National and Urban Contexts of The Four Metropolises: December 2013

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/300094616
National and Urban Contexts of the Four Metropolises
Chapter · December 2013

DOI: 10.1142/9781908979605_0002
CITATIONS READS
3 1,115
7 authors, including:
Théry Hervé Véronique D.N. Dupont

French National Centre for Scientific Research Institute of Research for Development
442 PUBLICATIONS 586 CITATIONS 160 PUBLICATIONS 1,235 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Frédéric Landy Marie-Caroline Saglio-Yatzimirsky

Université Paris Nanterre, France Institut National des Langues et Civilisations Orientales
179 PUBLICATIONS 340 CITATIONS 52 PUBLICATIONS 78 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Subaltern Urbanisation in India View project
Revista Confins View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Frédéric Landy on 13 July 2016.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

b1592 Megacity Slums: Social Exclusion, Space and Urban Policies in Brazil and India 4th Reading
Chapter 2
National and Urban Contexts
of the Four Metropolises
Hervé Théry, Louise Bruno,Véronique Dupont, Frédéric Landy,
Ailton Luchiari, Marie-Caroline Saglio-Yatzimirsky
and Marie-Hélène Zérah
While macro-perspectives often tend to overlook local specificities

and may risk leading to inefficient measurements and erroneous
analyses, the micro-perspectives that constitute most of this book
shall not ignore the need to put local situations and processes in their
context at higher levels. Each level of analysis has its own causalities
and the local is not a scaled-down model — a smaller copy of meso-
and macro-levels: different factors and differing cause–effect rela-
tionships exist at each scale. Hence, this chapter highlights the urban
agglomerations and national contexts within which the cities, neigh-
bourhoods and their inhabitants shall be examined later. As it is
mostly factual, this chapter demonstrates the difficulties faced in
making comparisons, not of processes, but of locations and statisti-
cal data in two differing countries, particular since Indian databases
have a more limited content than their Brazilian counterparts, nota-
bly at the local level (Belle, 2009).
51
b1592_Ch-02.indd 51 7/18/2013 12:27:14 PM

4th Reading b1592 Megacity Slums: Social Exclusion, Space and Urban Policies in Brazil and India
52 H.Théry et al.
2.1. India and Brazil, contrasting urban situations

2.1.1. High urbanization level in one country, a large number
of metropolises in both
The development of Delhi and Mumbai bears witness to a major
tendency in the urbanization process in India: an increasing concen-
tration of the urban population in metropolises of a million or more
inhabitants. In 1951, in the aftermath of Independence, there were
only five cities or urban agglomerations with one million or more
inhabitants, accounting for 19% of the total urban population of the
country; in 2011 there were 53, accounting for 43% of the total
urban population (as per census data — see Box 2.1 for definitions).
Yet, the domination of the Indian urban scene by the biggest cities
takes place within the context of a country which is still predomi-
nantly rural and is likely to remain so in the medium term, as
reflected in the relatively moderate rate of urban growth1: in 1951
only 17% of the population lived in urban areas, rising to 31%
in 2011.
For several decades, the urban system was dominated by four
major cities, forming the vertices of a rhombus: Bombay–Mumbai
(urban area of 18.4 million inhabitants in 2011), Delhi (16.3 million
within its administrative boundaries), Calcutta–Kolkata (14.1 mil-
lion) and, far behind, Madras–Chennai (8.7 million). However, the
remarkable development of Bangalore (8.5 million inhabitants in
2011) and Hyderabad (7.5 million) has compounded the earlier
urban structure, and the southern peninsula is now characterized by
competing dynamic megacities (Figure 2.1). Thus, there is an absence
of any urban primacy across the country in the Indian urban
system.
1
Below 2% per year on an average from 1901 to 1931; between 2.5% and 4% on
an average from 1931 to 2001, and 2.8% per year during the last intercensal dec-
ade of 2001–2011 (as per census data — see Box 2.1 for definitions).
b1592_Ch-02.indd 52 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

National and Urban Contexts of the Four Metropolises 53
Box 2.1. Definition: urban place and urban agglomeration

in India.
The definition of an “urban place” or town that has been applied
since the 1961 Census of India is as follows:
(a) All places which answer to certain administrative criteria, such as

the presence of a municipality, a corporation, a cantonment
board, a notified town area committee, etc. These are called
“statutory towns”.
(b) All other places that meet the following three criteria simultane-
ously: (i) a minimum population of 5,000 inhabitants; (ii) at least
75% of the male working population engaged in non-agricultural
pursuits; (iii) a population density of at least 400 persons per
square kilometer. These are called “census towns”.
In addition, the concept of “urban agglomeration” was introduced

at the time of the 1971 census and remained unchanged in the 1981
and 1991 censuses: “An urban agglomeration is a continuous urban
spread constituting a town and its adjoining urban outgrowths, or
two or more physically contiguous towns together and any adjoining
urban outgrowths of such towns.” For the 2001 census, two other
conditions were added: a) “the core town or at least one of the con-
stituent towns of an urban agglomeration should necessary be a statu-
tory town” and b) “the total population of all constituents (i.e. towns
and outgrowths) of an urban agglomeration should not be less than
20,000 (as per 1991 census).”
A place with over 100,000 inhabitants is called a city rather than
a town.
Source: Government of India. Ministry of Home Affairs. Ofﬁce of the Registrar

General & Census Commissioner, India., http://censusindia.gov.in/Metadata/
Metada.htm#2bFig
b1592_Ch-02.indd 53 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

54 H.Théry et al.
Number of inhabitants
(2011)
Srinagar
8 n n n n 5
CHINA ,28 i) illio illio illio illio ,36 a)
Amritsar , 4 14 mba 7 m 5 m 3 m 5 m ,001 (Kot
Ludhiana Chandigarh 18 (Mu 8, 1, 1
PA K I S TA N Meerut
Faridabad
Ghaziabad
Delhi NEPAL
Jaipur Agra BHUTAN
Lucknow
Jodhpur Gwalior Kanpur Patna

Kota Allahabad Varanasi B ANGLADESH
Ahmadabad Bhopal Dhanbad Asansol
Indore Jabalpur Ranchi
Jamshedpur
Rajkot Vadodara
Nagpur Raipur
Surat Kolkata MYANMAR
Nashik Durg-
Vasai Virar Bhilainagar
City Aurangabad
Pune
Mumbai Visakhapatnam Gulf
Hyderabad Vijayawada of Bengal
Bangalore
Arabian Sea
Chennai
Kannur
Kozhikode Coimbatore
Malappuram Tiruchirappalli
Thrissur
Kochi Madurai
Kollam
Thiruvananthapuram
SRI LANKA
0 150 300 mi
Source : Census of India, 2011 - Mapping with Philcarto : J. Robert, Université Paris Ouest 2013
Figure 2.1. Urbanization in India: million-plus urban agglomerations in India (2011).
Brazil faced an accelerated urbanization process during the 20th

century, which became more marked from the end of the 1920s,
with the start of the expansion of a national industrial sector. At the
beginning of the 20th century, 9.4% of Brazil’s population was liv-
ing in cities; by 1950, the proportion had already risen to 36%.
Today, the country is considerably urbanized with an urbanization
b1592_Ch-02.indd 54 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

rate of more than 80%, accounting for some 150 million people out
of the country’s 190 million. Unlike in India, a rather homogenous
territory, the overall demographic distribution of the country shows
a very clear north–south dichotomy: most of the population is con-
centrated in the southern part of the country, mainly around the
Atlantic Coast where the metropolitan cities of São Paulo and Rio de
Janeiro were established.
The accelerated industrialization process, conjugated with an
agrarian structure marked by a very strong level of land concentra-
tion and a swift mechanization rate, strengthened the process of drift
away from the land. Furthermore, high migratory flows from the
country’s northeastern region (caused mostly by cyclic periods of
drought) aggravated the substantial rural exodus towards the big
metropolises of the south. Such internal migrations played a major
role in the country’s urban configuration, so much so that a quarter
of the Brazilians counted in 1980 did not live in their place of origin.
Box 2.2 outlines what is meant by “Urban”.
As a result, the country’s urban population quickly exceeded the
rural population, the turning point being in the 1960s. The rural
population gradually started showing a downward trend, even in
Box 2.2. Definition: “urban” in Brazil.

The legal definition of what is urban is the one adopted by the
Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE), the official
Federal Government body responsible for population censuses.
According to this criterion, any urban community that is the head-
quarters of a municipality is considered a city, regardless of its popu-
lation size, and the urbanized sections of its neighbouring rural
districts are considered extensions of these cities. However, many
critics point to the distortions in the official urbanization rate gener-
ated according to this classification, such as the case of small villages
classified as cities, with their population being described as urban,
which makes the statistics on Brazil’s urbanization rate somewhat
inflated.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 55 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

56 H.Théry et al.
absolute terms. In four of the five major regions, the predominance

of the urban population is now very clear. In fact, even in the north,
the number of urban residents outweighs the number of rural resi-
dents. But these trend curves crossed each other in different regions
at different times: while this dates back to 1950 in the southeast, in
the south and midwest it took place only in the 1960s. In the north-
east it dates back to the 1980s, and in the north only to the 1990s,
turning the Amazon into what Bertha Becker has called an “urban-
ized forest”. Most Brazilian cities are concentrated on or near the
coast, particularly in the southeast and south, while being still fairly
small and scattered through the midwest, northeast and the north-
eastern hinterland. This distribution reflects the inequality of popu-
lation densities and economic weights, and the quasi-absence of
urban networks outside the south-southeast.
These features still appear on the map of Brazil’s main cities as
prepared on the basis of the 2010 Brazilian Census (Figure 2.2). The
most visible fact is the weight of São Paulo: no other city can com-
pete with the country’s true capital. Rio clearly lags behind and,
although it still has some of the assets it inherited from its distant
past as a federal capital (a status it lost in 1960 in favour of Brasília),
its area of influence has shrunk considerably since then. Manaus and
Belém share the Amazon, while in the northeast, the city of
Fortaleza’s area of influence has shrunk mainly to the state of Ceará,
of which it is the capital, and Salvador is now facing competition
from Recife. Further, Brasília is struggling to find its own space
between Belo Horizonte and Goiânia.
2.1.2. The wealth of the four cities

The agglomeration of Delhi and its hinterland display an indisputa-
ble economic vitality, which is also reflected in its demographic
dynamics (Figure 2.3 and below). The per capita income of the
National Capital Territory of Delhi (NCTD) was 2.5 times higher than
the national average in 2009–20102 and, conversely, the population
2
Source: Central Statistical Organization, Government of India, New Delhi — as
quoted in the Delhi Statistical Hand Book 2011, Directorate of Economic and
b1592_Ch-02.indd 56 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

Number of inhabitants
11 125 243 Sao Paulo
6 323 037 Rio de Janeiro

2 476 249 BrasÌlia
50 000
©H.Théry 2011
Source: IBGE 2010 N 0 500 km
Made with Philcarto
http://philgeo.club.fr
Figure 2.2. Urbanization in Brazil: cities with more than 50,000 inhabitants in 2010.
ratio below the poverty line was much lower than in the country as
a whole (14.7% against 27.5% in 2004–2005)3.
Assessed in terms of its contribution to the net domestic product,
the weight of the NCTD4 in the national economy is, however,
Statistics, Government of NCTD (www.delhi.gov.in/wps/wcm/connect/doit_des/

DES/Our+Services/Statistical+Hand+Book/).
3
Source: Planning Commission, based on data on consumer expenditure from the
National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO, 61st Round Survey, July 2004–June
2005). More recent estimates from other sources do not seem so reliable.
4
There are no statistics of domestic product available at the level of the urban
agglomerations. In the case of Delhi however, the population of the urban
b1592_Ch-02.indd 57 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

58 H.Théry et al.
0 10 km
DELHI
Kundli
URBAN EXPANSION
UTTAR
PRADESH 1950 - 2008
NATIONAL
CAPITAL TERRITORY
OF DELHI Loni
Bahadurgarh
Delhi
Ghaziabad
New
Delhi
Cantonment
Noida
URBANIZED ZONES
Ya
m
Before 1950
un
a
From 1950 to 1969/75
riv
er
HARYANA Gurgaon From 1969/75 to 1997
Faridabad- From 1997 to 2008

Ballabgarh
State Boundaries
Boundaries of Delhi Metropolitan Area
Main Roads
Figure 2.3. Delhi’s urban expansion, 1950–2008.
Figure 2.3. Legend

The NCTD comprises of:
• The urban agglomeration of Delhi — i.e. the urban area circum-
scribed within the boundaries of the three statutory towns corre-
sponding to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, the New Delhi
Municipal Council and the Cantonment Board, together with
contiguous census towns and extensions. Its limits are redefined at
each census in order to take into account the most recent urban
expansions, though within the administrative boundaries of the
NCTD.
• Other towns that are not part of the urban agglomeration. Their
number varies from one census to another, due to, on the one
hand, the incorporation of some of them in the urban agglomera-
tion and, on the other hand, the upgrading of some villages into
towns.
• Villages in the rural hinterland.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 58 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

relatively low: around 3.5% of the net domestic product (NDP) from
2004–2005 to 2010–20115. This is due to the country size and the
development of a sophisticated urban system and very dynamic indus-
trial areas in neighbouring states outside the official boundaries of the
NCTD. Thus, Delhi is behind Mumbai in terms of industrial power.
Nonetheless, Delhi has long been a premium market for India’s
northwest region. It is endowed with multiple economic functions,
standing out not only in terms of trade and commerce but also bank-
ing, finance, insurance, hotels and tourism, as well as manufacturing
and information technology. It has greatly surpassed its original func-
tion, i.e. public administration, related to its status as the national
capital. As per the 2004 round survey of the National Sample Survey
Organisation (NSSO), the distribution of the NCTD’s employed
workforce was as follows (for the most significant industries):
• 31% in the secondary sector

• 28% in trade, hotels and restaurants
• 9% in transport and communication
• 9% in finance and business activities
• 22% in public administration, health, education, etc.
Within the organized sector, which, however, accounts for only

15% of the total employment in 2006, the public sector (central and
state governments, quasi-government and local bodies) remains the
largest employer (72% of the concerned workforce in 2008)6.
agglomeration accounted for 93% of the population of the NCTD in 2001 and
97% in 2011.
5
Source: Estimate of State Domestic Product. Directorate of Economic and
Statistics, Government of NCTD.
6
This data pertains to the NCTD. Sources: NSSO (62nd Round Survey, July 2005–
June 2006) and Directorate of Employment, Government of NCTD. These percent-
ages refer to the latest statistics quoted in the Economic Survey of Delhi, 2008–2009,
Planning Department, Government of NCTD. (This was the last Economic Survey
whose results were published on the department’s website, http://delhiplanning.nic.
in/ [last accessed 19 December 2011].) In Indian official publications, the ‘organized
sector’ corresponds to the entire public sector and non-agricultural establishments
employing ten or more persons in the private sector.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 59 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

