Revised Essay
In this captivating article “This Is Not A Slum”(2016) by Matias Enchanove and Rahul Srivastava, the authors inform us about the true potential that Dharavi has to offer, even though to many is it labeled a “Slum” in Mumbai (19). Enchanove and Srivastava believe Dharavi provides available affordable housing, work productivity, and a vibrant community for new-comers (19,20,21). The authors suggest places like Dharavi are better known as “homegrown neighborhoods,” demonstrating viable key fundamentals that could be exported around the world as a base model for urban cities. I strongly agree the various systems Dharavi has could be beneficial to other urban cities, taking into account that certain concepts or ideas would need to be modified in order to function in other urban contexts (20,23). The ethics “homegrown neighbourhoods” carry can be implemented elsewhere and may be used as base models to create a positive impact on cities alike (19,20).
Enchanove and Srivastava emphasize the strong community that thrives in Dharavi. On the one hand, Enchanove and Srivastava acknowledge that Dharavi lacks infrastructure as well as in support from their government to help improve their quality of life (22). On the other hand, the authors remind us of the key qualities of Dharavi’s potential, influencing transformative innovative ideas (22). Ultimately, they encourage us to recognize the key fundamentals of Dharavi, including multi-purpose homes, increased productivity, and affordable living, regardless of your background (24). The authors lastly endorse the idea that multi-purpose homes would thrive because of the new concepts and forms of architecture (24).
According to both Enchanove and Srivastava, the homes that current residents subside in Dharavi are used for several purposes. For example, homes can be used for living, working, and recreational purposes (20,21). The authors tell us that one of the most important things to a homeowner in Dharavi is their plot of land. The property they own is crucial and highly valuable to them (20). The livelihoods of people in Dharavi rely on financial stability in order to benefit their families and community. Many new-comers who enter Dharavi are outcasts who have been pushed out of cities due to the cost of living and available jobs. However, the outsiders now can live comfortably in the communities of Dharavi because of cheap rentals and potential work (23). The authors inform us that Dharavi faces limited resources; luckily the people do not take them for granted. (check) They develop their homes into shops, factories, and hostels to provide an adequate income (20,21).
Through both the author’s observations and facts about the productivity and economic boom from Dharavi are seen to play a significant factor in the success; providing 500 million worth of exports in a year and is considered one of the highest productive parts of the city (20). The lively spirits of Dharavi do not falter; the people are skilled, productive and hardworking entrepreneurs (20). Through the author’s research, unfortunately, Dharavi is not improved by their state to help expand and increase infrastructure (22). (reword sentence) Furthermore, Dharavi is continually improved and functions because of its people living there (22). Ramesh Misra, who is a resident of Dharavi for many years, states “We have always improved Dharavi by ourselves. All we want is permission and support to keep doing it.” (23) In other words, Misra believes Dharavi is self-supported and doesn’t rely on the state to improve the community. However, the people seek permission to make changes themselves. The authors claim that even through all the positive contributions Dharavi has made to the city/economy, this “homegrown neighborhood” never gets the recognition it deserves, but instead a disheartening label (19,20). In addition, Enchanove and Srivastava admire the enlightening community Dharavi has, regardless of the negativity attached to their hometown (20). The neighbors in the community offer each other support systems such as daycare for their children, and communal housing (21). The women living in Dharavi also feel a sense of security and do not feel threatened on the streets (21). Lastly, the authors tell us that the streets of Dharavi are not only safe but are sometimes turned unto venues for traditional ceremonies (21). Throughout the information presented the authors suggest Dharavi is a great place for the young and the old to subside and live in peace.
City planners have a crucial effect on Dharavi and have the power to demolish Dharavi, pushing the people out with no place to go leaving the residents homeless (22). Shaikh Mobin informs the New York Times that “People from all over the city, and the politicians, are making hue and cry that Dharavi must be developed” (22). Mobins point is that Dharavi itself will not be developed, but developments will be made to benefit richer classes featuring entertainment and malls (22). I believe the politicians and city dwellers are blind and not interested in the positive qualities that Dharavi has. The one improvement Dharavi would need is the government to invest money into improving the infrastructure, such as sewage/plumbing (22). Once again the features of Dharavi that could be applied to other communities would be multi-purpose homes, affordability, increased productivity and an inclusive community; providing work and housing for newcomers into the city (19,20,21).
There are various places in the world that could use systems that Dharavi has such as India, Asia, and the western part of the world. Ultimately, I would endorse Dharavi’s foundation into any major cities that are dense and overpopulated. Vancouver, BC is a great example of a place that could use the key fundamentals of Dharavi to improve the infrastructure and dense communities. The young generation would benefit from affordable housing and an inclusive community. The government could create smart apartments featuring available work/living space including an extra floor or room for the owner to use for any purpose. The apartments could also be used for communal living saving the government time and money to create more living space for a higher density of people. My argument is not to force the aspects of Dharavi onto people but to educate society about the benefits and possible reallocation of resources within our own country. I believe the authors suggested this as well for cities to look further into concepts like Dharavi to increase the success of urban cities. The key aspects that “homegrown neighborhoods” have can be implemented in various other urban cities as a foundation, significantly having a positive impact (19,20).