mapping apprehensions
SABAH #
Towards preparing for the submission for the PLU by the 15th sep, the groups in M-East had met on the 14th August in TISS. The meeting was attended by representatives of gaothans and koliwadas of M-East who raised the issue of boundary mapping and FSI for their gaothans/ koliwadas. Since these issues are not limited to the M-East ward but across the city, we had discussed the possibility of calling for a meeting specifically of representatives of gaothans and koliwadas towards preparing demands for the submission before the 15th.
The meeting has been fixed for 11th September at 6 pm in Rm No. 5 in TISS Main Campus
ISAAC #
i have to a degree done a mapping of m-ward communities sourced from the 1934 mumbai map which is then overlaid with the redrawn city dp and then google maps.
if it works will try and put together the rest of the content. just that i am keeping a bit unwell and not sure when i get home. but boundaries are clear to a degree at-least i think when it comes to m-ward.
HUSSAIN #
thanks for the map - this is a great start, there are hardly any credible maps available showing gaothans, adivasipadas and koliwadas in the city.
But we must be a little cautious about what we are doing, and I must explain my apprehensions.
In my opinion, and based on a little bit of experience in an attempt to make such maps before, there are three reasons (apart from the obvious political ones) why such maps have not been made as yet:
(1) the ambiguity in the definition of a gaothan, koliwada or agripada,
(2) the difficulty in deciding what a ‘village’ is
(3) the ambiguity in the extent, location and boundary of the settlement.
Since it is unclear whether the settlement is defined by its economy, the ethnicity of the dwellers, the urban fabric or the fact that these are historic settlements, it is difficult to map them. So not all gaothans practice agriculture, koliwadas do not consist only of kolis, the fabric of villages have transformed substantially over time and not all of them are ‘traditional’ or historic.
Moreover, it is also difficult to define the settlement spatially - is only the cluster of houses of the inhabitants the village? Do the areas used by the community - beaches, agricultural lands, etc - get included in the village? Do the resources the communities depend on - mangroves, waterbodies, etc - get included in the village?
Growth and transformation that have changed them substantially over the years have made identification of extents quite difficult. Some villages that are seen on older maps no longer exist or have been relocated - Cuffe Parade, Moragaon, Sion, etc. are examples. Adivasi padas do not show even in old maps. Therefore, though it is important to do this mapping, I think that we must be conceptually clear about the objective behind making them, as well as the kind of information we are putting out through them. The political consequences of an exercise such as this are difficult to predict, hence a clear methodology and objectives are necessary.
However, as a location map these can be valuable - and hence it might be better to not show them in a way that suggests ‘boundaries’ but leave them as general locations. Later, when we have a clear methodology, we can begin marking out boundaries.
I am attaching an unverified and partial map of koliwadas in Greater Mumbai (I think we should do this for the entire MMR Region). This might help what you are doing, but again, its better to do a thorough ground investigation before publishing them in any form - online or in print.
SHWETA #
I agree with Hussain! Precise Koliwada and Gaothan boundaries are difficult to verify from satellite images and historical maps. There are several issues such as ownerships and conflicting claims to land in these areas. Therefore it would be important do a ground verification in consultation with communities for the demarcation of precise boundaries.
ISAAC #
the map was very much done with citizens participation. its a detailed location plan, that can be verified.
the hussain proposition is a classic krvia ambiguity delirium. somewhere the line has to be drawn. my working theory is listing towards a definition. but before one goes there can there be a consolidated plan to locate. as in see where all the three habitation types are. at-least for reference for now like i did for mward could any of you help figure a city wide location plan of the a’s, g’s and k’s.
there are a lot of ambiguous non referenced location plans.
since you guys are in institutions with access to resources if you do have some consolidated excels in place or make one with type/ village names/ old name if any/ ward/ closest railway station etc we can have a fun location plan.
HUSSAIN #
Perhaps I wasn’t clear enough in my mail - a location map is welcome and must be made. The problem is likely to be boundary demarcations. But I certainly do not wish to stop you from having fun!