60 H.Théry et al.
Though in terms of population, Mumbai was recently overtaken by

Delhi if the actual urban spread is considered (as shown below),
Mumbai remains the country’s economic capital: in 2011, the agglom-
eration accommodated only 1.5% of India’s total population and 5%
of its urban population, but, according to the Mumbai Metropolitan
Region Development Authority’s estimates7, around 2003 it generated
5% of the total gross domestic product (GDP), and contributed roughly
10% of factory employment in India, 25% of industrial output and
33% of income tax collections. It also accounted for 40% of India’s
foreign trade (Swaminathan and Goyal, 2006). Its two ports make it
the country’s primary harbour. Its industrial power (large-scale units as
well as informal factories), its cinema production, the stock exchange,
etc., are other notable traits of this “maximum city” (Mehta, 2004).
The economic performance of Delhi and Mumbai as expanding
metropolises is better assessed at the level of their city region. As per
the Indicus Analytic database used here, the Delhi city region
includes the NCTD and the peripheral towns of Faridabad, Gurgaon
and Noida (Figure 2.3), and the Mumbai city region includes the
districts of Mumbai, Mumbai Suburban and Thane (Figure 2.4). In
terms of absolute GDP, the Mumbai city region tops all city regions
in India, with Rs. 20 billion at current prices in 2006–2007, while
the Delhi city region accounts for Rs. 16.1 billion of the GDP.
Mumbai’s per-capita income is almost three times the national aver-
age8. In terms of annual GDP growth between 2001–2002 and
2006–2007, the two city regions, with a rate of 8.5% for Mumbai
and 8.4% for Delhi, stand above the national average of 8%.
In 2008, the Globalization and World Cities Study Group (GaWC)
ranked Mumbai as an “Alpha world city”, that is in the third category
of global cities9: it is the sixteenth global city, ranked before the three
7
www.mmrdamumbai.org/projects_muip.htm: These old estimates of the economic
strength dating back to about 2003 have not been updated to our knowledge.
8
According to Forbes, in 2008 Mumbai was the seventh city in the world in terms
of the number of billionaires (20) but the first in terms of their average wealth:
www.forbes.com/2008/04/30/billionaires-london-moscow-biz-billies-cz_
cv_0430billiecities.html.
9
www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/world2008t.html.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 60 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

Figure 2.4. The Mumbai metropolitan region (MMR).
other cities under study: São Paulo is in the fourth category (alpha_)
and is the twentieth global city, Delhi is in the fifth category (beta+)
(forty-ninth), and Rio in the seventh category (beta-) (eightieth).
b1592_Ch-02.indd 61 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

62 H.Théry et al.
Rio de Janeiro’s economic situation has been declining drastically

since the capital was transferred to Brasilia, accentuated by an eco-
nomic recession during the 1980s (see Table 2.1). The relocation of
industries, banks and leading companies’ headquarters to the coun-
try’s economic capital pulled down the city’s economy. In four dec-
ades, from 1970 to 2010, São Paulo’s population increased twice as
fast as Rio’s. In 1988, average household earnings per capita were
22% lower in Rio than in São Paulo. However, Rio de Janeiro still
continues to make a substantial contribution to the national econ-
omy. The state of Rio is the second biggest contributor to the GDP.
It produces almost 11% of the national total, with the city producing
almost 70% of the state’s GDP (IBGE, Regional Accounts, 2007).
São Paulo is the capital of Brazil’s richest state, with the
Federation’s second highest GDP per capita (after Brasilia’s Federal
District), and is one of South America’s major economic hubs. Its
Securities, Commodities and Futures Exchange ranks among the
largest in the world. But the state of São Paulo’s share in the national
GDP has declined, mainly due to a historical economic decentraliza-
tion trend. In 1990, the state accounted for 37.3% of Brazil’s gross
domestic product and in 2008 its share in total output of goods and
services in the country fell to 33.1% (see Table 2.2).
* * * * *
The São Paulo metropolitan region has a GDP corresponding to

57% of the total GDP of the state of São Paulo. The city is home to
63% of the headquarters of the international business groups estab-
lished in the country, eight of the ten largest brokerage firms and five
of the ten largest insurance companies. If the municipality were a
state of the Brazilian federation, it would be the second richest in the
country, surpassed only by the state of São Paulo itself. A survey
done by the consulting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) ranked
São Paulo as the second richest city in Latin America, behind Buenos
Aires. The study’s calculations, however, are based on the concept of
“purchasing power parity”, a factor that has gone against the city,
considering that it has more than 10 million inhabitants, which leads
to a relatively low GDP per capita, compared to Buenos Aires.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 62 7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM

Table 2.1. Wealth in Brazil’s main cities (municipal GDP). in 2000 Brazilian reais (millions). deflated by the GDP deflator.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 63
b1592
1920 % 1920 1959 % 1959 1980 % 1980 2007 % 2007
São Paulo 534 4.72 29 263 18.62 120 029 15.61 183 130 12.02
Rio de Janeiro 1384 12.23 20 827 13.26 73 704 9.59 79 868 5.24
Brasília — — — — 15 324 1.99 57 198 3.76
Belo Horizonte 28 0.25 2362 1.50 13 755 1.79 21 867 1.44
Curitiba 62 0.55 1173 0.75 10 691 1.39 21 627 1.42
Manaus 42 0.37 726 0.46 7093 0.92 19 689 1.29
Porto Alegre 143 1.27 3122 1.99 14 985 1.95 19 134 1.26
Brazil 11 315 100 157 118 100 768 678 100 1 523 060 100
Source: Ipeadata, http://www.ipeadata.gov.br
Table 2.2. Brazil’s GDP %.
2002 2003 2004 2005

São Paulo state 34.63 34.11 33.14 33.86

Megacity Slums: Social Exclusion, Space and Urban Policies in Brazil and India
São Paulo metropolitan

region 19.35 19.13 18.53 19.40
São Paulo municipality 12.79 12.44 11.69 12.26
Source: IBGE/SEADE (Foundation State System of Data Analysis), Elaboração:

Sempla/Dipro.
63
4th Reading
7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM
64 H.Théry et al.
2.2. The growth of the four metropolises

2.2.1. Delhi, a capital city expanding beyond its administrative
boundaries
Delhi is located inland, on the banks of the Yamuna river in the
Ganges basin. The city claims a long history of at least “3000 years”
(Narain, 1986). Its strategic location has been “the site for a succes-
sion of cities, each of which served as the capital or citadel or centre
of a vast domain” (Frykenberg, 1986, p. xxii). Going back a few
centuries, Delhi was the capital of a powerful Sultanate (from 1206
to 1526), then of the Mughal Empire until the end of its reign in
1858, following the repression of the Indian Mutiny by the British.
The city regained its imperial status in 1911 when the British trans-
ferred the capital of their empire in India from Calcutta to Delhi and,
in 1947, it became the capital of the independent Indian Union.
Delhi is now the seat of both the central government as well as the
Delhi state government. The NCTD is an administrative and politi-
cal entity with fixed boundaries that correspond to the ancient
Province of Delhi under British rule in India. In 1991, this federal
territory of 1,483 km2, largely urbanized, acquired the status of a
quasi-state, with a government and an elected legislative assembly;
however, the central government retains control over its land, police,
and law and order. In addition, three local authorities are also
responsible for urban services in their respective jurisdictions: the
Municipal Corporation of Delhi, with an elected municipal council,
which covers most of the territory’s urban and rural areas; the New
Delhi Municipal Council, which includes the area of the new capital
built by the British; and the Cantonment Board (for the area around
the airport) (Figure 2.3). This specific situation has resulted in con-
siderable complexity in terms of managing urban affairs, with
“issues of multiple authorities, overlapping jurisdictions, and dif-
fused accountability”10.
10
Sheila Dixit (Chief Minister, Delhi), in Government of NCT of Delhi (2006,
Foreword, p. viii).
b1592_Ch-02.indd 64 7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM

Delhi’s evolution during the 20th century was deeply marked by

the country’s turbulent history. Following the promotion of Delhi as
the capital of the British Indian Empire, the city’s population
expanded from 238,000 in 1911 to 696,000 in 1947, with an
increasing rate of growth. With the advent of independence in 1947,
Delhi had to face a massive population transfer following the parti-
tion of India and Pakistan. The city, whose population was about
900,000 in 1947, received 495,000 refugees from Western Pakistan,
while 329,000 Muslims left the capital11. The 1941–1951 intercensal
period witnessed the highest demographic growth in the history of
the capital. Its population rose from 700,000 to 1.4 million, at a
growth rate of 7.5% per annum, which has not been equalled since.
In the post-independence period, Delhi’s population has grown at a
remarkable rate (oscillating between 4% and 5% per year between
1951 and 2001) for an urban agglomeration of that size, reaching
12.8 million in 2001 (within the limits of the urban agglomeration
as defined by the census) (see Table 2.3). During this period, migra-
tion continued to contribute significantly to urban growth12.
However, the last census revealed a reversal in this trend: with 16.3
million in 2011, the population of the (official) urban agglomeration
grew at an average rate of 2.5% per year from 2001 to 2011; more
significantly, within the established limits of the entire NCTD, the
population growth rate was only 1.9% per year, indicating net out-
migration flows, due to residential shifts towards new housing com-
plexes in outlying districts, as well as massive slum demolitions (as
explained in later sections; see also Joshi, 2011).
Delhi’s population growth took place concurrently with its spa-
tial expansion in all directions, including to the east of the Yamuna
river (Figure 2.3). The urban agglomeration’s official area almost
11
Source: Ministry of Rehabilitation, Annual Report on Evacuation, Relief and
Rehabilitation of Refugees, 1954–1955 (quoted in Datta, 1986).
12
Migrants with less than ten years of residence accounted for 22% of the popula-
tion of the NCTD in 1971 and 16% in 2001. (Since the 1971 Census, migrants are
defined as persons having resided in a place outside the place of enumeration.)
b1592_Ch-02.indd 65 7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM

66
b1592_Ch-02.indd 66
Table 2.3. Population growth and density in Delhi from 1911 to 2011.
NCTD DUA
4th Reading
Population Population Density

growth rate growth rate Area (inhabitants
Year Population (% per year) Population (% per year) (km2) per hectare)
1901 405 819 214 115 n.a.
1911 413 851 0.20 237 944 1.06 43.25 55
1921 488 452 1.67 304 420 2.49 168.09 18
1931 636 246 2.68 447 442 3.93 169.44 26
1941 917 939 3.73 695 686 4.51 174.31 40
1951 1 744 072 6.63 1 437 134 7.52 201.36 71
H.Théry et al.
1961 2 658 612 4.31 2 359 408 5.08 326.55 72

1971 4 065 698 4.34 3 647 023 4.45 446.26 82
1981 6 220 406 4.34 5 729 283 4.62 540.78 106
1991 9 420 644 4.24 8 419 084 3.92 624.28 135
2001 13 850 507 3.93 12 877 470 4.34 924.68 (1) 140 (1)
2011 (P) 16 753 235 1.92 16 333 916 2.47 1113.65 147
Source: Census of India, Delhi.

(1) Area and density of NCTD-urban (comprising of the DUA and three census towns).
(P) Provisional figures.
b1592 Megacity Slums: Social Exclusion, Space and Urban Policies in Brazil and India
7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM
multiplied fourfold between 1951 and 2001, while its share in the
total surface area of the NCTD rose from 14% to 53%. Delhi’s geo-
graphical location, in the Gangetic plain, more specifically the
absence of any real physical barrier to urban progression (the Delhi
Ridge, a protected forest that is part of the Aravalli Range and cov-
ers 35 km from southwest to north, does not constitute an effective
obstacle), has favoured the multidirectional spread of the urbanized
area.
The pattern of growth in Delhi has clearly been centrifugal in
nature (Brush, 1986; Dupont and Mitra, 1995; Dupont, 2004). The
urban sprawl has extended beyond the limits of the NCTD, into the
neighbouring states of Uttar Pradesh and Haryana; it has followed
the main roads and railway lines, thereby connecting the built-up
area of the core city — Delhi — with that of fast-growing peripheral
towns — Gurgaon, Ghaziabad, Faridabad — and the new planned
city of Noida, founded in 1976 (Dupont, 2001) (Table 2.3). This
urban spread has led to the development of a multi-nodal urban
conurbation whose limits overlap state boundaries13. This urban
area encompassed about 23 million inhabitants in 2011, thereby
placing Delhi as India’s largest metropolis, ahead of the Greater
Mumbai Urban Agglomeration. Whereas the population growth
within the NCTD has slowed down considerably over the last dec-
ade, the population of the surrounding districts has continued to
increase rapidly, suggesting a redistribution of the population within
the metropolitan area14.
13
Being located in other states outside the NCTD, these contiguous ring towns are
not considered by the Census of India as being part of the Delhi Urban
Agglomeration (DUA), whose actual population size had therefore already been
underestimated by more than 2 million in 2001. For a detailed analysis of urban
development and population redistribution in the Delhi metropolitan area and its
implications for categorizing population, see Dupont (2004).
14
For instance, the Gurgaon district’s population growth rate was 73.9% during the
2001–2011 decade, and that of Gautam Buddha Nagar (which includes Noida) was
51.5%, as compared to 21.0% for the NCTD.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 67 7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM

