CHAPTER-5
URBANISATION AND THEIR SLUMS: A STUDY OF SLUM
ENVIRONMENT OF THE FOUR SLUM LOCALITIES IN
BELGAUM CITY
5.1. INTRODUCTION
Urbanization is basically influenced by the incidence of poverty and
underemployment and seasonal unemployment of rural people. They migrate to urban
areas in search of regular employment and settle down in urban areas where living
conditions are better and cost of living is low. This leads to growth of slums in urban
areas and slums exhibit conditions of poor housing, lack of sanitation facilities, etc. The
migrants largely belong to socially backward communities and caste groups. The study
covers 200 respondents in the four selected slum localities in the urban study area of
Belgaum city. It has made an analysis of the slum environment and the social
conditions of the respondents in the study area of Belgaum City.
The discussions in this core chapter of the thesis are focused on the analysis of the data
pertaining to the slum environment of the four slum localities in Belgaum city covered
by the field survey. The four slum areas include parts of Anagol, Malaprabhanagar,
Ambedkarnagar, and Old Gandhinagar. The field survey in this part of the study relates
to….
•
The poverty level of the respondent families in the slum areas indicated by the
APL and BPL status and their respective percentage in the total number of
respondent families.
•
Social groups of respondent families based on caste affiliations.
•
Housing, drainage and sanitation conditions of respondents’ families.
•
Migration status of respondents.
•
House ownership and house facilities relating to Kitchen, Bathroom, Living
rooms, and Latrine.
•
Household possessions of respondent families viz; Electricity, Telephone, TV
and Cable connections, Refrigerators, Vehicles, Furniture, LPG stoves, etc.
108
5.2 BACKGROUND STUDY OF SLUM ENVIRONMENT OF THE FOUR
SLUM LOCALITIES IN BELGAUM CITY
HOUSEHOLD DETAILS OF RESPONDENT SLUM DWELLERS:
The discussions on these and other related aspects of the slum environment in
the four urban areas of Belgaum City have been supported by the empirical evidences
provided in appropriate tables. Inferences and conclusions have been provided based on
the data obtained through the field survey.
The household details of the respondent slum dwellers in the four slum in
Belgaum city provide some significant trends relating to the family size, age, education,
marital status, family occupation, etc.
Family size of the respondents:
The study has revealed that the family size of the majority of 172 respondents
(86%) was of 1 to5 members. The family size of a smaller number of 28 respondents
(14%) was of 6 and more members. Thus the majority of the families of the respondent
residents of the four slums in Belgaum had an optimum size of members.
Table: 5.1.Distribution of respondents according to area and Family size.
Family
size
Notified slums
Anagol
%
1-5
44
6+
Total
88.0
Malapra
bha
Nagar
40
6
12.0
50
100
Non-Notified slums
%
80.0
Ambed
kar
Nagar
45
10
20.0
50
100
%
Total
%
Chisquare
p-value
2.3256
0.50765
90.0
Old
GandhiN
agar
43
%
86.0
172
86.0
5
10.0
7
14.0
28
14.0
50
100
50
100
200
100
Source: Field Survey.
Average family size of the respondents:
Area wise analysis about the family size indicates that the mean size of the
families in Anagol was 4.2, Malaprabha Nagar 4.3, Ambedkar Nagar 3.9, and in Old
Gandhi Nagar the mean family size was 3.9.
Table: 5.2.Average family size by areas.
Summary
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Ambedkar Nagar
Old GandhiNagar
Total
F-value
P-value
Mean
4.2
4.3
3.9
3.9
4.1
0.7277
0.5366
SD
1.2
1.6
1.4
1.6
1.5
Source: Field Survey.
109
Age wise distribution of family members of respondent slum dwellers:
The average age of the family members of the respondent slum dwellers in
Anagol was 26.10 years, Malaprabha Nagar 27.12 years, Ambedkar Nagar 25.49 years
and in Old Gandhi Nagar the average age of the family members was 26.69 years. The
overall average age of the family members of the respondent slum dwellers was 26.36
years.
Table: 5.3.Average age of family members by areas.
Summary
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Ambedkar Nagar
Old GandhiNagar
Total
Mean
26.10
27.12
25.49
26.69
26.36
SD
15.66
15.82
15.29
14.98
15.43
Source: Field Survey.
Age Groups of family members of respondents:
The total number of the family members of the respondent slum dwellers in
Belgaum city was 814, of which 127 members (15.60%) belonged to less than 10 years
of age. Locality wise, the number of family members varied from 25 in Old Gandhi
Nagar to 37 in Anagol. A total number of 215 family members (26.41%) belonged to
11-20 years of age. The number varied between 51 in Anagol and 56 in Ambedkar
Nagar. There were 197 family members of the respondents (24.20%) who belonged to
the age group of 21-30 years. The number varied from 45 in Ambedkar Nagar to 54 in
Old Gandhi Nagar. A total number of 105 family members (12.90%) belonged to the
age group of 31-40 years. The number varied from 23 in Ambedkar Nagar to 29 in
Anagol. Family members totaling 104 (12.90%) belonged to 41-50 years of age and a
small number of 66 family members (8.11%) of the respondents belonged to more than
51 years of age.
