Share this story!            

VIEW: The urban poverty phenomenon —Syed Mohammad Ali

The Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper prepared by the Ministry of Finance admits that a lack of systematic data constrains the analysis of poverty dynamics. Consequently a majority of the development efforts in our urban areas remain impelled by broad generalisations, which consider the poor and their problems to be more homogenous than they really are

Urbanisation is occurring rapidly not only in the developed countries but in developing countries as well. Multilateral agencies estimate that the number of people living in urban areas around the world will double between 1990 and 2025 to more than five billion. Alongside this population increase, the number of poor in urban areas is also going to rise. It is thus necessary to pay close attention to this growing phenomenon of urban poverty, and to the dynamics particular to it.

Usually poverty is analysed at the national level, at most with regional price differentials indicated for urban and rural areas. While more information is available over the past years concerning the definitions, measurement and analysis of poverty, it is not automatically applicable to highly diverse urban environments. To design effective poverty reduction programmes and policies specifically for the urban poor, it is necessary to first accurately assess their circumstances. Poverty is most easily reported in quantitative, money measures which use income or consumption to assess whether a household can afford to purchase a basic basket of goods at a given point in time. Ideally, the basket reflects local tastes and adjusts for price differentials across urban-rural areas in a country.

Money-metric methods are used widely because they are thought to be objective and accurate. Yet, if not properly adjusted, monetary measures can underestimate urban poverty by ignoring the extra costs of urban living which includes greater housing and transport costs. It is also important to keep in mind that some dimensions of poverty are more pronounced for those who are disadvantaged within an urban setting. The urban poor have to contend with overcrowded living conditions; environmental hazard stemming from density and hazardous location of settlements; and increased social fragmentation due to fewer community and inter-household mechanisms for social security relative to those found in rural areas.

The next thing to keep in mind is that the data obtained on urban poverty has to be comparable. While multilateral agencies favour use of data that can be compared across countries, to facilitate their own development projects, such comparisons may be a bit too far-fetched. It is necessary however to develop comparable data on urban poverty for different cities within the same country, which would in turn can capture differences between the poor in small towns and mega cities, or even between urban slum areas within a city.

Accurate urban poverty assessments prove invaluable in terms of formulating development strategies. The World Bank has funded poverty assessments for Johannesburg and Bangalore for example, which are designed to lend support to municipalities in monitoring the impact of specific poverty alleviation interventions. There is also more information available concerning the problem of slums, particularly due to UN-endorsed HABITAT and Cities Alliance initiatives. Ultimately however, improving service delivery is the central challenge for local authorities. The gap between the requirements of constituents and the capacity of municipalities to deliver services deserves serious attention.

Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers, which are being used to channel development aid to developing countries, have a strong emphasis on the relative importance of rural poverty, yet many practitioners are concerned that these poverty estimates do not accurately represent the situation with respect to urban poverty. The approaches being used to measure poverty in many developing countries therefore do not appear to adequately acknowledge the context of the urban poor and many of the factors that contribute to their poverty. This is despite the fact that the underlying trends suggest that increasing urban poverty is a growing trend, and that inequality in urban areas often appears to be greater than in rural areas.

There is relatively higher inequality to be found in the urban areas of Pakistan as well. Urban areas account for a third of Pakistan’s population and a fifth of the urban population is officially considered poor. The largest concentration of the urban poor in Pakistan is to be found in Karachi, which is also the most polluted city of the country.

The municipal authorities in all our major cities are struggling to control transport, electricity and water supply requirements of their growing populations. The numerous epidemics that are spreading as a result of the breakdown of sanitation and sewerage systems provide a glaring example of the inability of local municipalities to cope with this increasing pressure.

UNDP has recently launched a programme to improve conditions of slums and under-serviced urban settlements. According to a UN press release, this urban poverty alleviation programme is worth $10 million and will be launched in Gujranwala, Faisalabad, Multan, Rawalpindi, DI Khan, Bannu, Mithi, Jacobabad, Sibi, Harnai, Mirpur and Muzaffarabad. These cities were selected on the basis of their district government’s willingness to allocate funds from their budgets on the basis of cost sharing with the CCBs. UNDP in turn hopes to further strengthen the component sharing methodology for urban development.

This UN programme is based on the lessons learnt from other community-based urban initiatives in Pakistan. Significant improvements for low-income households are possible at a cost they can afford and which they are prepared to pay for. The large impact and the very large scale of the community-developed sewer system in Karachi, supported by Orangi Pilot Project had been achieved in this way. The Anjuman Samaji Behbood’s initiative in Faisalabad has also sought to draw on the Orangi Pilot Project model and proved to be improving sanitation services for disadvantaged segments of the city.

Both these initiatives demonstrate how service delivery can be greatly improved for large sections of the low-income population, despite the weaknesses and lack of funds available to the local authorities. Unfortunately the PRSP for Pakistan prepared by the Ministry of Finance admits that a lack of systematic data constrains the analysis of poverty dynamics. Consequently a majority of the development efforts in our urban areas remain impelled by broad generalisations, which consider the poor and their problems to be more homogenous than they really are.

The writer is a researcher with diverse experience in the development sector. He can be reached at syedmohdali555@yahoo.com

Home | Editorial

Share this story!