68 H.Théry et al.
2.2.2. Mumbai, an economic capital in a narrow peninsula

Mumbai (formerly Bombay), unlike Delhi, was formerly a major
trading post established during the colonial period, whose develop-
ment has been promoted by its favourable location. It had been
gifted in 1661 by the Portuguese to the British — one of the legacies
of the gift being that some of the names Mumbaites bear (de Mello,
D’Souza, etc.) sound familiar to Brazilian ears. What is presently
called “the (island) city” was originally seven islands, which were
amalgamated in the 19th century. Until the 20th century, land was
continuously being reclaimed from the sea through polderization, in
an effort to expand the surface area of the fast-growing city, which
is somewhat squeezed onto the southern tip of a peninsula.
A good part of Mumbai’s initial economic growth was due to cot-
ton cultivation in the 19th century (grown in the hinterland, its
prices rose considerably due to the American Civil War) and the
opening of the Suez Canal. “From an entrepot to a manufacturing
city” (Patel and Masselos, 2003, p. 6), Mumbai soon started its own
spinning and weaving mills. In 1901, the population had risen to
928,000 inhabitants. Textiles were followed by other industries, all
of them attracting new waves of immigrants coming from all over
India. After the Second World War, the city was reshaped into a
commercial and service centre, and the textile crisis, culminating in
the longest textile strike in world history (1982–1983), illustrated
the dramatic change in the economic, social and political fabric of
the megacity (D’Monte, 2002). Immigration, added to the domina-
tion of Gujarati-speaking businessmen, made Marathi-speaking
workers support and obtain the bifurcation of the Bombay State in
1960, which gave birth to the Maharashtra State, with Bombay as
its capital. The spatial relocation of industries to the outskirts of the
metropolitan region, the informalization of the unorganized work-
force in spatially dispersed locations15, the tertiarization of the urban
economy, and the rise of regional nativist and, later, anti-Muslim
movements such as the Shiv Sena, were some of the major processes
15
Various data given in Patel and Masselos (2003) differ, but all emphasize the same
trend of informalization and insecurization of work.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 68 7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM

that reshaped the city. In 1995, when the Shiv Sena came to power
in Maharashtra State, Bombay, its capital, was renamed Mumbai,
“erasing a multi-ethnic and multilingual cosmopolitanism being nur-
tured in the city, that of a bourgeois class-based modernity, substi-
tuting it with a populist oriented ethnic and religious identity”
(Patel, 2003, p. 4). In the 2000s, the growth of the Maharashtra
Navnirman Sena (MMS), a scion of the Shiv Sena, made the condi-
tion of immigrants even more delicate.
Mumbai grew rapidly during the 20th century, mainly because of
its manufacturing industries attracting migrant labour, and also, like
Delhi, because of the Partition in 1947 and the subsequent inflow of
refugees. Between 1941 and 1951, the city of Bombay witnessed a
net increase of 950,000 migrants, mainly from Sindh and what is
now Pakistan, a figure that dropped to 600,000 in the next decade
(Zachariah, 1968). The urban agglomeration’s population increased
from 1.4 million in 1941 to 2.3 million in 1951, rose above 4 million
in the 1960s and hit 8 million by 1981. According to the 2011 cen-
sus, 12.5 million inhabitants lived in the area covered by the
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (i.e. the “city” and the
historical “suburbs”), and 18.4 million in the entire agglomeration.
The drawing power of the metropolis extended to the rural popula-
tions of Maharashtra and of the poor states of the Gangetic plains
(Uttar Pradesh and Bihar). However, the de-industrialization of
Mumbai since the 1980s and its gradual transformation into a finan-
cial and service centre has slowed down its migratory pull effect.
Between 1971 and 1981, migration accounted for 47% of the popu-
lation increase, but only 17% in the following intercensal period.
However, it accounted for 39% of the population growth in 1991–
2001, particularly because of the higher influx from Uttar Pradesh16
(Figure 2.5).
Mumbai’s spatial expansion has been limited by topographic con-
straints (Figure 2.4), which is not the case with Delhi. Indeed, this
island city, half built on filled-in marshy land and unable to expand,
16
A mark of immigration, the gender ratio remains very unbalanced, with 861
females per 1000 males in Greater Mumbai (2011).
b1592_Ch-02.indd 69 7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM

70 H.Théry et al.
Population Growth Rate

1991 - 2001
N
SGNP
Decennal Growth Rate

(1991-2001)
less than -50 %
-50 to -25 %
-25 to 0 %
0 to 25 %
25 to 50 %
50 to 100 %
More than 100 %
0 2,5 5 10 km
Source : Census of India
Figure 2.5. Population growth in greater Mumbai, 1991–2001.
except on the northern side, has few road linkages with the mainland
and drastically lacks space to grow; hence, it is a congested city.
Moreover, Mumbai is constrained by strong ecological factors, as it
is located on the seashore. Most of its seafront is occupied by man-
groves. A 104 km2 urban forest, the Sanjay Gandhi National Park
(SGNP), is located in its northern section. The seashore is classified
as a no-development zone as it is ecologically fragile terrain, and the
b1592_Ch-02.indd 70 7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM

SGNP is a protected area. In spite of many encroachments, these

characteristics impose restrictions on human settlement. The lack of
available physical space in the island city contributes to the degrada-
tion of its inhabitants’ quality of life, and is one of the factors that
generate conflicts between, on the one hand, the middle and upper
classes, and, on the other, the less privileged ones: the slum and
pavement dwellers.
Historically, the suburbs were connected to the city by two rail-
ways, the direction of which (to the north, Gujarat, and to the north-
east) turned into the double backbone of the urban sprawl. The
Central and the Western Railways’ tracks define the “ribbon-like
mental maps” of the “linear city” (Masselos, 2003, p. 38): stations
are key elements of the lived-in urban space, and wards are often
named “East” and “West” according to their position vis-à-vis the
railway. Mumbai is one of the few Indian cities enjoying an efficient
train network (58% of the public transportation), with more than 6
million commuters a day, mostly travelling in the morning to the
southern Mumbai central business district or the more central
(though historically in the “suburbs”) and recent Bandra Kurla
Complex17. A subway network is under construction. Delhi, which
was not a colonial port, was not endowed with a train line by the
British, and had to rely mostly on public bus transportation until the
first metro line was opened in 2002.
The creation of Navi Mumbai (New Bombay) on the other side of
the Thane Creek was an attempt to decongest the city and transplant
most of the urban growth towards the east and the continent. Soon,
a third axis was born towards the east, since railway and car bridges
were built over the creek. There is no doubt that this area of the
MMR is doomed to witness dramatic growth, with the development
of the Jawaharlal Nehru Port, the creation of Special Economic
Zones (SEZ), and the plan to move the airport. Nevertheless, the
northern extension, towards the industrial and economically dynamic
state of Gujarat, shall remain a key direction for urban sprawl.
17
Accidents due to packed coaches and slums installed along the tracks kill almost
ten people a day.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 71 7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM

72 H.Théry et al.
The civic body that governs the city of Mumbai is the Brihanmumbai
Municipal Corporation (BMC), also called the Municipal Corporation
of Greater Mumbai. The city is sub-divided into 24 administrative
wards that elect a Corporation Council of 227 councillors (Ruet and
Tawa Lama-Rewal, 2009). It is responsible for administering and
providing basic infrastructure (roads, schools, hospitals, water, elec-
tricity supply, sewage treatment and so forth) to the city and suburbs
of Mumbai. The corporation is headed by a civil servant, the munici-
pal commissioner, who wields executive powers, along with the
elected corporators and the mayor. Greater Mumbai consists of two
revenue districts: Mumbai City and Mumbai Suburban. Defence
lands, Mumbai Port Trust lands and the SGNP area are out of its
jurisdiction. In any case, a considerable portion of the Mumbai
agglomeration spreads far beyond the municipal boundaries, in the
Thane and Raigad districts. It includes the Thane, Kalyan-Dombivali
and Navi Mumbai municipal corporations. It covers an area of
4,355 km2 and the rest of the urban agglomeration outside Greater
Mumbai accounts for a third of the total population. The growth of
the suburbs is higher than the city’s, but it is less than the growth of
peripheral districts out of the BMC, where major investments take
place. Mumbai does not differ in this matter from other Indian
metropolises (Shaw, 1999; Chakravorty and Lall, 2007). Hence, a
key role is played by the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development
Authority (MMRDA) (a Maharashtra State government organiza-
tion established in 1975 and in charge of town planning, develop-
ment, transport and housing18).
2.2.3. The three urban regions of Rio de Janeiro

In Rio de Janeiro, the deep-seated institutional changes the city has
undergone since its foundation in 1565 have had a direct impact on
the urban structure. The gold of the Minas Gerais region, then the cof-
fee of the Paraiba do Sul river valley led to the circulation of a great
deal of wealth through the port, placing the city in the heart of colonial
18
See http://www.mcgm.gov.in/.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 72 7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM

political decisions and raising it to the status of the colony’s capital

in 1763. The development of the sugarcane industry in the 17th and
18th centuries contributed to the upgrading of its infrastructure,
sanitation and housing. The transfer of the region’s administration to
Rio by the Portuguese crown at the beginning of the 19th century
accelerated the urbanization process. Together with the acceleration
of gold and gem export activities, this transformation strengthened
the city’s drawing power and contributed to its population growth.
The arrival of the Portuguese royal family following the
Napoleonian invasion in 1808 transformed the small city into the
capital of the Portuguese Empire and brought about major changes
in the urban structure — by the opening of new streets, as well as the
expansion of the housing stock and the provision of public services.
Rio became the capital of independent Brazil in 1822. Its population
increased considerably during the 19th century, in particular with
the first influx of slaves at the end of the War of Paraguay in 1870
and the mass arrival of European immigrants to gradually replace
the slave labour. The main problems ensuing from this change were
felt earlier here than in the rest of the country, in particular in the
field of housing, as can be seen in the major crisis that struck the city
in the last decades of the 19th century. Due to the shortcomings of
the transportation network, the difficulty in defining public policies
for housing, and the instability of the labour market, the inhabitants
were forced to live in crowded conditions in the precarious and
dilapidated buildings of the city centre.
The city maintained its status until the inauguration of the new
capital, Brasilia, in 1960. But the transfer turned out to be disastrous
and aggravated the loss — which had already begun to occur a few
years earlier — not only of the city’s political influence at the
national scale, but also of its economic importance as compared to
São Paulo, henceforth the country’s major economic hub. Deprived
of its status as a Federal District, Rio de Janeiro was, however, raised
to the rank of state capital of Guanabara, a privilege it held on to for
15 years. In 1975, the young state of Guanabara finally merged with
the former state of Rio de Janeiro, and the city of Rio de Janeiro
finally became the capital of the state, bearing its name.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 73 7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM

74 H.Théry et al.
Rio de Janeiro has long been described for the uniqueness of the
morphological site on which it is located. Its location as the gateway
to Guanabara Bay, as well as the very shape of its succession of hills
and breaks, has undoubtedly always captivated visitors. The analysis
of the city’s specific geographical configuration is a key element for
understanding the expansion of this urban hub and also plays a role in
its current socio-spatial organization (Appendix 1.1 and Figure 2.6).
The site on which the city is located is made up of two distinct
morphological areas: a vast plain, known as baixada, and a plateau,
where the major part of the population lives. It is encircled by the
Atlantic Ocean, around two bays: Guanabara in the east and
Sepetiba to the west. Three hill complexes dominate the site, at an
altitude of around 1000 metres, with several hills, lagoons and
swampy areas constituting the main physical characters of the city-
scape. Whilst the hilly areas have long been occupied by human set-
tlements, most of the districts were established in the flat lands
between these hills and the coastal area. This very unique natural
framework has contributed to strengthening the division of the city
into three main and different socio-spatial zones, as described below.
(inhab.)
7,000,000
6,000,000
5,000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Figure 2.6. Growth of Rio de Janeiro.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 74 7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM

1. A “central region”, situated south of the Tijuca Massif. This

zone extends between the harbour region and the historic city
centre, along the edges of Guanabara Bay — including the well-
to-do districts of the Atlantic seafront, situated on the Zona Sul
(southern zone) — up to the current district of Barra da Tijuca,
situated in the Zona Oeste (western zone). Like Lefebvre, who
asserted that urban centrality concentrated “the wealth, the
power, the means of power, the information, the knowledge, the
leisure activities, the culture, etc., in brief: everything” (1974,
p. 238), we too consider that this area plays a central role in Rio
de Janeiro’s political, social and economic dynamics. For a long
time, not only was a major part of local economic growth con-
centrated in the historic city centre, so was a major share of the
population and a certain social mix. The various urban reforms
of the first half of the last century confirmed the vocation of the
historic city centre, combining a wide variety of services and
harbouring the seats of political power (as well as those of major
private companies) while contributing to the expulsion not only of
the deprived classes of urban dwellers, but also — gradually — the
affluent and middle classes. Districts located along the Atlantic
seafront always displayed very dynamic economic activities. The
expansion of the labour market in this area, at least until the
1960s, attracted a large number of urban poor who settled in the
favelas, initially around the Rodrigo de Freitas lagoon19. Besides
their dynamism, they also played an important symbolic role, as
for several years most of the popular demonstrations in the city
(both cultural and political) were concentrated here. The expan-
sion of the central zones took a different shape from the 1970s
onwards, with the construction of a new district, Barra da
Tijuca, located on the west coast of the city. Its accelerated
expansion — with its wide avenues, its commercial and residen-
tial towers built on the basis of the northern American model of
19
Due to the massive rehousing policies in the 1960s and 1970s, it is impossible to
believe today that this region was once one of the areas in the city that had the larg-
est number of favelados in Rio de Janeiro.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 75 7/18/2013 12:27:17 PM

76 H.Théry et al.
urbanism, as well as its tertiary economic activities and a grow-

ing number of favelas — represents a rupture in the spatial logic
of a city that initially developed around the southern zone and
the historical centre. The geographical distance between these
zones and Barra da Tijuca, as well as the efforts of the municipal
public authorities to preserve the economic attraction of the old
centre, seemed to design a new urban configuration which would
no longer have a single, large centre by the sea, but probably two
central poles responding to their own dynamisms.
2. The “northern zone” (Zona Norte). This area is located north of
the Tijuca Massif and culminates at an altitude of 1,012m
(Tijuca Peak, or Pico da Tijuca). It harbours not only a large part
of the middle classes that live in districts close to the historical
centre, but also the more humble sections of the population, who
live in peripheral areas. This region’s activities were strengthened
at the end of the 19th century thanks to the expansion of the
transportation network (railroads and public transportation).
Previously, and until the 1980s’ industrial crisis, this vast zone
was an important industrial area in the city. It has many areas
witnessing an economic decline and a large number of favelas.
3. The “western zone” (Zona Oeste). Formerly agricultural land,
activities in this region intensified in the mid-20th century, fol-
lowing the expansion of the railroads and the construction of the
endless Avenida Brazil during the 1940s. Situated far from the
central areas, this part of the city harbours a large industrial
estate, specially established within the sphere of influence of
the aforementioned avenue. Besides the widespread presence of
favelas, this zone also holds a large number of the city’s irregular
plots.
Migration has long been a significant factor in Rio de Janeiro’s

demographic growth. As a matter of fact, in 1980, migrants accounted
for more than 40% of the total population, mostly coming from the
northeastern regions of Brazil in search of work in the construction
industry. Most of them settled in the outskirts of the city, mainly in
the peripheral areas of Nilopolis, Nova Iguaçu, São Gonçalo and
Caxias. As the city’s economy declined in the 1980s, Rio’s urban
b1592_Ch-02.indd 76 7/18/2013 12:27:17 PM

Table 2.4. Evolution of urban population in Brazil and in

Rio de Janeiro.
Year Brazil Index Rio de Janeiro Index
1872 9 930 478 100 274 972 100

1890 14 333 915 144 552 651 201
1900 17 438 434 175 811 443 294
1920 30 635 605 308 1 157 873 421
1940 41 236 315 415 1 764 141 641
1950 51 944 397 523 2 377 451 864
1960 70 070 457 705 3 281 908 1 193
1970 93 139 037 938 4 251 918 1 546
1980 119 002 706 1 198 5 090 790 1 851
1991 146 825 475 1 478 5 480 778 1 993
2000 170 115 000 1 713 5 851 914 2 128
Source: IBGE.
growth started to diminish, due to the combination of lower rates

of immigration and the ageing of the population (cf. Table 2.4).
2.2.4. São Paulo, a North American city?

