Amitabh Kunadu, Arjun Kumar | Copenhagen Consensus Center

The objective of the study is to contribute to the discussion in the academic literature on the relative efficiency of engaging public agencies, private developers and civil societies along with the beneficiaries, in the housing projects. In the context of social housing, engagement of the private sector through direct and partnership with public agencies has been subject of discussion and debate, particularly since the early eighties. It is often argued that private sector enjoys a relative advantage in terms of cost-efficiency, timeliness in delivery and responding to the requirements of beneficiaries.

On the other hand, claims have been made that public agencies, through the involvement of the community leaders and mobilization of beneficiaries, are capable of bringing down the costs substantially and increase social benefits by reducing leakages or displacement of slum dwellers within a participatory framework.

The present study tries to bring in definite empirical evidence in the context of these alternative perspectives, based on an evaluation of three centrally sponsored verticals viz. Beneficiary-led Construction or enhancement (BLC) (individual led), Affordable Housing in Partnership (AHP) (private developers led) and In-situ Slum Redevelopment (ISSR) (publicprivate partnership and community engagement) launched under the contemporary national policy of Housing for All by 2022 – Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana Urban (PMAY U).

The three Centrally Sponsored Scheme verticals namely BLC, AHP and ISSR, launched under PMAY U, for large cities of Andhra Pradesh have been analyzed in terms of their Benefit-Cost Ratios within a comparative framework, keeping the national level figures as the reference point. Comparisons have also been made with All India and Rajasthan which is the other state, covered in the study.

Official available information has been used for computation, sourced from National Housing Bank (NHB) RESIDEX, Census 2011, NSS 60th round, Labour Bureau, HPEC, MoUD, HUDCO, NBO, NBCC among others. A few of the parameters have been determined in consultation with the officials of various public agencies, select subject experts, functionaries in concerned. Civil Societies and other stakeholders engaged in slums and affordable housing projects at ground level.

Research Summary

Cost-benefit analysis of housing vertical interventions for urban poor in large cities of Andhra Pradesh
Cost-benefit analysis of housing vertical interventions for urban poor in large cities of Andhra Pradesh