110
Table: 5.4.Distribution of respondents according to area and age groups of family
members.
Notified slums
Non-Notified slums
Anagol
%
Malapra
bha
Nagar
%
Ambed
kar
Nagar
%
Old
GandhiNa
gar
%
Total
%
<10yrs
37
29.13
33
25.98
32
25.20
25
19.69
127
15.60
11-20yrs
51
23.72
55
25.58
56
26.05
53
24.65
215
26.41
21-30yrs
49
24.87
49
24.87
45
22.84
54
27.41
197
24.20
31-40yrs
29
27.62
28
26.67
23
21.90
25
23.81
105
12.90
41-50yrs
24
23.08
29
27.88
27
25.96
24
23.08
104
12.78
51+yrs
19
28.79
19
28.79
13
19.70
15
22.73
66
8.11
Total
209
25.68
213
26.17
196
24.08
196
24.08
814
100.0
Age groups
Source: Field Survey
Educational status of family members of respondents:
It is significant to find from the field survey that a large number of 260 family
members of the respondents (31.94%) are illiterate. Locality wise, the number of
illiterates varied from 53 in Old Gandhi Nagar to 82 in Anagol. Majority of 272 family
members (33.42%) had only primary education. The number varied from 65 in Anagol
to 72 in Malaprabha Nagar. A substantial number of 226 family members (27.76%) had
secondary education. The number ranged between 45 each in Anagol and Ambedkar
Nagar to 74 in Malaprabha Nagar. A lesser number of 39 family members (4.79%) had
degree level education with the number ranging between 7 in Malaprabha Nagar and 11
each in Anagol and Ambedkar Nagar. There were 8 family members with just
LKG/UKG level of education and another 8 family members with other level of
education. There was 1 family member in Malaprabha Nagar who had PUC level of
education.
111
Table: 5.5. Distribution of respondents according to area and educational
qualifications of family members.
Notified slums
Non-Notified slums
Anagol
%
Malapr
abha
Nagar
%
Ambed
kar
Nagar
%
Old
GandhiN
agar
%
Total
%
Illiterates
82
31.54
56
21.54
69
26.54
53
20.38
260
31.94
LKG/UKG
3
37.50
1
12.50
2
25.00
2
25.00
8
0.98
Primary
65
23.90
72
26.47
68
25.00
67
24.63
272
33.42
Secondary
45
19.91
74
32.74
45
19.91
62
27.43
226
27.76
PUC
0
0.00
1
100.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
1
0.12
Degree
11
28.21
7
17.95
11
28.21
10
25.64
39
4.79
Others
3
37.50
2
25.00
1
12.50
2
25.00
8
0.98
209
25.68
213
26.17
196
24.08
196
24.08
814
100.00
Educations
Total
Source: Field Survey
Marital status of family members of respondents of slum areas:
It is found from field survey that majority of 402 family members of
respondents (49.39%) were married. The number ranged from 91 in Ambedkar Nagar
to 111 in Malaprabha Nagar. Further 142 family members (17.44%) were unmarried.
The number varied from 34 in Ambedkar Nagar to 37 in Old Gandhi Nagar. It was
found that 270 family members (33.17%) were children and others. The number varied
from 62 in Old Gandhi Nagar to 71 in Ambedkar Nagar. The following table provides
the details.
Table: 5.6.Distribution of respondents according to area and marital status of family
members
Marital
status
Notified slums
Anagol
%
Married
103
Unmarried
Non-Notified slums
25.62
Malapr
abha
Nagar
111
36
25.35
Children
and others
70
Total
209
%
27.61
Ambed
kar
Nagar
91
35
24.65
25.93
67
25.68
213
%
Total
%
22.64
Old
GandhiNag
ar
97
%
24.13
402
49.39
34
23.94
37
26.06
142
17.44
24.81
71
26.30
62
22.96
270
33.17
26.17
196
24.08
196
24.08
814
100.0
Source: Field Survey
Occupational distribution of family members:
Occupational distribution of family members of the respondent slum dwellers in
Belgaum city indicates that large numbers of 308 family members (37.84%) are
occupied on a regular basis. The number varied from 62 in Ambedkar Nagar to 92 in
112
Malaprabha Nagar. A lesser number of 139 family members (17.08%) are involved as
casual workers. Their number varied from 32 in Anagol to 37 in Ambedkar Nagar.
Majority of 367 family members (45.09%) did nothing (no work). Their number varied
from 85 in Malaprabha Nagar to 97 in Ambedkar Nagar.
Table: 5.7.Occupational Distributions of Family Members.