São Paulo, originally a small mission founded by the Jesuits in 1554,
has become the most populated city in the whole continent, after a
late but swift growth. The capital of the coffee boom — the boom
financed the first large industrial facilities — the city has become
the economic heart of the country, its first industrial, commercial
and services centre, and is gradually also becoming its cultural and
intellectual capital.
Its conquest of the most important production and control func-
tions was matched by an urban sprawl that devoured space. Covering
over 8,000 km2, the city has expanded at the rate of about 60 km2 per
year, despite the slowdown in the last decade. But although not
planned, its expansion did not occur randomly, and one can distin-
guish marked contrasts between the different parts of the city. The
centre of São Paulo is one of the most stunning urban landscapes in
b1592_Ch-02.indd 77 7/18/2013 12:27:17 PM

78 H.Théry et al.
Brazil, with its forest of towers, the interlacing of highways and

bridges built over tributaries of the Tietê river ... and traffic jams.
In fact, the general appearance and operation of the business cen-
tre show no great originality as compared to the business centres of
any North American city. Nor are the residential suburbs of the
upper classes — which may only be greener than others — composed
of more sumptuous villas or maintained by more servants. Here too,
the historic centre is losing ground to the southwest, which has
developed a second centre along Paulista Avenue, a third around the
new shopping centres of Faria Lima Avenue and a fourth on Berrini
Avenue, along the Rio Pinheiros.
However, the mechanisms of urban growth are more original and
explain the extent and nature of the poor suburbs, which are endless
in size and form the largest part of São Paulo. Most important is
land speculation, which explains the expansion of the city far beyond
its actual needs: more than 40% of the urban space of the municipio
(municipality) of São Paulo consists of vacant land, waiting for its
prices to rise — sensible speculation as land prices rise higher and
faster than inflation, and even faster than the stock market. This has
led to additional infrastructural costs and longer commuting times,
made worse by inadequate public transport.
As a result, a clear social zoning has emerged, resulting from the
contrasting behaviour of social groups with very different incomes. One
can roughly distinguish a central zone with most of the high-income
households (over 50% of the population has an income higher than ten
times the minimum wage), a first periphery (between five to ten times
the minimum wage) and the huge outskirts where three quarters of
families have less than five times the minimum wage and where between
a third and a half have less than three times the minimum wage.
In the first national census, conducted in 1872, São Paulo had
only 31,385 inhabitants. After the abolition of slavery (1888), slaves
were replaced by immigrants, a significant number of whom settled
in the capital itself, becoming employees (and clients) of the first
industries founded in the neighbourhoods of Brás and Mooca, with
investments from the profits obtained by the coffee growers. With
the industrial growth of the city in the 20th century, its urbanized
area increased at a rapid pace, with residential neighbourhoods
b1592_Ch-02.indd 78 7/18/2013 12:27:17 PM

Table 2.5. Population growth of São Paulo.
1980 1991 2000 2007
Brazil 119 002 706 146 825 475 169 799 170 183 888 841
Estado de São
Paulo 25 040 712 31 588 925 37 032 403 39 838 127
Região
Metropolitana de
São Paulo 12 588 725 15 444 941 17 878 703 20 033 812
Município de São
Paulo 8 493 226 9 646 185 10 434 252 11 091 442
Source: IBGE Censos Demográficos e Contagem da População 2007 Secretaria Municipal do

Planejamento–Sempla/Dipro Estimativas para Região Metropolitana e Município de São
Paulo, 2007.
gobbling up land that was formerly occupied by farms. The great

industrial boom came during the Second World War, due to the cri-
sis in coffee production and restrictions on international trade, and
the city has since grown at a very high rate (Table 2.5; Figure 2.7).
According to Martins (2011):
The first results of the 2010 census show 19,672,582 people living in the
metropolitan area formed by São Paulo and 38 other municipal authorities
across the region, when the same cluster recorded 1,568,045 inhabitants in
1940. Calculating the difference, a new city of more than 18 million inhabit-
ants was built in 70 years.
2.3. Contrasting population densities and land uses

2.3.1. High population densities
The average population density in the urban agglomeration of Delhi
(as per the census delimitation) was 147 persons per hectare (ha) in
2011. Until 1991, the highest population densities were registered in
the historical city core: 616 persons per ha on average (740 in 1961)
in the Walled City (inherited from the city of Shahjahanabad built in
the 17th century by the Mughal emperor of the same name). The old
city also had a high concentration of commercial and small-scale
b1592_Ch-02.indd 79 7/18/2013 12:27:17 PM

80 H.Théry et al.
Figure 2.7. Growth of São Paulo.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 80 7/18/2013 12:27:17 PM

industrial activities with a mixed land-use pattern typical of tradi-

tional Indian cities. On the other hand, New Delhi, the area planned
by the British in the 1910s and 1920s according to a garden city
model, and the Delhi Cantonment, which includes military land and
the international airport, have low densities (70 and 22 persons per
ha, respectively, in 1991, as compared to an average population
density of 135 persons per ha in the urban agglomeration). The clas-
sical model of population density gradients, characterized by high
densities in the urban core and a sharp decline towards the periph-
ery, and whose “original causes can be summed up in three words:
protection, prestige, and proximity” (Brush, 1962, p. 65), had
largely survived in Delhi until the 1991 census.
Notable changes in the distribution of population densities have
taken place over the 1991–2001 period. For the first time, the highest
residential densities in 2001 were not recorded in the old city core, but
in two northeastern tehsils (administrative divisions below the district
level): Shahdara (422 persons per ha) and Seemapuri (402 persons per
ha), which comprise working-class neighbourhoods, including infor-
mal settlements and resettlement colonies of evicted slum dwellers.
Further population de-concentration occurred during the 2001–2011
decade: New Delhi District and Central District (including Old Delhi
and its extensions) registered an absolute decrease in their population
(respectively, a 25% fall and a 10.5% fall), attributed mainly to the
large-scale slum demolitions (Joshi, 2011). In the case of Old Delhi,
this was also due to the continuation of the increasing commercializa-
tion of this area at the expense of its residential function.
* * * * *
Until the 1990s, Mumbai was the only city in India to have high-rise
buildings in large numbers, due to space constraints and a rather tolerant
Floor Space Index (FSI)20. But they were occupied by offices or inhabited
by the upper class, rather than sheltering the poor population who have
to live in crowded individual houses or more or less derelict three- or
four-storey buildings. Mumbai has only 2.9m2 of built-up area per
20
FSI: Maximum allowed ratio between the total floor area of a building and the
plot size.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 81 7/18/2013 12:27:17 PM

82 H.Théry et al.
inhabitant (Vaquier, 2010). Amid the 49 cities in the world surveyed by

Bertaud and Malpezzi (2003), it is the densest metropolis in terms of
built-in area. About 6% of Mumbai’s land houses over half of its popu-
lation. In 2011, the average population density in the Greater Mumbai
Municipal Corporation was 201 inhabitants per ha (higher than in
Delhi, though decreasing). But in the slums, the density may reach 1,200.
The original core area of the city, in the south of the peninsula,
retains the highest population density. Though the central business
district (Fort, Esplanade), which is endowed with the two terminal
stations of the railways, has relatively few inhabitants, wards just to
the north (Girgaon) have more than 1,500 inhabitants per hectare.
The north of the “city” (Dadar) is also densely populated, while the
southern “suburbs” (Bandra, Ghatkopar) are now in the same situ-
ation. Finally, a homogenization process due to both peripheral
growth and population loss in the central wards (Figure 2.5) led to
the present map of Greater Mumbai, which does not show a clear
centre/periphery pattern. The huge “empty spot” of the National
Park is all the more remarkable in the midst of the concrete jungle.
In vain, numerous committees recommended that the Backbay
scheme of dredging up earth from the sea bed in South Mumbai should
be abandoned, although it would expand the central business district
and satisfy mostly the upper-middle class which hoped for conveniently
located apartments. The reclamation work was completed in the
1970s, leading to an increase in real estate value and pressure on trans-
port and the housing market (Banerjee-Guha, 1995). Later, many simi-
lar opportunities of bringing some relief to lower-class housing
(conversion of mills, destruction of slums) were lost to the benefit of
real estate speculation and the political-mafia nexus (Sharma, 2007).
* * * * *
In Rio de Janeiro, population density has almost doubled in four

decades (Table 2.6). The municipal area — the boundaries of which
have not changed in the meantime — appears all the more congested
since many slopes are too steep (or protected) to be built upon.
* * * * *
b1592_Ch-02.indd 82 7/18/2013 12:27:17 PM

Table 2.6. Rio de Janeiro: population density and

area, 1960–2000.
Density
Year Population Area (ha) (inhab./ha.)
1960 3 307 163 27.01
1970 4 251 918 34.72
1980 5 090 790 122 456.07 41.57
1991 5 480 768 44.76
2000 5 857 904 47.84
Source: IBGE, PCFJ, IPP, 2005.
In São Paulo during the early stages of industrialization — until

the 1930s — industries tried to settle their employees in housing
estates near their plants. The influx of migrants soon rendered such
attention pointless, and sub-leases increased the density of occupa-
tion of old districts. Then, in the 1950s, immigrants began to use the
possession of a house as proof of their final domicile, and self-
construction (the construction of the house by its owner) on the
outskirts of the city became the main form of urban growth, account-
ing for 70–80% of construction. Produced with the help of family,
neighbours and craftsmen employed informally, the self-construction
process is slow and progressive — room by room, wall by wall —
well suited to the irregular incomes of the informal sector.
This process led to the development of “illegal” settlements,
termed as such because they do not meet the legal specifications
regarding minimum size, infrastructure and facilities, but which are
there in full view of everyone and are periodically certified by amnes-
ties. In the municipality of São Paulo alone, there are more than
3,000 such settlements, where two and a half million people live.
The level of facilities installed or available is very low — in the
most peripheral zone, only 28% of homes have running water and
just 7% are connected to the sewer system, as against 88% and 40%
across the city. But at least they are urban forms of settlement, more
stable and more satisfactory than those of the favelas that are now
emerging almost everywhere.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 83 7/18/2013 12:27:17 PM

84 H.Théry et al.
2.3.2. Land use: de-industrialization and urban renewal

At a city scale, Delhi appears highly fragmented, with abrupt changes
in urban morphology and a mosaic of highly differentiated sections.
Physical fractures introduce obvious demarcation lines between
urban sectors. The most important one is the Yamuna river with its
large bed of agricultural land. The river flows through the metropo-
lis from north to south, separating zones located to the east that are
mainly residential neighbourhoods of varied types of settlement, but
also include an industrial zone. The Delhi Ridge in the Aravalli Hills
forms another significant natural boundary with its natural forest,
crossing the capital from the southwest to the north. This forest was
partly declared “reserved” in 1914–1915, but less than 800 ha are
greenery (mostly thorny scrubs and weeds). Historical development
and town planning efforts by the colonial rulers, and later by the
independent government, have shaped the urban landscape in a deci-
sive way (see Chapters 4 and 5) and directly contributed to a specific
pattern of urban segmentation, even fragmentation.
The Indian capital city has developed as a poly-nuclear metropo-
lis, with several district-level business centres and commercial com-
plexes, in addition to Connaught Place, the Central Business District
(CBD) inherited from the British colonial period built at the junction
of New Delhi and the old city. Administrative functions remain
dominant in New Delhi. The southern sector (beyond New Delhi
and excluding the southeastern fringe) accommodates residential
areas, especially for higher-income groups, as well as several flour-
ishing commercial complexes and a major business district (Nehru
Place) and government offices. On the other hand, the main indus-
trial zones are located in the western and northwestern sectors,
including recently planned large industrial estates on the outskirts (in
Narela and Bhawana); nonetheless, there is also a large planned
industrial estate in the southeast (Okhla) and another notable indus-
trial zone in the northeast (Shadhara) (see Figure 2.8).
As a capital city, the country showcase, also aspiring to become
“a global metropolis and world-class city” (DDA, 2007, Introduction),
Delhi and its ring towns are also undergoing major transformations
in their urban landscape, including the multiplication of shopping
b1592_Ch-02.indd 84 7/18/2013 12:27:17 PM

Delhi : main economic areas and transportation networks
to Sonipat, Panipat, Chandigarh
Kundli
N
Narela
10 Km Bawana
UTTAR PRADESH
NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY
Loni to Meerut
OF DELHI
To Rohtak
Rohini
Bahadurgarh Shahdara Ghaziabad

To Moradabad
Old Delhi
Hi
nd
an
Ri to Lucknow, Kanpur
ve
Najafgarh r
Dwarka New Delhi
to Jhajjar Noida
South Delhi
to Greater Noida, Aligarh
Ya
m
un
a
Ri To Agra
ve
r
Gurgaon LEGEND
HARYANA
Delhi Ridge
Faridabad Built-up area

To Alwar, Jaipur Industrial area
Main business district
Main roads
Railways
Metro lines
Airport
To Agra
© V. Dupont IRD, B. Lefebvre www.ao-seine.com, 2011
Sources: Delhi Eicher City Map, Delhi Metro Rail Corp. State borders
Figure 2.8. Spatial organization of Delhi metropolitan area: infrastructure and func-
tional specialization (2011).
malls and business centres, high-rise buildings, flyovers, new arterial

roads, the construction of a metro rail system and a high-capacity
bus system involving dedicated corridors. As in Mumbai, these infra-
structure projects have resulted in large-scale slum evictions. In addi-
tion, the preparation for the Commonwealth Games, held in Delhi
in October 2010, provided a specific context for pushing infrastruc-
ture and urban renewal projects and for “cleaning” and “beautify-
ing” the city, especially — once again — through slum clearance
(Dupont, 2011). However, until now, the historical core — Old
Delhi — has not been affected by gentrification.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 85 7/18/2013 12:27:17 PM