Shweta and I have been doing the boundary demarcation of Malvani Fishing village for the past few months, and regrettably, it hasn’t been too much fun - and we haven’t been bold enough as to “draw the line somewhere.” Consultations furthermore, are needed not simply to “locate” the village but to determine the boundary - two very different tasks to my mind. We will be bringing the maps of Malvani to the meeting on the 11th, we will be most happy to discuss the process.
And the fact that you say that “there are a lot of ambiguous non referenced location plans” raises the more important question - what is this mapping being done for? Surely not simply to indicate that these villages exist - that has been done in MCGM’s ELU; all the villages you have shown are mapped in the ELU as villages with their CTS boundaries. Hence their existence is acknowledged already. The added value in your map is pointing out what each one is called. Obviously, the boundaries as shown in the ELU may be disputed, but based on what criteria? According to whose claims? This will require a methodology, and I am afraid that listing out the all the villages will not reveal the formula.
The KRVIA stereotype and slotting is amusing - surely you do not believe that anyone who finds some activity ambiguous suffers from the “KRVIA ambiguity delirium” just because they happen to, unfortunately, work in the asylum. I do not hold for instance, that working with UDRI automatically results in an obsession for making tourist maps. But in one important way I think I did deviate from the KRVIA recipe (to reinforce the stereotype) - ambiguity does not mean – unlike the KRVIA approach – that nothing can be done, but means that it has to be done more carefully and methodically. Is that too much to ask?
MARINA #
The academic and political contribution of creating such maps at this point in time is immense, given that histories of indigenous communities are being erased and rewritten through processes ongoing in our city.
What Hussain has succinctly pointed out is not ‘krivia ambuguity’ – it should serve in understanding the issue and its complexity, especially since it looks like this is a task you wish to take on.
Maps are inherently political – maps are created for political purposes and for this there is no doubt. Given this, one should be weary of approaching the task as ‘the line must somewhere be drawn’. It is a very multifaceted task to be mapping (geo referencing to the last detail) koliwadas and gaothans and more so adivasipadas for the whole city.
Given all our capacities (as institutions and individuals) we can come up with a precise location map of these settlements. And maybe that should be the aim at this point of time. This in itself will be a contribution to the ongoing debate.
To reiterate what Hussain and Shweta said, for a detailed mapping, definitions on these ‘lines’ and ‘settlements’ must be theoretically, methodologically and historically arrived at with i) consent and participation of communities involved ii) understandings on how indigenous peoples settlements have been mapped in Indian and the world over.
Without these clear definitions and clarity on land ownership and ownership over common property resources as well as community consent, it would be an injustice to map exact boundaries of these settlements. A detailed mapping of boundaries can be left to agencies with the necessary technical expertise.
Hope you approach this mail as one that furthers a discussion and not one that hinders what you are trying to do. It is a collective concern that while taking on this exercise one should be aware of the responsibility towards the communities involved and its fair share of consequences.
ARAVIND #
MPs wonder: Where are the villages in ‘urbanised’ Mumbai?
Even as Prime Minister Narendra Modi had on August 15 announced a scheme under which parliamentarians would adopt a village in their constituencies, MPs from Mumbai, all from the Shiv Sena-BJP combine, are confused and at a loss to understand how to implement the scheme.
Their argument is that Mumbai, the country’s financial capital, is a completely urbanised and a highly developed region. The city has a heritage of 189 gaothans and 32 koliwadas, but even these are well developed, some MPs say, with the biggest issue surrounding them being redevelopment. Adopting a village elsewhere will be fraught with jurisdiction problems and lack of clarity on funding outside their constituencies, the MPs feel.
Gajanan Kirtikar, Shiv Sena MP from the Mumbai North West constituency, “We are confused about how the model villages scheme is to be implemented in urban areas. We don’t have villages here. Even the gaothans of Mumbai cannot be compared to villages. Our problems are slums, but a permanent solution to that can only be redevelopment, which is a whole different issue.”
He added that the scheme is difficult to be implemented even for an MP from a primarily rural district, which has 200-300 villages. “If he selects one village and focuses his attention on developing it as a model village, others may feel neglected and this might not work in the MP’s favour from the election point of view,” Kirtikar said.