Nature of work
Notified slums
Non-Notified slums
Total
%
Anagol
%
Malapr
abha
Nagar
%
Ambedka
r Nagar
%
Old
GandhiN
agar
%
Regular
81
26.30
92
29.87
62
20.13
73
23.70
308
37.84
Casual
32
23.02
36
25.90
37
26.62
34
24.46
139
17.08
None
96
26.16
85
23.16
97
26.43
89
24.25
367
45.09
Total
209
25.68
213
26.17
196
24.08
196
24.08
814
100.0
Source: Field Survey
Average number of days of work by family members:
The average number of working days of family members in the four slum areas
of Belgaum city was 18.36 days a month. The number of working days varied from a
minimum of 17.44 days in Old Gandhi Nagar to 19.67 days in Anagol.
Table: 5.8.Average of no of days of work of family members by areas.
Summary
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Ambedkar Nagar
Old GandhiNagar
Total
Mean
19.67
17.84
18.56
17.44
18.36
SD
12.28
10.91
10.96
11.09
11.32
Source: Field Survey.
Average wages per month of family members of respondents:
The average monthly wages of family members of the respondent slum dwellers
of Belgaum city was Rs. 2493.61. The area wise monthly wages were Rs. 2550.89 for
family members in Anagol, Rs.2449.61 in Malaprabha Nagar, Rs.2558.59 in
Ambedkarnagar and Rs.2426.17 in Old Gandhi Nagar.
Table: 5.9.Average ages per month of family members by areas
Summary
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Ambedkar Nagar
Old GandhiNagar
Total
Mean
2550.89
2449.61
2558.59
2426.17
2493.61
SD
2061.78
2742.26
2043.34
1960.74
2246.15
Source: Field Survey.
113
Distribution of respondents according to area and ration card category in
Belgaum city:
The study covered a total number of 200 respondent residents in four residential
areas of Anagol and Malaprabha Nagar in the notified slums and Ambedkar Nagar and
Old Gandhi Nagar in non-notified slum areas of Belgaum city each area consisting of
50 respondents categorized under APL and BPL income groups. The distribution of the
respondents based on the ration card category indicates that majority of the respondents
in all the four slum areas, accounting for more than two percent of the total, belonged to
the lower income groups holding ration cards under the category of BPL(below poverty
line). the total number of BPL ration card holders in the four slum areas was 148
accounting for 74%of the total while the total number of those holding ration cards
under the APL (above poverty line) category averaged 52 constituting 26% of the total.
There is a greater representation of respondents belonging to BPL category as the slum
areas obviously are inhabited by economically weaker section of the society.
Table: 5.10. Distribution of respondents according to area and ration card
category in Belgaum city
Ration card
category
Notified slums
Non-Notified slums
Total
%
Anagol
%
Malaprabh
a Nagar
%
Ambedkar
Nagar
%
Old
GandhiN
agar
%
APL
12
24.0
14
28.0
15
30.0
11
22.0
52
26.0
BPL
38
76.0
36
72.0
35
70.0
39
78.0
148
74.0
Total
50
100.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
200
100.0
Chi-square= 1.0403,
df=3,
p=0.79170
Source: Field Survey.
Out of a total of 200 respondents, 52 respondents have APL cards and 148
respondents have BPL cards. Out of 52 respondents have APL cards, in which 24%
belongs to Anagol, 28% belongs to Malaprabha nagar, 30% belongs to
Amabedkarnagar and 22% belongs to Old Gandhinagar.
However, out of a 148
respondents with BPL cards, in which 76% belongs to Anagol, 72% belongs to
Malaprabha nagar, 70% belongs to Amabedkarnagar and 78% belongs to Old
Gandhinagar. Therefore, the chi-square test of significance clearly showed that, there
is no significant difference observed between four slums with respect status of rations
cards (chi-square=1.0403, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance.
114
Percenatge
Figure-5.1Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and ration
card category.
Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and
ration card category
100.0
90.0
78.0
76.0
80.0
72.0
70.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
28.0
30.0
24.0
22.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar Ambedkar Nagar Old GandhiNagar
BPL
APL
Source: Table-5.10
Distribution of respondent according to area and social group:
The following table-5.11 provides the details of the social groups of the
respondents. The schedule caste residents accounted for the highest average number of
77 (38.5%) among the 200 selected respondents in the four residential areas of
Belgaum city. Area wise, they accounted for 34% and 38% in notified slums of Anagol
and Malaprabha Nagar respectively. In the non-notified slums, respondents belonging
to SC caste group accounted for 46% and 36% in Ambedkar Nagar and Old Gandhi
Nagar respectively. The respondents belonging to scheduled tribe (ST) and other
backward class (OBC) social groups accounted for 20% each. The respondents
belonging to other social groups were slightly more at 21.5% of the total. Area wise,
the number of respondents belonging to SC social group was maximum at 46% in
Ambedkar Nagar under non-notified slums area followed by 38% in Malaprabha Nagar
under notified slums and 36% in Old Gandhi Nagar under non-notified slums. Resident
respondents of scheduled caste and scheduled tribe social groups constituted 20% of the
total in the four areas under notified and non-notified slum areas of Belgaum city. The
number of respondents belonging to other social groups constituted 21% of the total in
the four areas covered by the city in the two slum areas. However, it is significant to
115
find that maximum number of respondents (78.5%) in two different types of slum areas
belonged to the social backward communities of SC, ST and OBC.