86 H.Théry et al.
Until two decades ago, Mumbai was marked by a business district

located at the southern tip of the peninsula: the offices in the Fort and
Nariman Point turned into posh residential neighbourhoods on the
western shore, while the eastern side is mostly occupied by the port
and industrial activities (Figure 2.4). Five kilometres to the north are
the popular, old merchant areas of Girgaon or Byculla (a Muslim-
dominated area). Parel and Worli lost their textile industries, and
often the chawls (social housing of workers) are now next to com-
mercial malls and upper-middle-class accommodation. The legacy of
the 1992–1993 communal riots has led to higher religious segmenta-
tion than before, with Muslims living more and more apart.
Dharavi, “the second biggest slum in Asia”, is close to the Mithi
river that marks the boundary between the “city” and the so-called
“suburbs”. Today, however, the nearby Bandra Kurla Complex is a
new business pole that makes the commuters’ daily routes more com-
plex. In 1980, 51% of Mumbai’s offices were in the southern CBD,
18% in the rest of the island, and 31% in the suburbs. In 1998, the
respective figures were 36, 18 and 46%21. Within the suburbs,
smaller business areas, an export processing zone (Andheri) and posh
residential neighbourhoods (Juhu) have emerged. The international
airport at Andheri is now at the very centre of Mumbai’s urbanized
area. Transfers of development rights (TDR) allowing developers to
benefit from higher FSIs in a northern area if they accommodate slum
dwellers on a given site, have intensified the city’s extension towards
the north. Even though the double spatial pattern of the agglomera-
tion remains grossly valid (south richer than north, and west than
east), two processes have somewhat dealt the cards again. These are:
(i) the gentrification of the south due to de-industrialization; and (ii)
the change in the spatial level of segregation. Until recently, it was on
a very small scale, slums often being found close to posh residences,
and hawkers working within the central business district. As in other
Indian metropolises, larger socially homogenous areas are being con-
structed by the civic authorities and developers. These twin processes
are summarized by the notion of “beautification” by urban planners
21
According to the Economic Census 1998 (http://202.54.119.40/docs/
Population%20and %20Employment%20profile%20of%20MMR.pdf).
b1592_Ch-02.indd 86 7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM

and the elite, while considered as an attack on the right to the city by
the advocates of the lower classes.
All in all, Mumbai’s cityscape has moved through three distinct
phases (Nijman, 2007):
1. The “colonial phase” was marked by the contrast between the

European town (Fort) and the northward native town.
2. The “national phase” witnessed a “relative dissipation of the
foreign presence from the urban landscape” (p. 240).
3. The “global phase” established three different CBDs: the local
CBD is in the former native town (Girgaon), the national CBD is
the former European town south of the port, and the global CBD
is along Marine Drive, centred on Nariman Point (an area
reclaimed from the Arabian Sea in the 1950s), on the western
shore, facing the posh area of Malabar Hill. New business dis-
tricts (Navi Mumbai) also emerged. Nijman states that this
“makes this city an even more complex city. The local–global
disjunction takes place amidst other existing and evolving divi-
sions based on religion (Hindu–Muslim), ethnicity (Marathi–
other), caste and class” (p. 256).
Since the 1990s, which marked the real start of economic liberali-
zation policies and opening up to the international market in India,
Delhi and Mumbai have experienced a restructuring of their urban
space in line with the requirements of globalizing cities. The trans-
formations were first more conspicuous in Mumbai, the gateway to
international corporate firms. The pressure on the slum dwellers
became stronger when the city began to endure major changes due
to its redeployment, from a great industrial centre into a “global
city” (Sassen, 1991) — that is, a concentration of the major financial
institutions, corporate headquarters, international conglomerates
and high-level service firms oriented towards the world market. As
underlined by Grant and Nijman (2002), since the 1990s, Mumbai
has been marked by an increasing corporate presence, as well as by
the emergence of multiple CBDs that are integrated into the wider
economy and a manifestation of its globalization. This whole pro-
cess, requiring infrastructure, advanced transportation systems and
b1592_Ch-02.indd 87 7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM

88 H.Théry et al.
communication networks, has restructured the urban space and

reinforced the socio-spatial exclusion of the poor. Thus, commercial
and real estate lobbies exert increasing pressure on the urban poor,
leading to a greater “internal differentiation” of the urban space
(Banerjee-Guha, 2002).
* * * * *
Rio de Janeiro is not built like an ordinary city. Established primarily on the
flat and marshy area bordering the bay, it was introduced between the steep
hills which enclose it on all sides, the way fingers are in a too tight glove.
Lévi-Strauss (1955, p. 96)
Rio is characterized by the omnipresence of nature. Urbanization

seems to espouse the site, even as it continues to impose itself on it.
The history of urban development is the formation of two opposing
but always complementary cities (Bruno, 1998): on one hand, the
casa grande, the city of “masters”, and on the other hand, mucam-
bos, oca and senzalas, today’s favelas and suburbs, the city of the
poor, often black and mixed races, descendants of slaves and
Amerindian populations. Nowadays, social divisions and its func-
tional urban space remain one of the most striking features of the
carioca city. Through the division of its space, the city reveals the
structure of its society, where rich and poor live side by side while
maintaining their roles as masters and servants.
The tropical forest and mountains form a natural barrier that per-
forms the function of a border. The easy access to coastal areas is
available only through a few passages. In the west, the passage is
through Guaratiba Road. The two mountains are crossed by the
Yellow Line expressway connecting the airport to the coastal districts
(Barra da Tijuca). The main north–south access is the Rebouças tun-
nel. Finally, the downtown and the southern districts are connected
by a tunnel, Santa Barbara or the coast road from the Orla. The bor-
der function played by the mountain ranges is highlighted at some
checkpoints, such as tolls or the Yellow Line tunnels (Rebouças, Santa
Barbara), which can be blocked by groups of drug traffickers in urban
b1592_Ch-02.indd 88 7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM

guerrilla operations (2005). In affluent areas, the terrain once again

forms a barrier between the formal city, lower down, and the dense
and tangled fabric of favelas perched on top of the hills, reproducing
the north–south dichotomy on another scale (Bruno, 2005).
Nature in Rio is not only a “natural set-up” that is used to sup-
port urban development. It is an urban element in its own right, with
which the city has had to compromise and which it has often had to
“dominate” (or destroy) in order to meet the needs of urban expan-
sion. The draining of wetlands, the destruction of hills, deforestation
and water pollution are as much founding acts of the city as are its
built features (houses, buildings, roads, viaducts and bridges), entan-
gled between the sea and the mountains (see Table 2.7).
* * * * *
The overall organization of the metropolitan region of São Paulo

shows a clear contrast between a centre and a periphery, whether in
terms of densities or land use or the population’s income levels. This
occurs all the more freely since there are no natural constraints (sea
or mountains) to hinder it, unlike in Rio or Mumbai: from this point
of view it is to Delhi that São Paulo is the closest.
Table 2.7. Rio de Janeiro’s land use (% of total area), 1996.
Urbanized area 46,30

Predominantly residential 32,05
Service and Commerce 2,33
Industrial 2,54
Institutional 8,05
Leisure 1,33
Natural areas 53,70
Lagoons 1,19
Agriculture 6,20
Green areas 19,05
Unoccupied 27,26
Source: Anuario Estatistico, PCRJ, 1998.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 89 7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM

90 H.Théry et al.
The most distant periphery still has unaltered natural areas, so

much so that some large felines still live free in its forests (the
spotted or black onça, similar to a jaguar). The centre, however,
has high densities, a large concentration of trade-related activities
and residential areas for the high- and medium-income groups.
Mixed use (retail trade, services, with some industries and ware-
houses) and genuine industrial uses are concentrated along the
railways. The western region has a large concentration of pre-
dominantly residential areas for the medium- and high-income
groups. Other uses associated with industries (manufacturing and
services) are located along the Pinheiros and Tiete rivers and
occupy large areas — or rather used to, as many of them are now
leaving the city for less cluttered areas in the inland regions of São
Paulo state. The southwest has large concentrations of residential
areas of medium- and high-standard quality, both horizontal and
vertical. Finally, the eastern region (Zona Leste, inhabited by
more than 4.5 million people) consists mainly of residential areas
of less than average quality, mainly houses and low-rise buildings,
with occasional clusters of medium- and high-standard high-rise
residential buildings.
2.4. Housing: the significant share of slums

2.4.1. Shortage of decent housing for all
Indian cities, especially the largest ones including Delhi and
Mumbai, are faced with an acute shortage of decent housing, which
has resulted in congestion, lack of comfort for urban households,
and the growth of poor and illegal settlements. According to the
2001 census22, only 41% of urban households lived in a house
whose structure was considered permanent (fully consolidated),
36% in a semi-permanent structure, and 23% in temporary and
precarious housing structures. In addition, 37% of urban house-
holds had only one room for living, with the proportion rising to
22
At the time of writing, the 2011 Census tables on houses and household amenities,
and on slums, were not available.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 90 7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM

39% in Delhi, and to 65% in Mumbai, for an average household

size of around five persons. While 88% of urban households had
electricity (93% in Delhi and 95% in Mumbai Urban Agglomeration
[MUA]), only half were equipped with tap water. There is even
more discrimination with regard to the availability of latrines
within the house: 26% of urban households had none. The situa-
tion is Delhi is slightly better (21% of households without latrines),
but it is much worse in Mumbai (in the entire urban agglomeration,
48% of households had no latrine, and 56% in the area of the
municipality).
The proportion of the urban population living in slums provides
a summary indicator of the shortage of proper housing in Indian cit-
ies. As per the 2001 census (see definition in Box 2.3), 43 million
people, representing 23% of the population of Indian cities over
50,000 inhabitants, lived in slums. The proportion is much higher
for the largest municipalities23: 19% of the population in Chennai
and Delhi, 33% in Kolkata, and 54% in Mumbai. Subsequently, the
Committee on Slum Statistics/Census (Government of India, 2010)
took into account all the 5,161 towns and cities and estimated their
slum population (in clusters of at least 60 households) at 75.3 mil-
lion, accounting for 26.3% of the total urban population. The pro-
jection for 2011 is 93 million. However, as per the more comprehensive
definition of UN-HABITAT (Box 2.3), India’s urban slum popula-
tion was estimated at 158.42 million by mid-2001, or 55% of the
total urban population.
To complement this outline of the housing situation, the presence
in India’s major cities of a large number of homeless has to be men-
tioned, although they are largely undercounted by the census. In
23
The census figures pertain to the municipal corporation’s jurisdiction of each city,
and not to their entire urban agglomeration. Data on slums from the 2011 Census
of India were published in spring 2013. The reader can visit the Census of India
website (http://censusindia.gov.in) for these figures (see in particular “Housing
Stock, Amenities and Assets in Slums”). We did not actualize the data, however,
because a debatable methodology clearly underestimated the slum population in
India (Ramanathan, 2013). Official figures for 2011 estimated that 17.4% of urban
Indian households lived in slums (41.3 % in Mumbai and 14.6% in Delhi).
b1592_Ch-02.indd 91 7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM

92 H.Théry et al.
Delhi, the houseless population was estimated at between 100,000

and 200,000 in the mid-1990s, or 1–2% of the total urban popula-
tion (Dupont, 2000). Their number has increased dramatically fol-
lowing large-scale slum demolitions, which also affected Mumbai
(see Chapters 4 and 7).
The contrast in living conditions with Brazilian cities cannot be over-
emphasized. In the metropolis of São Paulo (the case of Rio de Janeiro
is similar), 87% of dwellings have access to a sewerage system (63% in
urban India), 98% to the water supply network, 75% of the house-
holds have refrigerators and television, 25% a computer, 50% a car.
The situation is far different in Mumbai and Delhi, where the distribu-
tion of consumer goods is still at its beginnings. In India, only 63% of
the urban population enjoys sewerage and septic tank facilities, and
Mumbai treats only 30–40% of its sewage (McKinsey, 201024).
Box 2.3. Various definitions of “slums” in India.

UN-HABITAT operational deﬁnition of a slum
The operational definition of a slum recommended by a United
Nations Expert Group Meeting (Nairobi, 28–30 October 2002) for
international usage, defines a slum as an area that combines, to vari-
ous extents, the following physical and legal characteristics
(Un-Habitat, 2003):
— inadequate ac
access
cess to safe water
— inadequate access to sanitation and other infrastructure
— poor structural quality of housing
— overcrowding
— insecure residential status.
Slums as per the Census of India

For the first time in 2001, the Census of India collected data about
slum areas in cities/towns having a population of 50,000 inhabitants
(Continued)
24
No precise date for these data is mentioned in this report.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 92 7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM

Box 2.3. (Continued)

or more based on the 1991 census, and identified as follows, without
referring to the authorized or unauthorized status of occupation.
“For the purpose of Census of India, 2001, the slum areas broadly
constitute:
— All specified areas notified as ‘Slum’ by State/Local Governments

and Union Territories (UT) Administration under any Act.
— All areas recognized as ‘Slum’ by State/Local Governments and
UT Administrations which may not have been formally notified
as a ‘Slum’ under any Act.
— A compact area of at least 300 population or about 60–70 house-
holds of poorly built congested tenements, in unhygienic environ-
ments, usually with inadequate infrastructure and lacking in
proper sanitary and drinking water facilities.”
Slums and squatter settlements in Delhi and Mumbai

Although the term “slum” is used rather extensively in Indian official
documents, the press and academic writings, it is in fact necessary to
distinguish between the slums as defined by their dedicated 1956 act, and
the slums as recognized by the administrative authorities of each city.
The Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act of 1956 deems
as slums: old, dilapidated and overcrowded housing sectors where the
buildings “are in any respect unfit for human habitation”25. This defi-
nition may apply to houses inhabited by tenants or proprietors with
legal rights, as in the case of the old urban core of Delhi, which was
notified as a slum area, as illustrated in Figure 2.9.
In Delhi, a second category of slums includes precarious forms of
housing — self-made structures fabricated from salvaged materials,
i.e. flimsy, makeshift shelters, cramped shacks and huts — called
jhuggi-jhompris, which, when grouped together in certain areas,
(Continued)
25
Or that “are by reason of dilapidation, overcrowding, faulty arrangement and
design of such buildings, narrowness or faulty arrangement of streets, lack of
ventilation, light or sanitation facilities, or any combination of these factors, detri-
mental to safety, health or morals”. (Seghal, 1998, p. 5).
b1592_Ch-02.indd 93 7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM

