My first article this week titled, ‘Decentralized Management of Solid Waste in Mumbai Slums: Informal Privatization through Patronage’ by Joop de Wit (Who now is the proud owner of the best name I’ve ever heard) is a long title to discuss such a short acronym – SAP or Slum Adoption Program, set up in Mumbai by the MCGM (Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai) in 2000 with the intention of sensitizing and empowering slum residence to take the SWM of their neighborhoods into their own hands.

What started as a well organised plan (on paper) quickly fell pray to false assumptions about resident life in the slums as well as a lack of transparency, corrupt local governments and, according to the article, apathy among the slum residence toward the conditions they were (are) living in. (An assertion I have  a hard time believing. I would think anyone, regardless of their level of education or financial standing would have strong opinions about the sanitation and hygiene of their surroundings, since it directly effects quality of life. What the author sites as apathy misses the important detail of whether people living in that situation feel like there’s anything they can do about it. However, this feeling is my own uneducated bias and further research may prove apathy to be the case.)

The article goes into great detail about the history of municipal organization in Mumbai, the changes in legislation and the subsequent creation of CBOs (Community Based Organizations) and the dizzying array of bureaucratic tiers involved in identifying, funding and cleaning slums under SAP.

The article spends a lot of time exploring the consequences of decentralizing SWM. Like previous articles I have read up to now, it tells the story of how private companies and NGOs as well as informal privatization at very local levels funneled money intended for improving the slums into the pockets of small time politicians and organized crime rings.

What was particularly interesting to me was the explanation given for why is so easily fell apart, despite being a good idea.

In environments of scarcity and poverty, it’s easy for corruption to take hold, because the poorest of the poor are unable to hold their public officials accountable for how well or badly they do their job. Why? The most obvious reason (as noted before) being that when you are living just to survive, there is no time to spare for politics. Outside of that though the article mentioned a few other reasons.

The people in slum neighborhoods were rarely, if ever informed of what SAP or the CBOs were intended to do. They were never organized, or given a platform to voice their opinions on the matter. An uninformed  populace is easy to take advantage of.

With survival an everyday concern, the CBOs don’t give locals any incentive for wanting to clean their streets. Everyone would LOVE to have a clean park with a place for kids to play, but where is the long term benefit to people who never have time to enjoy that kind of luxury?

Also, the author noted that social divides like ethnicity, religion, caste, political affiliation etc. grow larger in environments of scarcity, making it difficult for a community to come together and unite under the banner of a single cause like making sure all the streets are kept clean. In these scenarios, people do what they need to do to survive and without organized government help, there’s no one to take the lead.

And of course, everyone’s favorite – politics. CBO’s are given a certain amount of grant money by MCGM to cover the cost of operations for SAP. But of course, they pass off the money without tracking where is goes, leading to situations where a properly connected CBO Chair can falsely register multiple SAPs to get more money without delivering any services.

Without National Government involvement, there’s no one keeping the lower levels accountable for bad behavior. On top of that, by signing over responsibility of SWM to private companies or NGO’s the Indian government essentially crippled itself. It limited it’s ability to set standards and limits as well as the ability to intervene when things went south. ( NOTE: I’m writing in the past tense, since the paper deals with issues documented up to 2010, but I am going to make the assumption for now that these things still hold some truth until I learn otherwise, but take my exploration of this article with a grain of salt).

The article documents one particular CBO organizer’s experience as an example of some of the deterioration that goes on without accountability and then preceded to explore smaller examples from 5 other slums in the city.

The 12 page, double columned article filled 5 pages of notes, front and back to obviously there is much more in it then I am recalling here. It’s an interesting article and a more in depth look at the political structure of large Indian  cities.

I’m tempted to give this article more time and attention, given the amount of information in it. There are particular details I want to explore more deeply. Also, on top of that, My birthday is Wednesday and my sister is visiting this week 😉 Rather then rush though the next article for the sake of taking in more volume I’ll take my time with this one.

One last note – there’s something about the development of the SAP program that feels familiar.  The story of good intentions leading to a good plan gone wrong feels like something I would do, being the bleeding heart that I am. (I’m trying to toughen up a little, I promise!) I am sometimes so eager to help that I don’t think of the logistics. I also make false assumptions about how people will behave or how my ideas will be received so I think this article was good for me to read on the level of just giving me another small reminder: Good ideas can go bad if they’re all heart and no head.

-Ashley