Table: 5.11. Distribution of respondents according to area and social group in
Belgaum City.
Social
group
Notified slums
Anagol
%
SC
17
ST
Non-Notified slums
34.0
Malapr
abha
Nagar
19
4
8.0
OBC
8
Others
Total
38.0
Ambed
kar
Nagar
23
10
20.0
16.0
14
21
42.0
7
50
100.0
Source: Field Survey.
%
%
46.0
Old
GandhiN
agar
18
36.0
77
38.5
11
22.0
15
30.0
40
20.0
28.0
8
16.0
10
20.0
40
20.0
14.0
8
16.0
7
14.0
43
21.5
100.0
200
100.0
50
100.0
Chi-square= 22.7716,
50
%
Total
100.0
50
df=9,
p=0.0067*
%
Note: *p<0.05.
Figure-5.2 Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and social group
Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and social group
50.0
46.0
45.0
42.0
40.0
Percenatge
35.0
38.0
36.0
34.0
25.0
22.0
20.0
20.0
16.0
20.0
16.0 16.0
14.0
15.0
10.0
30.0
28.0
30.0
14.0
8.0
5.0
0.0
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
SC
ST
Ambedkar Nagar
OBC
Old GandhiNagar
Others
Source: table-5.11
Housing condition of respondents:
The study has revealed that majority of 118 respondent residents in the two
slum areas consisting the four localities in Belgaum city constituting 59% lived in
Pucca houses, of which majority of them lived in Malaprabha Nagar (32) in notified
slum area and in Old Gandhi Nagar area (36) in non-notified slum area of Belgaum
city. A total number of 82 respondents constituting 41% of the total lived in Kaccha
116
houses in the four localities in notified and non-notified slum areas of the city. Among
them, relatively more number of them lived in Anagol (23) in notified slums and
Ambedkar nagar (27) in non-notified slums. Out of a total of 200 respondents, 118
respondents have Pucca houses and 82 respondents have Kaccha houses. Out of 118
respondents having Pucca houses, 54% belongs to Anagol, 64% belonged to
Malaprabha nagar, 46% belonged to Amabedkar nagar and 72% belonged to Old
Gandhinagar. However, out of 82 respondents having Kaccha houses, 46% belonged to
Anagol, 36% belonged to Malaprabha nagar, 54% belonged to Amabedkar nagar and
28% belonged to Old Gandhinagar. Therefore, the chi-square test of significance
clearly showed that, there is a significant difference was observed between four slums
with respect to the status of nature of houses (chi-square=8.0208, p<0.05) at 5% level
of significance.
Table: 5.12 Distribution of respondents according to area and nature of house in
Belgaum City.
Nature of
house
Notified slums
Anagol
%
54.0
Malapr
abha
Nagar
32
Pucca
27
Kaccha
23
46.0
18
Total
50
100.0
Non-Notified slums
%
64.0
Ambed
kar
Nagar
23
36.0
27
50
100.0
Chi-square= 8.0208,
50
%
Total
%
46.0
Old
GandhiN
agar
36
72.0
118
59.0
54.0
14
28.0
82
41.0
100.0
200
100.0
100.0
50
df=3,
p=0.04562*
%
Source: Field Survey. Note: *p<0.05
Figure-5.3 Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and nature of
house
Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and nature of house
80.0
72.0
70.0
Percenatge
60.0
64.0
54.0
54.0
46.0
50.0
46.0
36.0
40.0
28.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Pucca
Ambedkar Nagar
Kaccha
Source: table-5.12
117
Old GandhiNagar
Drainage facility in the slum areas:
Slum dwellers are forced to live in most unhygienic environment without the
basic sanitation facilities. Despite various schemes for slum clearance and provision of
modern facilities, the residents of slum areas live in unhygienic conditions. The basic
need for minimum drainage facility has been denied to the residents of the slum areas
in Belgaum city. Large number of 64 respondent slum dwellers in the city constituting
32% indicated absence of drainage facility in their areas. A good number of 29
respondents (14.5%) mentioned about the blocked conditions of drainage in their areas
while maximum number of 107 respondents (53.5%) indicated free flowing type of
drainage without proper outlets. This appalling condition creates an environment of
infectious diseases and causes greater health hazards. Slums are the breeding grounds
for mosquitoes and the resultant diseases caused by them. The two slum areas covering
four localities present a picture of highly unhygienic and unhealthy conditions in the
growing city of Belgaum.
