A Slum, for the purpose of Census, has been defined as residential areas where dwellings are unfit for human habitation by reasons of dilapidation, overcrowding, faulty arrangements and design of such buildings, narrowness or faulty arrangement of street, lack of ventilation, light, or sanitation facilities or any combination of these factors which are detrimental to the safety and health.

1. Slum & UrbanSlum & Urban
InfrastructureInfrastructure
Piter Biswas
piterbiswas11@gmail.com

2. Definition of a Slum
A Slum, for the purpose of Census, has been
defined as residential areas where dwellings are
unfit for human habitation by reasons of
dilapidation, overcrowding, faulty arrangements
and design of such buildings, narrowness or faulty
arrangement of street, lack of ventilation, light, or
sanitation facilities or any combination of these
factors which are detrimental to the safety and
health.

3. Identification of Slums in Census
• For the purpose of Census, slums have been
categorized and defined as of the following three
types:
• Notified Slums
• Recognized Slums
• Identified Slums

4. All notified areas in a town or city
notified as ‘Slum’ by State, UT
Administration or Local Government
under any Act including a ‘Slum Act’
• Notified Slums
• Recognized Slums
• Identified Slums
Identification of Slums

5. All areas recognised as ‘Slum’ by State, UT
Administration or Local Government, Housing
and Slum Boards, which may have not been
formally notified as slum under any act
• Notified Slums
• Recognized Slums
• Identified Slums
Identification of Slums

6. A compact area of at least 300 population or
about 60-70 households of poorly built
congested tenements, in unhygienic
environment usually with inadequate
infrastructure and lacking in proper sanitary and
drinking water facilities (Identified).
• Notified Slums
• Recognized Slums
• Identified Slums
Identification of Slums

7. Data on Slum from Census
• It is for the first time in Census that datasets on Housing
stock, Amenities and Assets based on the Houselisting
and Housing Census are being released
• In Census 2001, information on Slums were released
only on demographic characteristics based on the
Population Enumeration. For this purpose, Slum Blocks
were identified in Statutory Towns having a population of
20,000 by the local authorities at the time of Population
Enumeration phase
• In Census 2011, Slum Blocks have been delineated in
all statutory towns irrespective of population size.

8. Census 2011
Results

9. • Out of 4,041 Statutory Towns
in Census 2011 Slums
reported from 2,543 Towns
(63%)
• Total Slum Enumeration
Blocks (SEBs) in Census
2011 is about 1.08 lakh in the
country
• Largest number of Slum EBs
reported from Maharashtra
(21,359)
Towns Reporting Slums
India : Census 2011

10. • Notified Slums 37,072
• Recognised Slums 30,846
• Identified Slums 40,309
Total: 1,08,227 Blocks
Number of Slum Blocks by
Type of Slums – India : Census
2011

11. • Notified Slums 49.65 lakh HHs
• Recognised Slums 37.96 lakh HHs
• Identified Slums 49.88 lakh HHs
Total: 137.49 lakh HHs
Households by Type of
Slums – India : Census
2011

12. Slum & Non-Slum Households
– India 2011
Indicator
Number of
households
(in lakh)
Total (Urban) 789
Slum 137
Non-Slum 652
Number of households (in %)
Slum 17.4
Non-Slum 82.6

13. Number of Slum Households in
Million Plus Cities
Indicator Number
Number of Slum Households (in lakh)
Total (Slum) 137
Slum in Million Plus Cities 52
Slum in other Cities 85
Number of Slum Households (in %)
Slum in Million Plus Cities 38.1
Slum in other Cities 61.9
38 % of the slum households are in 46 Million Plus Cities

14. Top/Bottom 5 States
Reporting Slum Households
State
Proportion of Slum
HHs to Urban HHs
(%)
Andhra Pradesh 35.7
Chhattisgarh 31.9
Madhya Pradesh 28.3
Odisha 23.1
West Bengal 21.9
Top 5 States
Bottom 5 States
State
Proportion of
Slum HHs to
Urban HHs (%)
Chandigarh# 9.7
Gujarat 6.7
Jharkhand 5.3
Assam 4.8
Kerala 1.5

