2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.jue.2007.08.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measuring the welfare effects of slum improvement programs: The case of Mumbai

Abstract: This paper evaluates the welfare effects of in situ slum upgrading and relocation programs using data for 5000 households in Mumbai, India. We estimate a model of residential location choice in which households value the ethnic composition of neighborhoods and employment accessibility in addition to housing characteristics. The importance of neighborhood composition and employment access implies that relocation programs must be designed carefully if they are to be welfare-enhancing. The value of our model is t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
26
0
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
2
26
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…and the redistributed consequences arising from diversities in population, growth rate and construction cost across settlements within the same city (Tinsley, 1993;Hansen & Skak, 2008); variation in housing types (Takeuchi, Cropper, & Bento, 2006); relative proximity to physical and social networks, workplaces and the CBD (Rath & and Routray, 1997); neighbourhood and housing services, poor sanitation and pressures on schools (Tinsley, 1993;Manaster, 1968;Penrose, de Castro, Werema, & Ryan, 2010;Rose, 2006;Field, 2003) and lot size (Friedman, Jimenez, & Mayo, 1988). Other factors for utility differences may include original land access modality (Durand-Lasserve, Durand-Lasserve, & Selod, 2013), gender of household head since female household head often engender less transfer uncertainty (Lanjouw & Levy, 1998), type of employment, household size, duration of residency and education level (Friedman, Jimenez, & Mayo, 1988).…”
Section: Modelling Informality and Transaction Failure Riskmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…and the redistributed consequences arising from diversities in population, growth rate and construction cost across settlements within the same city (Tinsley, 1993;Hansen & Skak, 2008); variation in housing types (Takeuchi, Cropper, & Bento, 2006); relative proximity to physical and social networks, workplaces and the CBD (Rath & and Routray, 1997); neighbourhood and housing services, poor sanitation and pressures on schools (Tinsley, 1993;Manaster, 1968;Penrose, de Castro, Werema, & Ryan, 2010;Rose, 2006;Field, 2003) and lot size (Friedman, Jimenez, & Mayo, 1988). Other factors for utility differences may include original land access modality (Durand-Lasserve, Durand-Lasserve, & Selod, 2013), gender of household head since female household head often engender less transfer uncertainty (Lanjouw & Levy, 1998), type of employment, household size, duration of residency and education level (Friedman, Jimenez, & Mayo, 1988).…”
Section: Modelling Informality and Transaction Failure Riskmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These need to be described in the note. Understanding outcomes in a post-intervention scenario relies broadly on qualitative and quantitative approaches-generally followed by World Bank, ADB and other multi-lateral agencies (Annez et al, 2012;PNPM-Urban, 2013;Takeuchi, Cropper, & Bento, 2006). The former principally develops an assessment framework which identifies key desirable outcomes post-intervention (useful in our context).…”
Section: A1mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similar to worldwide initiatives (Takeuchi et al, 2008), Turkey has been trying to solve the squatter settlement issue by implementing various approaches since 1949. In this framework, the Demolition of Illegally Built Structures Law No.…”
Section: Legalization Of Illegal Settlementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The migration from rural to urban areas experienced especially in the industrialization period has led to rapid urbanization and the construction of illegal settlements in many countries (Choguill, 2007;Keles¸R, 2006;Majale, 2008;Takeuchi, Cropper, & Bento, 2008;Viratkapan & Perera, 2006;Werlin, 1999;). These settlements are usually over-crowded, unsafe, temporary, unhygienic, probably illegal, and mostly located in the suburban areas of cities.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%