Table: 5.13. Distribution of respondents according to area and drainage status in
Belgaum City
Drainage
status
Notified slums
Anagol
%
28.0
Malapr
abha
Nagar
19
Not
available
Blocked
14
Free
flowing
Total
3
6.0
33
50
Non-Notified slums
%
38.0
Ambed
kar
Nagar
16
2
4.0
66.0
29
100.0
50
%
32.0
Old
GandhiN
agar
15
30.0
64
32.0
1
2.0
23
46.0
29
14.5
58.0
33
66.0
12
24.0
107
53.5
100.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
200
100.0
Source: Field Survey.
118
%
Total
%
Figure-5.4 Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and drainage
status in Belgaum city
Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and drainage status
80.0
70.0
66.0
66.0
58.0
Percenatge
60.0
46.0
50.0
38.0
40.0
30.0
32.0
28.0
30.0
24.0
20.0
6.0
10.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Not available
Ambedkar Nagar
Blocked
Old GandhiNagar
Free flowing
Source: table-5.13
Garbage status in the slum areas:
The following table-5.14 provides poor sanitation and hygienic conditions in the
slim areas in Belgaum city. It has been further deteriorated by the spread of garbage in
those areas in addition to the highly unsatisfactory drainage conditions mentioned
earlier. A substantial number of 88 respondents, in the notified and non-notified slum
areas constituting 44% of the total, have mentioned about the garbage spread in their
areas. However, majority of 112 respondents (56%) did not mention about the garbage
in their areas and there is need for proper action regarding the removal of the garbage
by the authorities of the Municipal City Corporation of Belgaum who are mainly
responsible for maintaining sanitation in the city areas.
Table: 5.14. Distribution of respondents according to area and garbage status in
Belgaum City
Garbage
status
Notified slums
Anagol
%
50.0
Malapr
abha
Nagar
19
Found
around
Not found
25
25
50.0
Total
50
100.0
Non-Notified slums
%
38.0
Ambed
kar
Nagar
21
31
62.0
50
100.0
%
42.0
Old
GandhiN
agar
23
46.0
88
44.0
29
58.0
27
54.0
112
56.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
200
100.0
Chi-square= 1.6233,
%
Total
d f=3,
Source: Field Survey.
119
p=0.65410
%
Figure: 5.5 Percentage distributions of respondents according to area and
garbage status:
Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and garbage status
80.0
70.0
62.0
58.0
60.0
Percenatge
50.0
54.0
50.0
46.0
50.0
42.0
38.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Found around
Ambedkar Nagar
Old GandhiNagar
Not found
Source: table-5.14
House cleanliness__ Responses of residents:
Maintenance of cleanliness in the houses seems to have been ignored as
majority of 105 respondents accounting for 52.5% mentioned that they had not
maintained cleanliness in their houses. Locality wise, there is almost unanimity among
the selected respondents in the four localities covered by the study. However,
substantial number of 95 respondents constituting 47.5% asserted that they had
maintained cleanliness in their homes. Here again, almost an identical number of
respondents in the four localities indicated similar responses about cleanliness. The
responses indicate that there is need for creating awareness among the slum dwellers
about the importance of maintaining cleanliness in their houses. Municipal authorities
and voluntary organizations should work towards creating awareness among the
residents regarding the significance of maintaining cleanliness.
120
Table: 5.15. Distribution of respondents according to area and cleanliness of house
in Belgaum City
Cleanliness
of house
Notified slums
Anagol
%
Clean
21
Not clean
Total
Non-Notified slums
42.0
Malapr
abha
Nagar
24
29
58.0
50
100.0
%
48.0
Ambed
kar
Nagar
24
26
52.0
50
100.0
%
48.0
Old
GandhiN
agar
26
52.0
95
47.5
26
52.0
24
48.0
105
52.5
50
100.0
50
100.0
200
100.0
Chi-square= 1.0253,
%
Total
df=3,
%
p=0.79579
Source: Field Survey.
Figure-5.6 percentage distribution of respondents according to area and
cleanliness of house
Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and cleanliness of house
70.0
58.0
60.0
52.0
Percenatge
50.0
52.0
52.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
42.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Clean
Ambedkar Nagar
Old GandhiNagar
Not clean
Source: table-5.15
Noise level in the slum areas of Belgaum city:
Environmental pollution is caused by high intensity noise created by vehicular
traffic and movement of people. Slums are populated with overcrowding of people in
small and unhealthy residences. These cause air pollution and create health hazards
particularly for pregnant women, children and old age people who are largely home
found during day and night. The noise pollution is considered as ‘moderate’ according
to the majority of 135 respondent residents of slum areas accounting for 67.5% of the
total. The noise pollution is considered as ‘high’ by 42 respondents (21%) while the
noise pollution is deemed ‘low’ according to 23 respondents (11.5%). The locality wise
121
response of the selected residents of the four localities is largely similar to the overall
average of responses.
Table: 5.16. Distribution of respondents according to area and noise level in
Belgaum City.