Speaking from the ramparts of Delhi’s historic Red Fort, the prime minister had included in his Independence Day speech the announcement of a ‘Sansad Adarsh Gram Yojana.’ Under this scheme, every MP is to select one village with a population of three thousand to 5,000 in his constituency and make it a model village by 2016, working on the conditions of health, cleanliness, atmosphere and greenery. After 2016, the MPs are to select two more villages and develop them as model villages before the Lok Sabha elections in 2019. Modi said MPs in urban areas can adopt any village of their choice.
Rahul Shewale, Shiv Sena MP from Mumbai South Central, said, “If we pick a village in someone else’s constituency, it may lead to jurisdiction clashes. There are many gaothans and koliwadas in my constituency, but the city’s civic body has a scheme for the development and maintenance of basic parameters in gaothans. We have developed the Trombay gaothan area under that scheme.” Shewale said he hopes there is more clarity on the scheme once the Centre rolls out the blueprint in October.
Arvind Sawant, Shiv Sena MP from Mumbai South, also said he was waiting for the Centre to spell out the parameters for the development of villages, and whether the parliamentarians have to use their local area development funds, or if additional funds will be made available.
“Existing rules do not permit an MP to use more than Rs 10 lakh on the development of any area outside his or her constituency, so if urban MPs are to select any village of their choice the existing rules will need to be amended.”
BJP’s Gopal Shetty, MP from Mumbai North, said the situation of Mumbai is different as the city is fairly developed, and MPs under this scheme can look for betterment of the basic amenities in their constituency. “Since Mumbai’s situation is different, I will look at developing basic amenities in existing urban villages in my constituency such as Malwani,” Shetty said. Malwani is a settlement in Malad that used to once be a village but has now metamorphosed into a cluster of low-rise buildings, slums and cottage
industries.
BJP MP Kirit Somaiya of the Mumbai North-east constituency, regarding slums as the urban equivalent of villages, is looking to adhere to the PM’s directive through the creation of a model slum in Mumbai.
“My team is researching to see which small slum can be used for developing a model. It may not be possible to adopt a village outside our constituency as by law, MP funds must be used within the boundaries of our own constituencies. Practically speaking, the BJP-Shiv Sena combine has won in almost all constituencies in Maharashtra and the party presence in these areas is strong. There will be a robust implementation of the scheme here leaving little need to adopt another village in another MP’s jurisdiction.”
Meanwhile, BJP MP from North-Central constituency, Poonam Mahajan, has said she looks forward to adopting a village outside the urban area of Mumbai, but is waiting for further clarification on implementation from the Centre. Mahajan says she is already involved in developmental work in her own native village in Osmanabad and a village on the outskirts of Mumbai. “By October, the Centre should work out the nitty gritties of how to implement the plan, which includes the technicality of MP fund usage outside the constituency. When we get more clarity, we will plan our execution. I look forward to working in small villages outside Mumbai.”
East Indians plan party to fight upcoming polls
Tired of being neglected and ignored, the East Indian community is launching its own party to contest the upcoming assembly elections with the support of other citizens groups from Mumbai. The name of the party will be decided in the coming week through an online vote of the members of East Indian community. So far, the decision to field 10 to 12 candidates this time has been taken. This will include Advocate Godfrey Pimenta who will contest against the sitting Baba Siddique from Bandra.
Confirming the move Pimenta, a civil issues activist, said, “We are the original residents of Mumbai and have decided to take things in our own hands. We feel cheated by bad governance and the step motherly treatment meted out to the citizens of Mumbai. We are frustrated with the way politicians across parties have treated East Indians. We had to begin somewhere hence we decided to contest elections.”
Pimenta clarified that while the party is formed by the East Indian community, it will remain open to people from all castes whose agenda to contest is development and better governance.
“We are targeting important constituency like Kalina, Malad, Borivali and others from where we invite citizen associations to list out candidates. After a detailed background check, we will consider their candidature,” he said adding that each time the community had raised key issues regarding gaothans and the future of East Indians, all they have got is empty promises and no results.
The core issues that the party aims to tackle in the polls apart from the improvement of roads and infrastructure in Mumbai are also the creation of a single agency to oversee the city’s holistic development and the appointment of a CEO for running civic affairs.