94 H.Théry et al.
constitute bastis26 or jhuggi-jhompri clusters27. The illegal nature of

the occupation of the land is a common element in this second cate-
gory of housing: for the planners and the judiciary, this signifies
squatter settlements, i.e. land occupied and built upon without the
permission of the land-owning agency. Thus, the physical precarious-
ness of housing and the precariousness of the occupancy status are
combined in most of the jhuggi-jhompri clusters where the residents
have no legal tenure.
In Mumbai, by “slum” the authorities refer to dilapidated housing
unfit for living because of its physical and hygienic precariousness,
and further identify three categories of slums:
— The chawls: a type of social housing specially constructed for

workers at the beginning of the 20th century, consisting of one-
room housing units laid out in a row along a corridor in a two- to
four-storey building.
— The patra-chawls: a cheap type of authorized construction con-
sisting of single-storied corrugated-iron-sheet structures for resi-
dential purpose.
— The jhopad pattis or zopadpattis28: “Slums of unauthorized and
unsanitary huts put up by vagrants and homeless people on
vacant land belonging to private or government owners.”29 They
correspond to the jhuggi-jhompri clusters of Delhi, and are syn-
onymous with squatter settlements.
(Continued)
26
“As in most cities of India, bastis abound in Delhi and are found in almost all
parts of the city. A basti is identified as a cluster or conglomerate of katcha huts or
shacks of tin or wood, built on any conceivable open piece of land and almost
always in an unauthorized manner” (DDA, 1957, p. 223).
27
The term J.J. colony — for jhuggi-jhompri colony — which is also in use in Delhi,
designates in fact the resettlement colonies (see infra) of the residents of demolished
jhuggi-jhompri clusters.
28
Zopadpatti is the Marathi word for slum area and literally means “horizon of
huts”.
29
Bombay Municipal Corporation, A Brief Report on the Survey of Old Buildings in
Bombay City (1956–1957).
b1592_Ch-02.indd 94 7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM

These are the squatter settlements, or — strictly speaking — the

slums30, that will constitute the focus of our analysis in this chapter
and the following ones.
NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI: SLUM POPULATION - 2001
% of Slum Population
per ward 10 Km
100
80
40
20
10
0
© Bertrand Lefebvre - www.ao-seine.com, 2011

Source: Census of India, 2001
Figure 2.9. Proportion of slum population in the total population of Delhi per ward
(2001 census).
30
The Census of India, which for the first time in 2001 collected detailed data about
slum areas in cities/towns having a population of 50,000 or more (based on 1991
census), applied its own definition of slums, which broadly encompasses all the
categories described above, without, however, referring to the authorized or unau-
thorized status of occupation.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 95 7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM

96 H.Théry et al.
However, Rio de Janeiro faces a major housing problem. The

rapid increase of its population over the last few centuries and the
economic decline that began during the last decades of the 20th cen-
tury underscore the importance of this issue today. The hygiene-
related policies implemented by the government from the 19th to
mid-20th centuries, as well as the various urban reforms that fol-
lowed after the proclamation of the Republic in 1889, generated
major changes in the city’s urban structure without attempting to
resolve the housing problem. Successive public interventions, by
forcing a large part of the lower classes of urban dwellers to leave
the city centre, frequently urged them to settle in distant suburbs, or
else to climb the hills located around the city centre, which led to the
emergence of favelas in the city. The absence of an effective social
housing policy in Brazil, in particular in Rio de Janeiro during the
20th century, led many urban poor to opt for informal housing.
Harbouring a concentration of more than a million inhabitants
today, the favelas have turned into a major urban landmark for Rio
de Janeiro, often merged with its urban history. The last decades
have witnessed an increase in the share of favelas in Rio’s total urban
population, from 9.8% (1970) to 12.4% (1991) and 24.6% (2007).
Interestingly, the municipality of Rio holds a higher proportion of
favelas than its periphery: the municipalities of Caxias and Niteroi
contain the second and third highest number of favelas. All in all, the
social geography of Rio de Janeiro defines very contrasting spaces,
with strong symbolic connotations. The boundaries of the different
socio-economic areas are reflected in the partitions occurring due to
the configuration of the site and its relief, especially within the
framework of the morro vs asfalto (hill-tar) contrast between the
formal city and the favelas, or more recently in the form of the walls
enclosing the condominios fechados (gated communities).
Despite its wealth, São Paulo also has serious housing problems in
some parts of the city. According to Sampaio and Pereira (2003):
The metropolis of São Paulo has always had part of its population living in
poor housing conditions. Today, this instability reaches unimagined
b1592_Ch-02.indd 96 7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM

proportions, either in terms of lack of infrastructure services, or considering

the safety conditions of property, such as the risk of landslides, flood or fire
due to poor wiring, or the danger of contracting infectious diseases resulting
from the accumulation of waste and poor conditions of hygiene. There
remains also the danger of infection due to the close proximity of an accu-
mulation of people in a tiny space with little access to healthcare and, cur-
rently, the pollution and industrial waste contamination with radioactive
material.
2.4.2. Jhuggi-jhompris, jhopad patties and favelas

In Delhi, despite the implementation of housing policies and slum
clearance programmes (see Chapter 4), the population of the
jhuggi-jhompri clusters — or squatter settlements — (as identified
by the administration) has continued to grow over the years from
the 1950s to the 1990s, notwithstanding the notable exception of
the 1975–1977 “state of emergency” during which more than
150,000 families were forcibly removed from slums and squatter
settlements in the city’s centre and peri-centre, and sent to periph-
eral semi-developed resettlement colonies (Jain, 1990, p. 172–173).
In 1998, approximately 600,000 households were living in 1,100
jhuggi-jhompri clusters, whose size varied from a few housing units
to 12,000. On the whole, these squatter settlements housed some 3
million people at this date, or more than a quarter of Delhi’s total
population. The growth of the slum population was on average
faster than that of the total population of the Delhi agglomeration
(Table 2.8). As a result, the proportion of Delhi’s population living
in this type of settlement has also increased considerably: 4% in
b1592_Ch-02.indd 97 7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM

98
b1592_Ch-02.indd 98
4th Reading
Table 2.8. Evolution in the number and the population of jhuggi-jhompri clusters in Delhi from 1951 to 2011.
Jhuggi-jhompri (JJ) Delhi Urban

Population
clusters (1) Agglomeration (2)
of JJ clusters/
Number Number of Estimated population Decennial growth Population Decennial growth total urban
of JJ housing units (Number of households rate of the popu- in rate of the popu- population
Year clusters (or households) × 5) in thousands lation (%) thousands lation (%) (%)
1951 199 12 749 64 1437 106.6 4

1961 42 815 214 235 2359 64.2 9
H.Théry et al.
1971 62 594 313 46 3647 54.6 9

1973 1373 98 483 492
1977 20 000 100
1981 98 709 494 130 5729 57.1 9
1990 929 259 929 1300
1991 1552 214 8419 46.9 189
(Continued)
b1592 Megacity Slums: Social Exclusion, Space and Urban Policies in Brazil and India
7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM
b1592_Ch-02.indd 99
b1592
Table 2.8. (Continued)
Jhuggi-jhompri (JJ) Delhi Urban

Population
clusters (1) Agglomeration (2)
of JJ clusters
Number Number of Estimated population Decennial growth Population Decennial growth /total urban
of JJ housing units (Number of households rate of the popu- in rate of the popu- population
Year clusters (or households) x 5) in thousands lation (%) thousands lation (%) (%)
1994 1080 480 929 2405

1998 1100 600 000 3000 38 11 282 27
2001 728 429 662 2148 12 791 51.9 17
2011 869 420 000 2100 −2.2 16 334 21.0 13
Sources of data:
(1) Slum and Jhuggi-Jhompri Department & Food and Civil Supplies Department, Municipal Corporation of Delhi; Delhi Urban Shelter
Improvement Board (DUSIB), Government of NCTD.
For 1990 (January) and 1994 (March): based on direct surveys.
For 1991: estimations on the basis of the 1990 population and the growth rate from 1990 to 1994.
For 2001: figures quoted as the latest data from the “Slum Department, Municipal Corporation of Delhi”, in the City Development Plan of Delhi,
released in 2007 under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (IL & FS Ecosmart Limited, 2007). These figures, however, do
Megacity Slums: Social Exclusion, Space and Urban Policies in Brazil and India
not seem reliable, and do not match with the figures on the number of relocated families (for a detailed analysis, see Dupont [2008]).
2011: provisional estimates by the DUSIB.
(2) Census of India, Delhi.
Population in 1998: own estimation.
99
4th Reading
7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM
100 H.Théry et al.
UTTAR
Rohini
PRADESH
Ya na
Rohini
Rohini
mu
Model
Town
Yamuna
Vihar
Delhi
University
Civil
Lines
Punjabi Bagh
Shahdara
OLD
Karol Bagh DELHI
Rajouri Lakshmi
Garden Pusa Nagar
Institute Connaught
Place
NEW DELHI
Janakpuri
President India
Gate
Estate Trilokpuri
Mayur Vihar
NOIDA
Nizamuddin
Dhaula Safdarjang
Kuan Aerodrome Nehru Stadium
CANTONMENT
R.K.
Puram
Airport Nehru Place
Nehru
University
Okhla
Mehrauli
Saket
Tughlaqabad
Tigri
Squatter settlements
Resettlement colonies N
Delhi Ridge
Limits of Delhi 0 5 km
HARYANA
Tigri Study areas
Sources: Census of India 1991, District Census Handbook, Delhi, V. Dupont - LCA, Bondy - IRD
Directorate of Census Operation, Delhi.
Slum & Jhuggi Jhompri Department, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, 1990.
Sabir Ali, Slums within Slums: a study of resettlement colonies in Delhi,
New Delhi: Council for Social Development, 1990.
Digitized map: UMR ESPACE, Montpellier.
Figure 2.10. Squatter settlements and resettlement colonies in the Delhi urban agglom-
eration (1990).
b1592_Ch-02.indd 100 7/18/2013 12:27:18 PM

1951, 9% in 1961, 1971 and 1981, reaching 18% in 1991 and

27% in 1998.
Until the 1990s, squatter settlements were found throughout the
capital, insinuating themselves into all the interstices of the urban
fabric wherever there was vacant land and where surveillance by the
legal authorities was limited (Figure 2.10). Yet, although their inhab-
itants accounted for about a quarter of the urban population, they
occupied only less than 6% of the city land31, which demonstrates
(as in Mumbai) the extreme inequality in access to urban land.
Large-scale slum demolitions since the late 1990s have dramatically
altered this situation (see Chapter 4). According to provisional esti-
mates of the recently established Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement
Board (in force since July 2010), whose first task was to undertake a
comprehensive survey of the slums, the population living in squatter
settlements would be around 2.1 million in 2011, or 13% of the total
population of the urban agglomeration. As mentioned above, the
removal of slum clusters is considered by the census officers as the main
reason for the absolute decrease of population from 2001 to 2011 in
the New Delhi District and the Central District (Joshi, 2011, p. 49).
A specific feature of the squatter settlements in Delhi is the public
ownership of the land that they occupy — a situation resulting from
the monopoly of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) on land
acquisition since the 1960s (see Chapter 4). Thus, in 1994, 84% of
31
We found different estimates regarding the percentage of urban land occupied by the
jhuggi-jhompri clusters, but all of them underline the extreme inequity of land distri-
bution in the capital, at the expenses of the slum dwellers, in similar disproportions.
The Delhi Urban Environment and Infrastructure Improvement Project (DUEIIP)
report (2001) quotes the following figures for 1994: a population of more than 2 mil-
lion living in jhuggi-jhompri clusters that occupy 902.36 ha of land, thus representing
only 1.45% of the total area of the urban agglomeration of Delhi (62,428 ha as per
the 1991 census). According to Dewan Verma: “In Delhi […] jhuggis accommodate
20 to 30 lakh [1 lakh = 100,000] people and occupy about 4000 hectares (almost all
of it government land) out of approximately 70,000 hectares meant to be urbanized
for a population of 120 lakhs as per the provisions of the 1990 Master Plan” (2002,
p. 73). Kundu proposes another estimate for the year 2000: “The total land occupied
by the [three million people living in slums] would, however, come to less than 10 km2,
around 3% of the total residential area in urban Delhi” (2004, p. 267).
b1592_Ch-02.indd 101 7/18/2013 12:27:19 PM

102 H.Théry et al.
Table 2.9. Population growth of the Bombay Municipal Corporation and share
of the slum population.
Total popula- Total slum Share of slum

tion of Greater Year population population in
Year (popula- Mumbai (in (slum (in total popula-
tion census) thousands) census) thousands) tion (%)
1951 2967 1951 — —

1961 4152 1961 498 12
1971 5971 1968 1000 20
1976 3250 41
1981 8242 1981 4200 51
1991 9900 — — —
2001 11990 2001 6500 54
Sources: After Adhikari (2004) and Census of India.
squatter land was owned by the DDA, 15.7% by other public land-
owning agencies (such as the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, New
Delhi Municipal Committee, Railways, Public Works Department),
and only 0.6% by private owners (DUEIIP, 2001, Chapter 6, p. 10).
Although this distribution may have changed following the large-
scale slum demolitions, the land occupied by the remaining squatter
settlements is still essentially public land.
Mumbai has the largest slum population among Indian cities:
6.5 million slum dwellers in the Municipal Corporation as per the
2001 census, accounting for 54% of its total population. The slum
population’s share has increased unabatedly (Table 2.9), despite the
large-scale and violent demolitions of unauthorized settlements dur-
ing the Emergency period. It also continued to increase during
1991–2001, while it decreased in Delhi.
Although the slums, strictly speaking, house half of the population
of Greater Mumbai, they occupy only 8% of the land in the municipal
area (Das, 2003). Their location, initially in the central zones, close to
b1592_Ch-02.indd 102 7/18/2013 12:27:19 PM

Figure 2.11. Location of slums in Greater Mumbai (2006).

Source: MMRDA. Drawing: F. Moreau.
the transportation networks (railway tracks, airport) and places of

work, is progressively shifting to the peripheries, as a result of eviction
policies and despite the slum dwellers’ continued struggle to hold on
to their place in the core of the urban market (Figure 2.11). The first
major differentiation resides in the contrast between the island city —
i.e. up to Mahim Creek, which has “cleared” parts of its slums, with
b1592_Ch-02.indd 103 7/18/2013 12:27:19 PM

104 H.Théry et al.
GREATER MUMBAI: SLUM POPULATION - 2001
5 Km
% of Slum Population
per section
100
80
60
40
20
© Bertrand Lefebvre - www.ao-seine.com, 2011

Source: Census of India, 2001
Figure 2.12. Section-wise percentage of the slum population in Mumbai (2001).