Noise level
Notified slums
Anagol
%
Low
5
Medium
Non-Notified slums
10.0
Malapr
abha
Nagar
6
37
74.0
High
8
Total
50
%
12.0
Ambed
kar
Nagar
6
39
78.0
16.0
5
100.0
50
%
12.0
Old
GandhiN
agar
6
12.0
23
11.5
28
56.0
31
62.0
135
67.5
10.0
16
32.0
13
26.0
42
21.0
100.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
200
100.0
Chi-square= 9.4166,
%
Total
df=6,
%
p=0.1515
Source: Field Survey.
Figure-5.7 percentage distribution of respondents according to area and noise
levels.
Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and noice levels
100.0
90.0
78.0
74.0
80.0
Percenatge
70.0
62.0
56.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
32.0
26.0
30.0
16.0
20.0
10.0
12.0
10.0
10.0
12.0
12.0
Ambedkar Nagar
Old GandhiNagar
0.0
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Low
Medium
High
Source: table-5.16
5.3. MIGRATION DETAILS
Migration status of respondents:
Migrants coming to the city and residing in the four slum areas selected
constituted a substantial number of 90 accounting for 45% of the total while nonmigrant respondents constituted a majority of 110 representing 55% of the total
122
respondents of 200 from both the notified and non-notified slums. Migration to city
areas has been a common feature as there is a surplus manpower in the rural areas
where agricultural employment is seasonal. Hence the surplus labour in the rural areas
migrates to cities and finds slums as the suitable areas for their accommodation at lower
cost compared to non-slum areas.
Table: 5.17. Distribution of respondents according to area and migration status in
Belgaum City
Migration
status
Notified slums
Anagol
%
Yes
22
No
Total
Non-Notified slums
44.0
Malapr
abha
Nagar
19
28
56.0
50
100.0
%
38.0
Ambed
kar
Nagar
27
31
62.0
50
100.0
%
54.0
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
22
44.0
90
45.0
23
46.0
28
56.0
110
55.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
200
100.0
Chi-square= 2.6675,
%
Total
df=3,
%
p=0.44593
Source: Field Survey.
Figure-5.8 Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and migration
status
Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and migration status
70.0
62.0
56.0
60.0
Percenatge
50.0
56.0
54.0
46.0
44.0
44.0
38.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Yes
Ambedkar Nagar
No
Source: table-5.17
123
Old GandhiNagar
Purpose of migration:
Majority of 36 respondents (40%) had migrated to the city for earning their
livelihood from cooli work (porter) in the urban areas. Another 33 respondents
(36.67%) had migrated to the city for doing job work. A small number of 13
respondents (14.44%) had migrated to Belgaum city for business purpose. Other
reasons had compelled 8 respondents (8.89%) to migrate to the city. Thus employment
seeking in urban areas had attracted migrants in larger number to the city. Similar
reasons had compelled migrants to settle in slum areas of the city.
Table: 5.18. Distribution of respondents according to area and purpose of
migration in Belgaum City
Purpose of
migration
Notified slums
Anagol
%
Job
8
Cooli
Non-Notified slums
36.36
Malapr
abha
Nagar
5
9
40.91
Business
3
Others
Total
%
26.32
Ambed
kar
Nagar
12
8
42.11
13.64
3
2
9.09
22
100.0
%
Total
%
44.44
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
8
%
36.36
33
36.67
10
37.04
9
40.91
36
40.00
15.79
3
11.11
4
18.18
13
14.44
3
15.79
2
7.41
1
4.55
8
8.89
19
100.0
27
100.0
22
100.0
90
100.0
Source: Field Survey.
Figure-5.9 Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and purpose
of migration
Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and purpose of migration
50.0
Percenatge
40.0
44.4
42.1
40.9
40.9
37.0
36.4
30.0
36.4
26.3
18.2
20.0
15.8 15.8
13.6
11.1
9.1
10.0
7.4
4.6
0.0
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Job
Cooli
Source: table-5.18
124
Ambedkar Nagar
Business
Old GandhiNagar
Others
Status of house ownership/shelter of the respondents:
Majority of 107 respondents (53.5%) lived in their own houses despite being
poor and residing in slums. Locality wise, a lesser number of respondents were found
living in their own houses in Ambedkar Nagar compared to those in other three
localities. However a substantial number of 90 respondents (45.0%) lived in rented
houses. Relatively more number of respondents (29) in Ambedkar Nagar lived in rented
houses compared to those in other three localities. A handful of 3 respondents (1.5%) in
the notified slums of Anagol (1) and Malaprabha Nagar (2) lived in lease/ other type of
houses.
Table: 5.19. Distribution of respondents according to area and status of house in
Belgaum city
Status of
house
Notified slums
%
Malapr
abha
Nagar
Anagol
%
Ambed
kar
Nagar
Non-Notified slums
%
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
%
Total
%
Own
29
58.0
30
60.0
21
42.0
27
54.0
107
53.5
Rented
20
40.0
18
36.0
29
58.0
23
46.0
90
45.0
Leased &
others
1
2.0
2
4.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
3
1.5
Total
50
100.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
200
100.0
Source: Field Survey.