15. Percentage of
Slum HHs to
Total Urban
HHs

16. Proportion of Slum Households in
Metros - 2011
Million Plus Cities
Proportion of Slum
HHs to Total Urban
HHs (%)
Greater Mumbai (M Corp.) 41.3
Kolkata (M Corp.) 29.6
Chennai (M Corp.) 28.5
Delhi Municipal Corp (U) 14.6
BBMP (M Corp.) 8.5

17. Million Plus Cities with High
Proportion of Slum HHs (Top 10
only) - 2011
Million Plus Cities
Proportion of Slum HHs to
Total Urban HHs (%)
1. Greater Visakhapatnam M Corp. 44.1
2. Jabalpur Cantt (CB) 43.3
3. Greater Mumbai (M Corp.) 41.3
4. Vijayawada (M Corp.) 40.6
5. Meerut (M Corp.) 40.0
6. Raipur (M Corp.) 39.0
7. Nagpur (M Corp.) 34.3
8. Greater Hyderabad M Corp. (GHMC) 31.9
9. Kota (M Corp.) 31.8
10. Agra (M Corp.) 29.8

18. INDIA (Absolute numbers in lakh)
Use of Census House Urban Slum
Total Occupies Census Houses 990 160
Residence 761 133
Residence-cum-other use 24 3.9
Shop/Office 107 10.8
School/College, etc 4 0.5
Hotel/Lodge/Guest House 4 0.4
Hospital/ Dispensary, etc 3 0.3
Factory/ Workshop, etc 15 2
Place of worship 6 0.9
Other non-residential use 59 8
Locked Census Houses 7 1
Use of Occupied Census Houses
India : 2011

19. INDIA (in %)
Use of Census House Urban Slum
Total Occupies Census Houses 100.0 100.0
Residence 76.9 82.5
Residence-cum-other use 2.4 2.4
Shop/Office 10.8 6.7
School/College, etc 0.4 0.3
Hotel/Lodge/Guest House 0.4 0.2
Hospital/ Dispensary, etc 0.3 0.2
Factory/ Workshop, etc 1.5 1.2
Place of worship 0.6 0.6
Other non-residential use 6.0 5.1
Locked Census House 0.7 0.6
Use of Occupied Census Houses
India : 2011

20. Households by Type of Census Houses –
India
Type Urban Slum
Permanent 84.3 77.7
Semi-permanent 11.6 16.0
Temporary 3.2 5.3
Any other 0.9 1.0
HHs (in %)

21. Slum
Households by
Structure of
Census Houses
(Permanent)

22. Households by Number of Room – India
Number of Room Urban Slum
No exclusive room 3.1 4.4
One room 32.1 44.8
Two room 30.6 29.5
Three room 18.4 12.3
Four room 9.3 5.4
Five rooms and above 6.5 3.5
HHs (in %)

23. Households by Household Size– India
Household Size Urban Slum
1 member 3.6 3.7
2 members 9.5 9.5
3 members 15.9 14.9
4 members 26.4 25.1
5 members 18.5 19.4
6 to 8 members 20.6 22.2
9 and above members 5.4 5.2
HHs (in %)

24. Households by Number of Married Couples
– India
Number of married couples Urban Slum
None 12.7 13.6
1 71.1 72.1
2 12.6 11.3
3 2.8 2.4
4 0.6 0.5
5 and above 0.2 0.1
HHs (in %)

25. Households by Ownership Status – India
Ownership Status of Census House Urban Slum
Owned 69.2 70.2
Rented 27.5 26.3
Others 3.3 3.5
HHs (in %)