“We are discussing key issues that affect everyone, for instance the need for more police personnel with patrolling responsibilities and less on VIP duties, implementing the National Hawkers and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy 2007 along with special schemes and benefits for the natives of the state in their respective villages and towns,” said Alphi D'souza, the Spokesperson for Mobai Gaothan Panchayat - a Mumbai based association with a network of 100 gaothans across Mumbai, Thane, Vasai and Raigad which is one of the supporting groups for the party launch.
The idea is also to have an Area Representative for every constituency along with a ‘Patil’ for every gaothan to deal with important issues. “Our think tank deals with the key strategies. This elections will also give us experience to prepare for the Municipal elections in 2017 as well,” said an active member of an East Indian forum.
Meanwhile citizen groups like Bombay East Indian Association, Khar Welfare Association, Marol Citizens Forum, International East Indian Community Council and several others have already supported this move. Community members are still in talks with other like-minded organizations to gather support.
ISAAC #
my sincere apologies in not making in for the gig as am in bit of a mess in several dimensions. listed are some notes i think could contribute to your argument if you seem necessary.
my background in looking at communities have been both as operating design within one and ideating in theory its formation [communities as cultural precincts] and possible regulation under academic frameworks.
my position is towards an integrated cultural plan for the city. premise for culture as factor for development falls within the third article of the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity and unlike other states we have a cultural policy which has/ seems to have potential.
indigenous communities very much can be recognized under a formal cultural framework. being formal entities they ideally can be positioned under cultural subsidies to be beckoned towards welfare of these communities.
under these subsidies it isn’t communities or their representatives who draw lines but the planning agencies who are to perform these tasks. and supported by the dual postulate interpretation by marina of hussain and shweta [i) consent and participation of communities involved ii) understandings on how indigenous peoples settlements have been mapped in Indian and the world over.]
trauma at malvani seems at my end a lack adequate definitions. to define, one needs data. the questions proposed are all possibly concerns similar faced with informality. my concern lies with the fact villages aren’t informal settlements but being looked at like one.
with the chembur gaothan study there where clear limits. we where fortunate to say that between x and y is the villages and proposed are parameters of operation. since as type it fell within heritage frameworks the outcome networked into larger mandates.
prasad and rupali’s slum type study is something which needs to be replicated [it was a simple google satellite map + a lot of disposable jj man power]. the pursuit in locating and documenting the available variables to allocate as a whole the quantifiable recommended subsidy that indigenous communities in the city require to develop.
problems of the west and east of mward are the bit different. to identify that was the reason i made that map for the study. at least m ward wise if you have or can make an integrated study towards a calculated definition urban villages as viewed from the ward. extending that to city would then able guidelines for operation of urban villages as necessitated by earmarked culture.
plot is similar to games played at the heritage argument. first was listing then type then regulations for type. similarly unless there is systemic making of tourist map of its villages in the city [my view] we may be still stuck with misinformed concerns of operation of villages.
SABAH #
There seems to be some difference in our purpose for proposing the mapping.
Could you elaborate on your expectation from the of M-Ward project and the campaign? If you propose the campaign take this up, you should be writing to the campaign rather than a few individuals.
PS. I’d be careful with the usage of the term indigenous.
ISAAC #
thanks for the reply. the m-ward project i did was definitely different from what you are doing. and i don’t think i am entitled to any expectation. since i know you guys, i sent out some ideas which you may want/ help you in regards to your work.
i haven’t capacities to tackle the campaign therefore not dealing with it. i have a view/ opinion. am not so sure if i really want to push it. yes i certainly do understand your issues with classification of indigenous and i too to a degree trying to fix in a plausible argument which isn’t at the moment reaching much fruition.
was hoping you guys will have data or access to resources to facilitate the location mapping of the three communities. that apparently doesn’t seem viable unless i make a case under each of three projects to see who may budge. complex things. i have some leads if i can manage to get things going within the time frame i have, will send it across.
have been documenting the dp process for a while now and last two notes remain on the mward project and krvia free software communities. should get in touch in due time to wrap up the project.
transcripts from emails between 5th and 12th September 2014