Figure-5.10 percentage distribution of respondents according to area and status of
house
Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and status of house
70.0
60.0
60.0
58.0
58.0
54.0
Percenatge
50.0
46.0
42.0
40.0
36.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Own
Rented
Source: table-5.19
125
0.0
Ambedkar Nagar
Leased & others
0.0
Old GandhiNagar
Average house rent per month:
The respondents residing in rented houses have been paying an average rent per
month ranging from a minimum of Rs.1013.89 in Malaprabha Nagar and maximum of
Rs.1952.17 in Anagol of notified slums. Similarly, the average rent per month paid by
respondents in non-notified slums ranged from a minimum of Rs.1212.50 in Old
Gandhi Nagar to a maximum of Rs.1376.67 in Ambedkar Nagar. From the results of
the above table, it can be seen that, the average rent paid per month in Ambedkar nagar
(1376.67±679.85) is higher followed by Old GandhiNagar (1212.50±509.10), Anagol
(1052.17±685.81) and Malaprabha Nagar (1013.89±416.15).
Table: 5. 20.Average rent paid per month in Belgaum city
Notified slums
Non-Notified slums
Anagol
Malaprabha
Nagar
Ambedkar Nagar
Old Gandhi
Nagar
Total
Average rent
1052.17
1013.89
1376.67
1212.50
1187.89
SD rent
685.81
416.15
679.85
509.10
607.65
Source: Field Survey
Figure-5.11 Comparison of different slum areas with average rent paid per month
Figure: Comparison of different slum areas with average rent paid per month
1376.67
1500.00
1212.50
1052.17
Mean value
1200.00
1013.89
900.00
600.00
300.00
0.00
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Source: table-5.20
126
Ambedkar Nagar
Old GandhiNagar
Floor area, No of rooms, No. of windows and value of building:
1.
Floor area of respondents’ house varied from a minimum of 457.08 Sq.ft in
Malaprabha slum area to a maximum of 512.80 Sq.ft in Old Gandhi Nagar.
The average floor area for the four localities was 483.75 Sq.ft.
2. The number of rooms varied between 2.20 in old Gandhi Nagar to 2.60 in
Anagol. The average was 2.38 for the four slum localities.
3.
The number of windows of the respondent slum residents varied from 1.42
in Malaprabha Nagar to 2.40 in Ambedkar Nagar. The average number of
windows was 2.70 for the four localities.
4. The value of buildings of the respondents varied from a minimum of Rs.98,
400 in Ambedkar Nagar to a maximum of Rs.2, 23,448 in Malaprabha
Nagar. The average value of the buildings/houses of the respondents in the
four slum localities was Rs.2, 52,627.
Table: 5.21. Comparison of four areas with respect to floor area, no of room, no of
windows, and value of building in Belgaum city.
Conditions
Summary
Anagol
Malaprab
ha Nagar
Ambedka
r Nagar
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
Total
F-value
P-value
Floor area
Mean
457.95
457.08
503.00
512.80
483.75
0.5169
0.6711
SD
258.34
288.64
287.74
292.98
281.85
No of rooms
Mean
2.60
2.44
2.26
2.20
2.38
1.9910
0.1166
SD
1.01
0.73
0.90
0.97
0.92
Mean
2.10
1.42
2.40
2.28
2.07
4.2346
0.0063*
SD
1.66
0.72
1.68
1.46
1.48
Mean
1246875
223448
98400
105617
252627
4.1492
0.0075*
3675450
146952
149807
128838
1245165
No of window
Value of building
SD
Source: Field Survey.
*p<0.05
From the results of the above table, it can be seen that,
1. No significant difference was observed between four slums with respect to
average floor area (F=0.5169, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. It means
that, the average floor area in four slums is similar.
2. No significant difference was observed between four slums with respect to
average number of rooms (F=1.9910, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. It
means, the average number of rooms in four slums is similar.
3. A significant difference was observed between four slums with respect to
average number of windows in their houses (F=4.2346, p<0.05) at 5% level of
127
significance. It means, the average number of windows in their houses in four
slums is different. In another words, average number of windows in their houses
in Ambedkar nagar area had a significant higher as compared to other areas
4. A significant difference was observed between four slums with respect to
average value of the houses (F=4.1492, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. It
means that, the average value of building of their house in four slums is
different. In another words, the average value of building of their house in
Anagol area had a significant higher as compared to other areas.