26. Source of Drinking Water – India
Source of drinking water Urban Slum
1. Tap 70.6 74.0
From treated source 62.0 65.3
From untreated source 8.6 8.7
2. Well 6.2 3.0
3. Hand pump 11.9 12.7
4. Tube well / Borehole 8.9 7.6
5. Other sources 2.5 2.8
HHs (in %)

27. Location of Drinking Water Source– India
Location Urban Slum
1. Within premises 71.2 56.7
2. Outside premises 28.8 43.3
HHs (in %)

28. Slum HHs by
Location
Drinking Water
Source (Within
premises)

29. Source of Lighting– India
Source of lighting Urban Slum
1. Electricity 92.7 90.5
2. Kerosene 6.5 8.2
3. Solar 0.2 0.3
4. Other oil 0.1 0.2
5. Any other 0.2 0.2
6. No lighting 0.3 0.5
HHs (in %)

30. Slum HHs by
Fuel Used for
Cooking
(LPG/PNG)

31. Availability of Bathing Facility within Premises - India
Bathing Facility Urban Slum
1. Have facility 87.0 81.0
(a) Bathroom 77.5 66.6
(b) Enclosure without roof 9.5 14.5
2. Does not have facility 13.0 19.0
HHs (in %)

32. Drainage Connectivity for Waste Water
Outlet– India
Drainage connectivity Urban Slum
1. Closed drainage 44.5 36.9
2. Open drainage 37.3 44.3
3. No drainage 18.2 18.8
HHs (in %)

33. Type of Latrine Facility– India
Type of latrine Urban Slum
1. Latrine within the premises 81.4 66.0
(a) Water closet 72.6 57.7
(b) Pit latrine 7.1 6.2
© Other latrine 1.7 2.2
2. No latrine within premises 18.6 34.0
(a) Public latrine 6.0 15.1
(b) Open 12.6 18.9
HHs (in %)

34. Availability of Kitchen– India
Availability of kitchen Urban Slum
Total 100.0 100.0
1. Cooking inside house: 95.8 94.1
(a) Has kitchen 77.8 65.3
(b) Does not have kitchen 18.0 28.8
2. Cooking outside house 3.7 5.4
(a) Has kitchen 1.6 2.0
(b) Does not have kitchen 2.0 3.4
3. No cooking 0.5 0.5
HHs (in %)

35. Fuel used for Cooking– India
Fuel used for cooking Urban Slum
1. Fire-wood 20.1 25.8
2. Crop residue 1.4 1.6
3. Cow dung cake 1.7 2.1
4. Coal, Lignite, Charcoal 2.9 3.9
5. Kerosene 7.5 14.0
6. LPG/ PNG 65.0 51.3
7. Electricity 0.1 0.1
8. Biogas 0.4 0.5
9. Any other 0.2 0.3
10. No cooking 0.5 0.5
HHs (in %)

36. Households Availing Banking Services–
India
Availing Banking Services Urban Slum
1. Availing 67.8 53.2
2. Not availing 32.2 46.8
HHs (in %)

37. Household Possessing Various Assets –
India
Asset Urban Slum
1. Radio/Transistor 25.3 18.7
2. Television 76.7 69.6
3. Computer 18.7 10.4
With Internet 8.3 3.3
Without Internet 10.4 7.1
HHs (in %)

39. Household Possessing Various Assets–
India
Asset Urban Slum
5. Telephone 82.0 72.7
Landline only 5.9 4.4
Mobile only 64.3 63.5
Both 11.7 4.8
6. Bicycle 41.9 40.2
7. Scooter/Motor Cycle/Moped 35.2 22.0
8. Car/Jeep/Van 9.7 3.6
9. None of the specified assets 7.0 10.7
HHs (in %)

40. 63.5% HHs in
Slums in India
has Mobile

41. Slum HHs
Having None of
the Specified
Assets

42. Life in a
Slum

43. Infrastructure: The Crucial
Growth Factor
Indian economy is on the path to strong recovery
It is expected that during 2011-12, India would revert back to 9% GDP
growth
Fast economic growth and growing population have led to huge
demand-supply infrastructure deficit
Lack of adequate and quality infrastructure is proving to be
binding constraint in sustaining, deepening and expanding
India’s economic growth and global competitiveness
Infrastructure deficit estimated to cost 1 to 2% growth in GDP
every year.

