in consonance with emergence of a land-hungry middle class, powerful developers and federal and provincial land-owning agencies hoarding 4,000 hectares of land within the city for speculation and commercial developments. Gated elite and middle-income settlements are being built on 32,000 hectares on the city outskirts causing ecological and cultural damage and the destruction of the rural economy. Under pressure from powerful developers the government of Sindh has enacted the ‘Sindh High Density Board Act’ and the ‘Sindh Development Board Act’, which give the boards powers to densify any plot or area without any urban design exercise or a larger city plan. Among other realities of Karachi include increasing congestion resulting from an increasing number of cars in the city, poor formal employment, youth bulge, water shortages and falling water tables, and stresses posed by climate change.
While Karachi’s issues are numerous, they are solvable. There is an urgent need for land reform to contain speculation and preserve environment and ecology and curtailed government support of land developers. Urban projects should not damage ecology of the region as well as consider the needs of tangible and intangible culture. In service of this goal, architects and planners could take an oath to not get involved in projects that are detrimental to the city’s people and ecology. Having taken such an oath in 1983, Mr. Hasan concluded with the hope that change was possible if everyone remained true to this ideal.
Comments by Prof. Chiharu Takenaka (Graduate School and College of Law and Politics, Rikkyo University)
Mr. Hasan’s presentation was followed by the comments of the third speaker, Prof. Chiharu Takenaka. Prof. Takenaka posed the central question—namely, what processes and players could serve the needs of not only people in Karachi but also in other cities of the world? Secondly, since urban spaces are complicated on account of interlinked issues and challenges, as well as the connections among cities, nations, and the world, what questions and alternatives could scholars propose to local and global policymakers?
Viewed within this problematique, the agenda put forward by Dr. Hussain highlighted the struggles and contestations of multiple players including ordinary people. It was important to question who narrated these struggles and how these stories were told. In Mr. Hasan’s narrative of Karachi’s challenges, what stood out was that development was not pro-poor but served the interests of the elite and middle classes. Keeping in view the dominant power and reach of neoliberal processes, how could environmental and social considerations be prioritized over the dictates of the market? How could the interests of the majority be served, and respect of intangible cultures be observed? Which players and processes in the face of these massive and complex challenges serve as agents of positive change?
Prof. Takenaka noted her work on climate change and COVID-19 in which she focused on how local society could work with the state and international society to address the challenges of global issues of climate change and the pandemic. What seemed apparent was that people could not solely rely on management priorities of local governments or interests of neoliberal economies. While the answer seems to lie in the coming together of civil society, the challenge is bringing people together as well as amalgamate solutions presented by social and natural scientists with the decision-making of nation-states. Moreover, it is not easy to overcome divisions within societies and among nations.
Cities with their immense potential to serve as arenas of change invite academics, grassroots activists, and governments to work together. In the absence of coordinated responses, however, cities could also become places of instability as well as sites of deep inequality.
The presentations were followed by questions and answers. Moderated by Prof. Fujiwara, this resulted in a rich exchange of ideas among panelists and between participants and the panel.