Source: Census of India. http://www.censusindia.gov.in/maps/Town_maps/Mum_%25_slum%20pop
html
the notable exception of Dharavi in the extreme north — and the

suburbs where higher proportions of slum dwellers are found.
Another differentiation (Figure 2.12) pertains to the western areas as
opposed to the eastern areas, the former being more residential and
less occupied by slums than the latter, which are characterized by
industrial activities and harbour installations. The largest slum in
Mumbai is Dharavi — a city within the city that spreads along Mahim
Creek and houses about 800,000 residents32.
32
See Saglio-Yatzimirsky (2012) for a detailed analysis of the living and economic
conditions as well as the political organization in this slum.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 104 7/18/2013 12:27:19 PM

One main difference between Mumbai and Delhi lies in the land
ownership of the squatter settlements. In Mumbai, 48% of the ille-
gally occupied zones belong to private owners, 21% to the govern-
ment of Maharashtra, 18% to the Municipal Corporation, 7% to
the Central Government and 7% to the railways’ authorities.
Although these figures may differ according to the sources, they con-
firm the major share of private land (from 43% [Desai, 1995] to
49% [Afzulpukar, 1995]).
The variety of land-owning agencies and the precariousness of
tenure generate a number of intermediaries making profits at the
expense of the slum dwellers. In addition to the owner of the land,
there is also the owner of the house, then the one who has to pay the
slumlord to rent the house, and so forth. Furthermore, the variety of
land ownership is an explanatory factor of the intricacy of the imple-
mentation of slum policies in Mumbai — a complication that does
not arise in Delhi. Depending on the status of the land and the iden-
tity of the owner, the slums do not fall under the provisions of the
same policies. Lastly, the major land-owning agencies, such as the
Municipal Corporation, have an important part to play in slum
policies.
In Brazil, while cities are generally places of modernity, the accel-
erated urbanization process witnessed by the country for 50 years
has been accompanied by a strong social imbalance within its cities,
exacerbated by the growing number of excluded. Even more than
their Indian counterparts, Brazilian cities are fragmented, marked by
the frequent co-existence of neighbourhoods with impeccable infra-
structure, dedicated to the productive sectors of high technology or
luxury residences, and slums that can be found just a short distance
away from them, housing the poor and underemployed, without
sanitation and marked by serious environmental problems.
The absence or inadequacy of public investment in the areas of
drinking-water supply, sewage treatment or garbage collection has
resulted in serious public health problems in poor neighbourhoods,
where public services (health, education, security) are also deficient.
Nowhere is the situation as serious as in the favelas of Rio de
Janeiro, where the authorities have sometimes virtually given up any
b1592_Ch-02.indd 105 7/18/2013 12:27:19 PM

106 H.Théry et al.
Mountains
Rich neighbourhoods
Favela Guanabara bay
AP1 Planning area

Airport
Gericino
Mendanha
AP3
AP5
AP1
AP4
AP2
Pedra Branca Corcovado Sugarloaf
Tijuca
Jacarepagu·
Copacabana
0 4 km
Barra da Tijuca
©HT2012
Atlantic Ocean
Figure 2.13. Slums in Rio de Janeiro.

Source: Théry, 2011.
Table 2.10. Trends in the total population and the population living in favelas in
Rio de Janeiro (1960–2010).
Yearly growth Yearly Share of fave-

rate of total growth rate las in total
Total population of favela pop- population
Year population Favelas (%) ulation (%) (%)
1960 3 300 431 335 063 3.34 7.06 10.15

1970 4 251 918 565 135 2.57 5.37 13.29
1980 5 090 723 722 424 1.82 2.49 14.19
1991 5 480 768 962 793 0.67 2.65 17.57
2000 5 851 914 1 092 783 0.73 2.45 18.67
2010 6 323 000 1 393 314 0.80 2.75 22.03
Source: Census FIBGE (1999).
b1592_Ch-02.indd 106 7/18/2013 12:27:19 PM

effort to enter, leaving the areas’ management to drug traffickers.

But other Brazilian cities are also experiencing situations that offend
any sense of justice and raise challenges — and present threats — for
all the relevant political authorities.
In Rio de Janeiro, during the 1991–2000 intercensal period, the rate
of growth of so-called subnormal sectors was 2.4% per year, six times
that of the rest of the city, which grew only by 0.38% per year.
Indicating a population explosion in Rio’s favelas, according to the
IBGE, the number of residents in “subnormal” areas rose from 637,518
in 1980 to 1,092,476 in 2000 — an increase of 71.3% (Table 2.10).
While not a specific feature of Rio de Janeiro, issues of social dis-
parity, inequality of income distribution and urban segregation have
very clear-cut spatial boundaries. The southern zone and Barra da
Tijuca are the richest sections, with an income level 2.5 times higher
than that of the city as a whole. The northern zone comes second,
with about half the income of the former, while the inner suburbs
(those located closer to the centre) have revenues slightly higher than
in the outer suburbs and the western zone. However, both extremes
are represented in the southern zone, which has 40% of the city’s
Sao Paulo municipality
Figure 2.14. Slums in the metropolitan region of São Paulo.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 107 7/18/2013 12:27:20 PM

108 H.Théry et al.
% of area households in favelas (2008)

in favelas
10.81
7.12 25 127 SACOMA
3.05
20 449 VILA ANDRADE
0.27
0.01 6 840 PERUS
4 171 RAPOSO TAV.
2 136 JACANA
22 PINHEIROS
Source: Prefeitura Municipal de Sao Paulo/SEHAB-HABI-RESOLO,
Elaboration: SEMPLA-DIPRO
© Hervé THERY, 2008
Figure 2.15. Share of population living in favelas in São Paulo.
income while accounting for only 12% of the population, and the
western region, with 25% of the population and only 8% of total
income (FIBGE, 1999).
In São Paulo, from 1972 to 1991 the share of the population living
in favelas in the municipality has grown tenfold, and over 2 million
people live there today. Located along the lines of communication
b1592_Ch-02.indd 108 7/18/2013 12:27:20 PM

near the main industrial centres, they are devoid of any infrastruc-
ture. Their inhabitants are “the poorest of the poor”, unskilled
manual labourers and the poorest independent small businesses.
Beside them live the inhabitants of the cortiços — damaged and
overcrowded buildings in the centre — shared and re-shared among
too many poor families. Close to the centre, these “interstitial slums”
juxtapose the “two Brazils”, pushing social contrasts to the point of
caricatures. At most, a slowdown in the influx of immigrants
attracted by the demand for labour and the mirage of prosperity may
be noted, but São Paulo’s slums continue to show high rates of veg-
etative growth. In 2008, the population growth of slums was
4% — twice that of the city — according to Municipal Housing
data, but the footprint remained virtually the same, which indicates
an increase in population density in the slums.
2.5. Conclusion
The structure of this chapter, moving from the national to the local
scale, has clearly shown that the housing problem is a multidimen-
sional issue, that must be addressed at various decision-making lev-
els, otherwise policies will be poorly designed, poorly implemented,
or will not correspond to the needs of the poor. On the other hand,
considering a more “horizontal” approach, the amazing inner vari-
ety of land uses and housing within a metropolis should force policy
makers to disaggregate actions so as to be able to respond to the
idiosyncrasies of local settings: just consider the sheer disparity of
urban landscapes shown by satellite imagery in São Paulo (see
Appendix 2.1).
Solving the issue of slum housing is a formidable task. The work
to be done is extensive. As argued in the first chapter, living in a slum
does not always mean being socially excluded, and vice versa. A more
qualitative and social approach is needed for linking the housing
issue with social exclusion as well as urban policies. This should be
taken into consideration by urban planners as well as researchers —
as developed in the next chapters.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 109 7/18/2013 12:27:20 PM

110 H.Théry et al.
Appendix 2.1. Typologies of land use at local scale:

the case of São Paulo.
Ailton Luchiari
This typology of land use, based on satellite imagery, was pre-
pared in order to characterize the diversity of the urban landscape
at the scale of the city’s bairros (boroughs). Twelve types could be
defined:
Gated communities
This category is formed by gated communities consisting of houses
with one or two floors. The houses occupy plots of 400 to 500m2,
front setbacks from 6m to about 8m, roofing tiles and a built area
between 250m and 350m2. The sub-divisions have paved streets,
squares and some green areas. The roof tiles show in yellow in the
normal colour composition and light green in the composite false
colour, while cement tiles appear to be grey and dark grey, and tiles
appear to be bright white and light blue in the normal composition
and coloured in the false-colour composition.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 110 7/18/2013 12:27:20 PM

Summer houses
This category is represented by former farms, converted into summer
homes, which occupy large areas. The residential buildings are
250 m to 450 m2, in the midst of plots with a dense vegetation cover.
The streets are generally paved and the residences appear isolated
from each other, with many having pools. The residences are cov-
ered in ceramics, appearing in a yellowish colour in the colour com-
position and green in the false-colour composition.
Downtown middle-class residences

These are areas of horizontal middle-class residences in the old cen-
tral districts. Due to the proximity of the centre, the oldest part of
the city, the homes do not have front setbacks. The plots have areas
varying from 150 m to 300 m2, the buildings 150 m to 200 m2, with
roof tiles that have blackened over time. The streets are paved and
residential use is dominant, however some buildings occupy larger
areas for trade and public services. Vegetation is present in the
background plots and public squares, while it is sparse in the
streets. The roofs can be seen in yellowed and darkened colours in
the colour normal composition and dark green in the false-colour
composition.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 111 7/18/2013 12:27:36 PM

112 H.Théry et al.
New housing estates in occupied areas

This class is characterized by new neighbourhoods and housing
estates in areas already built and in fully occupied areas. The plots
sizes range from 175 m to 250 m2, with paved streets and little vege-
tation. The buildings mostly have roofing cement, darkened by
time. In the midst of these, some buildings are covered with pottery
tiles. The colours are dark in normal and false-colour compositions.
Small residential condominiums

Small residential condominiums are a new way of living. The resi-
dences are horizontal and do not exceed two floors, having a built
b1592_Ch-02.indd 112 7/18/2013 12:27:45 PM

area between 60 m to 80 m2, occupying almost the entire area of the

condominium. The division is by condominium types, with streets,
paved areas and facilities such as swimming pools, sports facilities
and common areas. The roofs are made of ceramic and show in yel-
low in the normal composition and light green in the false-colour
composition.
Popular housing estates

Popular housing estates for the lower-middle class occupy large
areas. These estates have paved streets and public facilities such as
schools and plazas since their implementation. The residences are
buildings that occupy areas of 130 m2 on average and are covered
with cement. The apartment complexes have a low rate of vegeta-
tion, especially along the roads. The coverings are seen in dark col-
ours both in the normal and false-colour composition.
Medium plots with roads

Plots in these areas are of an average size of 5 m by 25 m, with high
occupancy rates and paved roads. The homes are predominantly
covered in cement. Some vegetation is visible in the plots, but not on
public roads. In both normal and false colour, the roofs show in light
colours due to their recent construction.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 113 7/18/2013 12:28:10 PM

114 H.Théry et al.
Medium plots without roads

In these areas, plot sizes are 5 m by 25 m and 20 m, with the same
characteristics as the previous category. What differentiates this cat-
egory is that it does not have paved streets and the homes are a little
more densely grouped.
Slums
Slums occur evenly across the metropolitan area of São Paulo. Their
main feature is their “streets”, narrow and without a regular geo-
metric design. The buildings are covered with tiles or cement slabs.
The general appearance that marks slums is the density of their
buildings, mostly located on the dissected relief or on the banks of
waterways.
Upper-class expansion
Plots with fewer homes characterize the areas of upper-class expan-
sion. These plots have well-defined streets and some buildings have
several floors. Pools are common in these plots and are located close
to the buildings. The plots are not fully occupied, leaving room for
vegetation. The streets can be paved, but it is not the norm in the
areas of expansion of adjacent plots.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 114 7/18/2013 12:28:19 PM

Bigger plots with roads

These areas are formed by 8 m by 25 m plots, with regular paved-
road systems. The buildings are flat and have roof tiles. Plots that are
not occupied show bare ground or sparse vegetation, usually grass.
Lower-class expansion
The lower-class expansion areas have no paved roads, which may
indicate a lack of infrastructure. We can see some houses under con-
struction, by the process of self-construction, and some streets that
have not been fully built. The buildings are covered in cement and
cement tiles, and plots not yet occupied show tree cover.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 115 7/18/2013 12:28:20 PM

116 H.Théry et al.
Bibliography
ABREU, M.A. (1997), Evolução Urbana do Rio de Janeiro, 3rd Ed. Rio de Janeiro,
PCRJ, IPP.
ADHIKARI, S. (2004), Urban planning and politics of slum demolition in metro-
politan Mumbai. MA dissertation, IIT Mumbai. Available at: http://www.
archidev.org/ article.php3? id_article=380 [accessed 27 January 2013].
AFZULPURKAR, D.K. (1995), Programme for the Rehabilitation of Slum and
Hutment Dwellers in Brihan Mumbai. Mumbai, Government of Maharashtra.
BANERJEE-GUHA, S. (1995), Urban development process in Bombay: planning for
whom?, in Patel, S. and Thorner, A. (eds), Bombay Metaphor for Modern
India. New Delhi, Oxford University Press: 100–120.
BANERJEE-GUHA, S. (2002), Shifting cities: urban restructuring in Mumbai,
Economic and Political Weekly, 37, 2: 121–125.
BAUD, I., PFEFFER, K., SRIDHARAN, N. and NAINAN, N. (2009), Matching
deprivation mapping to urban governance in three Indian mega-cities, Habitat
International, 33, 4: 365–377.
BECKER, B., (2005), Geopolítica de Amazônia, Estudos Avançados, 19, 53: 71–86.
BELLE, M.-C. (2009), Processos de megapolizaçô, São Paulo e Mumbai, Estudos
Avançados, 66: 227–236.
BERTAUD, A. and MALPEZZI, S. (2003), The spatial distribution of population
in 48 cities: implications for economies in transition. Available at: http://alain-
bertaud.com/AB_Files/Spatia_%20 Distribution_of_Pop_%2050_%20Cities.pdf
[accessed 5 January 2013].
BOMBAY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (1970), A brief report on the survey of
old buildings in city (1956–57), in Desai, A. R. and Pillai, S.D. (eds), Slums and
Urbanization, Bombay, Bombay Popular Prakashan: 153–160.
BRUNET, N. (2002), Le nouveau statut de la cité brésilienne. Available at: http://
vertigo.revues.org/3766 [accessed 6 October 2010].
BRUNO, L. (1998), Paris-Rio : Le Rôle de la Culture dans la Formation de l’Espace
Urbain, PhD Thesis, University of Paris Ouest-Nanterre, Nanterre.
BRUSH, J. (1962), The morphology of Indian cities, in Turner, R. (ed.), India’s
Urban Future. Berkeley, University of California Press: 57–70.
BRUSH, J. (1986), Recent changes in ecological patterns of metropolitan Bombay
and Delhi, in Tewari, V.K., Weistein, J.A. and Rao, V.L.S.P. (eds), Indian Cities
Ecological Perspectives. New Delhi, Concept: 121–149.
CHAKRAVORTY, S. and LALL, S.V. (2007), Made in India. The Economic
Geography and Political Economy of Industrialization. New Delhi, Oxford
University Press.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 116 7/18/2013 12:28:20 PM