44. Infrastructure Deficit
Roads & Highways- National highway network is 66,590 Kms which
constitutes only 2% of total road network but carries about 40% of total
traffic.
Power generation capacity- During the 11th Plan period, against
revised target of 62,000MW capacity, capacity of 32,507 MW (52%) has
been added. Peak power deficit range around 12-13%.
Ports- India has 12 major ports and 200 non-major ports which handle
95% of India’s trade in terms of volume and 70% in terms of value.
However, the average turnaround time in India’s port was 4.54 days in
2009 compared to 10 hours in Hong kong.
Civil aviation- Only two airports viz., Delhi and Mumbai account for
43% of passenger traffic and 55% of cargo traffic in the country.
Urban Infrastructure- India has the second largest urban system in the
world and 285 million people or 29% of the population live in urban areas.
This is expected to reach 40% by 2021.
Telecom - In the area of telecom, India has done well. Teledensity
(telephones per 100 persons) has grown from 1.9% in 1998 to 60% in
August 2010.

45. Infrastructure Investment
Requirements
 In the 11th
Plan period (2007-12), total infrastructure investment requirement has been
estimated at USD 514 billion.
 As per the Mid term appraisal of the 11th
Plan, during the first 3 years of the plan
period
Of the projected investment of USD 245 billion, the actual investment was
USD 266 billion.
This has been mainly due to over achievement in sectors like telecom, electricity and
airports.
However, sectors like roads, ports and railways have shown underachievement.
 During the 12th
five year plan (2012-17), the total investment requirements in
infrastructure sector would be USD 1 trillion.
 The large investment requirements cannot be met entirely by the public sector.
 The role of PPP in the coming years will therefore gain more importance
 It is expected that at least 50% of the investment would have to come from the private
sector and by 2015-16, share of private investment will surpass public investment

46. Infrastructure Financing
Currently, over 80% of infrastructure projects in the country are
financed by public sector banks.
Bank’s lending to the infrastructure sector has grown significantly over the years recording a
compound annual growth rate of 49% during the last 10 years.

47. Issues in Infra Financing
Bank lending going forward is likely to be constrained:
1.RBI Prudential Exposure Norms
• As per RBI prescribed prudential norms, in case of infrastructure projects, banks can take
exposure up to
• For single party- 20% of their capital funds + 5% after approval of their Board
• For group 50% of their capital funds + 5% after approval of their Board
1. Most of the banks are operating at ceiling levels having little headroom to lend further
2. The low resource base will not allow smaller banks to take large exposures as required in
the case of infrastructure projects.
Asset-Liability Mismatch
• 79% of the bank deposits have tenure of less than 3 years, while in the case of infrastructure
projects, the loans are generally for 10-15 years.
1.Thus, to mobilize the required resources, especially by way of private
investment, it is imperative that we find alternative mechanisms for financing.

48. Financing by IIFCL
India Infrastructure Finance Co Ltd (IIFCL) established in January 2006,
became operational in April 2006 to provide long term financial assistance to
commercially viable infrastructure projects with overriding priority to PPP
projects.
IIFCL provides
Long term debt by way of direct financing
 20% of the project cost is financed
 Loans to have average maturity of more than 10 years
Subordinate debt finance
Refinance to banks and other eligible institutions for their loans to
infrastructure projects in roads, ports, competitively bid power and railway
projects
UK subsidiary provides foreign currency loans to Indian infrastructure projects.

49. IIFCL’s Portfolio
49
SECTOR
CUMULATIVE GROSS
SANCTIONS
CUMULATIVE
DISBURSEMENTS
No. of Projects Amt Sanctioned No. of Projects Amt Disbursed
Road 92 12662 63 4014
Power 26 11951 23 4691
Airport 2 2150 2 706
Port 7 860 5 293
Urban Infra 3 704 1 11
PMDO 30 113 19 43
Refinance - - - 1500
TOTAL 160 28440 113 11258
Rs crore
•Projects sanctioned by IIFCL are spread over in 24 states of the country.
• Of the 160 proposals sanctioned, 137 (88%) cases have achieved financial closure which
indicates that participation of IIFCL has helped in speeding up financial closure.
•Commercial Operation Date (CoD) has been achieved in 18 road projects and 2 port projects.
(As on 31st
October 2010)

50. Need for alternative financing options
TAKEOUT FINANCING
IIFCL, a policy-based institution can partly address the
constraints faced by banks
Takeout finance can free up capital for banks and facilitate
incremental lending to infrastructure
Takeout financing is a viable option before banks to address asset
liability mismatch issue and group exposure constraint
Takeout financing scheme introduced by IIFCL in April 2010
First set of takeout finance deals signed recently
More proposals in the pipeline

51. Need for alternative financing options
 NEED TO DEVELOP CORPORATE BOND MARKET
 The corporate debt market is at a nascent stage and is predominated by government
securities.
 Reasons for slow development of the bond market
high compliance costs
limited appetite for corporate bonds
preference for bank loans compared to bonds
high stamp duty.
 Bond markets need to be well developed to encourage greater
participation by insurance and pension funds, and thereby reduce
dependence on banks

52. Need for Long term Investors
• Insurance companies and pension funds are potentially a
high source of long-term debt.
• Internationally, insurance companies invest on an average 25% of
their funds in less than AA rated paper.
• However, in case of India, participation of insurance
companies in infrastructure has been limited due to
regulatory requirements.
• Insurance companies are currently allowed to invest in debt securities
rated AA and above.

53. Need for Credit Enhancement
• Demand for debt instruments in India is largely limited only to highest safety
papers (AAA and AA rated papers)
• Around 72% of infrastructure SPVs in India are rated in the BBB and A
categories, while an estimated 18% - 20% of infrastructure SPVs are rated in
the sub – investment grade.
• A credit enhancement instrument that leads to an improvement in ratings of
infrastructure SPV bonds raised by developers (SPV) would lead to major
players with long term funds like insurance and PF getting enthused to
subscribe to such bonds.
•IIFCL has taken up the task of evolving a credit enhancement product

54. Private Equity investments
• Domestic resources may not be sufficient to bridge the investment
gap, thus, there is need to attract foreign capital.
• PE investors have shown keen interest in India’s infra sector:
As per available data, during 2009-10, total PE investments in power
sector alone was USD 820 million in 14 deals
• Recently, a PE deal for about Rs 400 cr was done in Road sector
• In 2010, till June, deal sizes in the range of USD 100-400 million
have been done in infrastructure.
• The flow of PE investments in infrastructure sector should be
increased through enabling policy environment.

55. Need for infrastructure equity funds
• Indian developers do not have enough long term equity resources
• Dedicated infrastructure funds provide long term high risk equity
capital
• The longer term horizon of such funds help supplement strategic
long term foreign capital
• Early stage incubation of infrastructure assets by infrastructure
funds can, after they attain maturity, become suitable for annuity
seekers like pension funds and insurance companies

56. Conclusion
India continues to remain infra-deficit economy which is acting as a binding
constraint on achieving higher economic growth.
Development of corporate bond market, introduction of innovations like credit
enhancement, securitisation etc is important
Long term investors like pension funds and insurance companies should be
encouraged to invest in infrastructure sector through appropriate changes in
policy and regulatory requirements.
Attracting foreign investments through PE investments and launching of
dedicated infrastructure funds need to be taken up.