DAS, P.K. (2003), Slums: the continuing struggle for housing, in Patel, S. and
Masselos, J., Bombay and Mumbai, The City in Transition. New Delhi, Oxford
University Press: 207–234.
DATTA, V.N. (1986), Panjabi refugees and the urban development of Greater
Delhi, in Frykenberg, R.E. (ed.), Delhi Through the Ages. Essays in Urban
History, Culture and Society. New Delhi, Oxford University Press: 442–460.
DDA (1957), Work Studies Relating to the Preparation of the Master Plan for
Delhi, Vol. 1. New Delhi, Delhi Development Authority.
DDA (2007), Master Plan for Delhi 2021. New Delhi: Delhi Development Authority.
DUEIIP (2001), Status Report for Delhi 21. New Delhi, Government of India,
Ministry of Environment and Forest & Government, Planning Department.
DESAI, V. (1995), Community Participation and Slum Housing. A Study of
Bombay. New Delhi, Sage Publications.
DEWAN VERMA, G. (2002), Slumming India: A Chronicle of Slums and their
Saviours. New Delhi, Penguin.
D’MONTE, D. (2002), Ripping the Fabric: The Decline of Mumbai and its Mills.
New Delhi, Oxford University Press.
DUPONT, V. (2000), Mobility patterns and economic strategies of houseless people in
Old Delhi, in Dupont, V., Tarlo, E. and Vidal, D. (eds), Delhi. Urban Space and
Human Destinies. New Delhi, Manohar — Centre de Sciences Humaines: 99–124.
DUPONT, V. (2001), Noida: nouveau pôle industriel ou ville satellite de Delhi?
Le projet des planificateurs, ses failles et son devenir, Revue Tiers Monde, 165:
189–211.
DUPONT, V. (2004), Urban development and population redistribution in Delhi:
implications for categorizing population, in Champion, T. and Hugo, G. (eds),
New Forms of Urbanization: Beyond the Urban-Rural Dichotomy. Aldershot,
UK: Ashgate: 171–190.
DUPONT, V. (2008), Slum demolition in Delhi since the 1990s. An appraisal,
Economic and Political Weekly, 43, 28: 79–87.
DUPONT, V. (2011), The dream of Delhi as a global city, International Journal of
Urban and Regional Research, 35, 3: 533–554.
DUPONT, V. and MITRA, A. (1995), Population distribution, growth and socio-
economic spatial patterns in Delhi Findings from the 1991 census data,
Demography India, 24, 1–2: 101–132.
FIGBE (1999), National Survey by Household Sample (Pesquisa Nacional por
Amostra de Domicilios-PNAD).
FORBES, (2008), Cities of the Billionaires. Available at: www.forbes.com/2008/04/30/
billionaires-london-moscow-biz-billies-cz_cv_0430 billiecities.html [accessed
20 December 2011].
b1592_Ch-02.indd 117 7/18/2013 12:28:20 PM

118 H.Théry et al.
FRYKENBERG, R.E. (ed.) (1986), Delhi Through the Ages: Essays in Urban
History, Culture and Society. New Delhi, Oxford University Press.
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA (2010), Report of the Committee on Slum Statistics/
Census. New Delhi, Ministry of Housing and Poverty Alleviation, National
Building Organization.
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA (2001), Census of India 2001. Available at:
http:/ censusindia.gov.in/Metadata/Metada.htm#2bFig [accessed 21 March
2012].
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI (2006), Delhi Human Development Report
2006. Partnerships for Progress. New Delhi, Oxford University Press.
GRANT R. and NIJMAN, J. (2002), Globalization and the corporate geography of
cities in the less-developed world, Annals of the Association of American
Geographers, 2, June: 320–340.
IL & FS ECOSMART LIMITED (2007), City Development Plan–Delhi. Submitted
under JNNURM to the Dept. of Urban Development, Government of Delhi.
JAIN, A.K. (1990), The Making of a Metropolis. Planning and Growth of Delhi.
New Delhi, National Book Organization.
JOSHI, V. (2011), Census of India 2011, Provisional Population Totals, NCT of
Delhi, Paper 1. Delhi, Directorate of Census Operation.
KUNDU, A. (2004), Provision of tenurial security for the urban poor in Delhi:
recent trends and future perspectives, Habitat International, 28: 259–274.
LEFEBVRE, H. (1974), La Production de l’Espace. Paris, Anthropos.
LEVI-STRAUSS, C. (1955), Tristes Tropiques, Paris, Plon.
MARTINS, M.L.R. (2011), São Paulo, centro e periferia: a retórica ambiental e os
limites da política urbana, Estudos Avançados, 25, 71. Available at: http://
dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103–40142011000100005 [accessed 2 May 2008].
MASSELOS, J. (2003), Defining moments/defining events: commonalities of urban
life, in Patel, S. and Masselos, J., Bombay and Mumbai, The City in Transition.
New Delhi, Oxford University Press: 31–52.
MCKINSEY GLOBAL INSTITUTE (2010), India’s Urban Awakening: Building
Inclusive Cities, Sustaining Economic Growth. Available at: www.mckinsey.
com/insights/mgi/research/urbanization/urban_awakening _ in_india [accessed
25 January 2013].
MEHTA, S. (2004), Maximum City. Bombay Lost and Found. New Delhi, Viking-
Penguin.
NARAIN, A.K. (1986), On the proto-history of Delhi and its environs, in
Frykenberg, R.E. (ed.), Delhi Through the Ages. Essays in Urban History,
Culture and Society. New Delhi, Oxford University Press: 3–17.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 118 7/18/2013 12:28:20 PM

NIJMAN, J. (2007), Mumbai since liberalisation: the space-economy of India’s

gateway city, in Shaw, A. (ed.), Indian Cities in Transition. Hyderabad, Orient
Longman: 238–259.
PATEL, S. and MASSELOS, J. (eds) (2003), Bombay and Mumbai. The City in
Transition. New Delhi, Oxford University Press.
RAMANATHAN, R. (2013), The State of the Slum, The Indian Express, 8 April.
RUET, J. and TAWA LAMA-REWAL, S. (eds) (2009), Governing India’s
Metropolises. New Delhi, Routledge.
SAGLIO-YATZIMIRSKY, M.C. (2013), Dharavi: From Mega-slum to Urban
Paradigm. New Delhi, Routledge India.
SAMPAIO, M.R. A. DE. and PEREIRA, P.C.X. (2003), Habitação em São Paulo,
Estudos Avançados, 17, 48. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103–
40142003000200014 [accessed 8 May 2009].
SASSEN, S. (1991), The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton,
Princeton University Press.
DHINGRA SEGHAL, S. (1998), An Exhaustive Guide to The Slum Areas
(Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956, and The Slum Areas (Improvement
and Clearance) Rules, 1957. New Delhi, Universal.
SHARMA, R.N. (2007), The housing market in Mumbai metropolis and its irrele-
vance to the average citizen, in Shaw, A. (ed.), Indian Cities in Transition.
Hyderabad, Orient Longman: 283–312.
SHAW, A. (1999), Emerging patterns of urban growth in India, Economic and
Political Weekly, 34, 16/17: 969–978.
SIVARAMAKRISHNAN, K.C., KUNDU, A. and SINGH, B.N. (2005), Handbook
of Urbanization in India. New Delhi, Oxford University Press.
SWAMINATHAN, R. and GOYAL, J. (2006), Mumbai Vision 2015: Agenda for
Urban Renewal. New Delhi, Macmillan India-Observer Research Foundation.
THERY, H. (2011), Scènes de guerre dans les favelas de Rio de Janeiro, in Giblin,
B. (ed.), Les Conflits dans le Monde, Approche Géopolitique. Paris, Armand
Colin: 47–57.
TOLOSA, H. (2000), A Expansão dos Serviços Modernos na Cidade do Rio. Rio
de Janeiro, Plano Estratégico da Cidade do Rio de Janeiro.
TOLOSA, H. (2003), The Rio/São Paulo extended metropolitan region: a quest for
global integration, The Annals of Regional Science, 37, 3: 479–500.
UNEP/IBAMA/PARCERIA 21 (2002), Projeto Geo Cidades Relatório sobre o Meio
Ambiente Urbano/Rio De Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro, IBAM.
UN-HABITAT (2003), Understanding Slums: Case Studies for the Global Report.
Development Planning Unit, University College London.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 119 7/18/2013 12:28:20 PM

120 H.Théry et al.
UN-HABITAT (2003), The Challenge of Slums — Global Report on Human

Settlements. London, Earthscan.
VAQUIER, D. (2010), The Impact of Slum Resettlement on Urban Integration in
Mumbai: The Case of the Chandivali Project. CSH Occasional Paper No. 26.
New Delhi, Centre de Sciences Humaines.
VETTER, D.M. (1981), A segregação residencial da PEA na Região Metropolitana
do Rio de Janeiro segundo grupos de rendimento mensal , Revista Brasileira de
Geografia, 43.
ZACHARIAH, K.C. (1968), Migrants in Greater Bombay. New Delhi, Asia
Publishing House.
Statistical data sources

Census of India: http://www.censusindia.gov.in
Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi, Planning Department: http://
www.delhiplanning.nic.in
Armazém de Dados (2002), Estatísticas Municipais: http://www.armazemdedados-
rio.rio.rj.gov.br
CIDE (2000), Anuário Estatístico do Estado do Rio de Janeiro 2000.
CIDE (2001), Anuário Estatístico do Estado do Rio de Janeiro 2001, CD-Rom.
GaWC Research Network (2010), The World According to GaWC. Available at:
www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/world2008t.html [accessed 20 December 2011].
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE) (1999), Pesquisa Informações
Básicas Municipais: http://www.ibge.gov.br
IBGE (2000), Atlas Nacional do Brasil. Rio de Janeiro.
IBGE (2001), Síntese dos Indicadores Sociais 2000. Rio de Janeiro.
IBGE (2002), Banco de Dados Agregados SIDRA: http://www.ibge.gov.br
Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (2003), Projects MIUP.
Available at: www.mmrdamumbai.org/projects_muip.htm [accessed 20
February 2010].
IPEA/IBAMA (1976), Instituto Nacional de planejamento social, Comissão
Nacional de Regioes metorpolitanas e politica urbana: Régiao metropolitana d
Grande Rio: serviços de interesse commun, Brasilia.
NCTD, Directorate of Economic and Statistics (2011), Delhi Statistical Hand Book
2011. Available at: www.delhi.gov.in/wps/wcm/connect/doit_des/DES/
Our+Services/ Statistical+Hand+ Book [accessed 20 December 2011].
NCTD, Directorate of Economic and Statistics (2011), Estimate of State Domestic
Product. Available at: //delhiplanning.nic.in/ [accessed 20 December 2011].
NSSO (2005), 61st Round Survey, July 2004-June 2005.
b1592_Ch-02.indd 120 7/18/2013 12:28:20 PM

View publication stats

National and Urban Contexts of The Four Metropolises: December 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

National and Urban Contexts of The Four Metropolises: December 2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

National and Urban Contexts of The Four Metropolises: December 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

National and Urban Contexts of the Four Metropolises

Chapter · December 2013

Théry Hervé Véronique D.N. Dupont

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Frédéric Landy Marie-Caroline Saglio-Yatzimirsky

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Subaltern Urbanisation in India View project

Revista Confins View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

While macro-perspectives often tend to overlook local specificities

b1592_Ch-02.indd 51 7/18/2013 12:27:14 PM

2.1. India and Brazil, contrasting urban situations

b1592_Ch-02.indd 52 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

National and Urban Contexts of the Four Metropolises 53

Box 2.1. Definition: urban place and urban agglomeration

(a) All places which answer to certain administrative criteria, such as

In addition, the concept of “urban agglomeration” was introduced

Source: Government of India. Ministry of Home Affairs. Ofﬁce of the Registrar

b1592_Ch-02.indd 53 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

Jodhpur Gwalior Kanpur Patna

Figure 2.1. Urbanization in India: million-plus urban agglomerations in India (2011).

Brazil faced an accelerated urbanization process during the 20th

b1592_Ch-02.indd 54 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

National and Urban Contexts of the Four Metropolises 55

Box 2.2. Definition: “urban” in Brazil.

b1592_Ch-02.indd 55 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

absolute terms. In four of the five major regions, the predominance

2.1.2. The wealth of the four cities

b1592_Ch-02.indd 56 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

National and Urban Contexts of the Four Metropolises 57

11 125 243 Sao Paulo

6 323 037 Rio de Janeiro

Statistics, Government of NCTD (www.delhi.gov.in/wps/wcm/connect/doit_des/

b1592_Ch-02.indd 57 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

Faridabad- From 1997 to 2008

Figure 2.3. Delhi’s urban expansion, 1950–2008.

Figure 2.3. Legend

b1592_Ch-02.indd 58 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

National and Urban Contexts of the Four Metropolises 59

• 31% in the secondary sector

Within the organized sector, which, however, accounts for only

b1592_Ch-02.indd 59 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

Though in terms of population, Mumbai was recently overtaken by

b1592_Ch-02.indd 60 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

National and Urban Contexts of the Four Metropolises 61

Figure 2.4. The Mumbai metropolitan region (MMR).

b1592_Ch-02.indd 61 7/18/2013 12:27:15 PM

Rio de Janeiro’s economic situation has been declining drastically

The São Paulo metropolitan region has a GDP corresponding to

b1592_Ch-02.indd 62 7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM

1920 % 1920 1959 % 1959 1980 % 1980 2007 % 2007

Table 2.2. Brazil’s GDP %.

2002 2003 2004 2005

São Paulo state 34.63 34.11 33.14 33.86

São Paulo metropolitan

Source: IBGE/SEADE (Foundation State System of Data Analysis), Elaboração:

2.2. The growth of the four metropolises

b1592_Ch-02.indd 64 7/18/2013 12:27:16 PM