Figure-5.12. Comparison of different areas with average value of building of their
house
Figure: Comparison of different areas with average value of building of their house
1246875.00
1200000.00
Mean value
1000000.00
800000.00
600000.00
400000.00
223448.00
98400.00
200000.00
105617.00
0.00
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Ambedkar Nagar
Old GandhiNagar
Source: table-5.21
Separate kitchen in the house of respondents:
The responses of the sample residents of the four localities in Belgaum city
have been detailed in the following table-5.22. Living conditions of slum dwellers are
unhygienic without even a separate kitchen. Common rooms are used for kitchen with
the smoke creating air pollution and health hazards for the family members. Such
practices are common in slum areas where houses are too small without independent
kitchen facility. The study has revealed that majority of 104 respondents (52%) in the
two slum areas did not have separate kitchen and a substantial number of 94
respondents had separate kitchen. Majority of respondents in notified slums of Anagol
and Malaprabha Nagar had separate kitchens while majority of respondents in non128
notified slum areas of Ambedkar Nagar and Old Gandhi Nagar did not have separate
kitchens in their houses.
Table: 5.22. Distribution of respondents according to area and separate kitchen in
Belgaum City.
Separate
kitchen
Notified slums
Anagol
%
52.0
Malapr
abha
Nagar
27
Yes
26
No
24
48.0
Total
50
100.0
Non-Notified slums
%
54.0
Ambed
kar
Nagar
21
23
46.0
50
100.0
%
Total
%
42.0
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
22
%
44.0
96
48.0
29
58.0
28
56.0
104
52.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
200
100.0
Chi-square= 2.0833,df=3, p=0.5553
Source: Field Survey.
Figure-13 percentage distribution of respondents according to area and status of
separate Kitchen
Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and status of separate kitchen
70.0
58.0
60.0
52.0
Percenatge
50.0
56.0
54.0
48.0
46.0
44.0
42.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Ambedkar Nagar
Yes
Old GandhiNagar
No
Source: table-5.22
Separate bathroom facility in the respondents’ houses:
The facility of a separate bathroom in the residences has been affirmed by
majority 106 respondents (53%) in the two slum areas (notified and non-notified)
comprising four slum localities of Anagol, Malaprabha Nagar, Ambedkar Nagar and
Old Gandhi Nagar in Belgaum city. However a substantial number of 94 respondents
(47%) mentioned that they did not have separate bathrooms in their residences.
Separate bathroom is necessary in maintaining cleanliness and hygienic responses.
129
Table: 5.23. Distribution of respondents according to area and separate bathroom in
Belgaum city
Separate
bathroom
Notified slums
Anagol
%
Yes
25
No
Total
Non-Notified slums
50.0
Malapr
abha
Nagar
31
25
50.0
50
100.0
%
62.0
Ambed
kar
Nagar
20
19
38.0
50
100.0
%
Total
%
40.0
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
30
%
60.0
106
53.0
30
60.0
20
40.0
94
47.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
200
100.0
Chi-square= 6.1826, df=3, p=0.1030
Source: Field Survey.
Figure-5.14 percentage distribution of respondents according to area and status of
separate bathroom
Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and status of separate bathroom
70.0
62.0
60.0
60.0
Percenatge
50.0
50.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
40.0
38.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Ambedkar Nagar
Yes
Old GandhiNagar
No
Source: table-5.23
Separate latrine in the residences of respondents:
Despite the efforts made by the government at the state and the central levels
many residents in urban as well as rural areas do not have separate latrines. Use of
common latrines or going out for open defecation has been widely practiced in both
urban and rural areas. This indicates lack of awareness about sanitation, hygiene and
healthy living among the people, particularly those belonging to socially backward
groups and those living in slum areas. A substantial number of 87 respondents (43.5%)
did not have separate latrines attached to their houses. However, majority of 113
respondents (56.5%) did have separate latrines in their residences. The number of
resident respondents indicating the availability of latrines and those mentioning nonavailability latrines is largely similar in both notified slums and non-notified slums.
130
Table: 5.24.Distribution of respondents according to area and separate latrine
Separate
latrine
Notified slums
Non-Notified slums
Total
%
Anagol
%
Malapr
abha
Nagar
%
Ambed
kar
Nagar
%
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
%
Yes
30
60.0
27
54.0
30
60.0
26
52.0
113
56.5
No
20
40.0
23
46.0
20
40.0
24
48.0
87
43.5
Total
50
100.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
200
100.0
Chi-square= 1.0368,
df=3,
p=0.7921
Source: Field Survey.
Figure-5.15 Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and status of
separate latrine
Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and status of separate latrine
70.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
54.0
Percenatge
52.0
48.0
46.0
50.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Yes
Ambedkar Nagar
Old GandhiNagar
No
Source: table-5.24
Type of latrine in the residences of respondents:
Majority of 86 respondents (76.1%) in the two types of slums covering four
localities in Belgaum city have indicated that they have squatting type of latrines in
their residences. These types of latrines are common among traditional Indian families.
However a good number of 27 respondents (23.9%) had western type of latrines in their
residences.
131
Table: 5.25. if yes for separate latrine….
Separate
latrine
Notified slums
Anagol
%
Western
8
Squatting
Total
26.7
Malapr
abha
Nagar
9
22
73.3
30
100.0
Non-Notified slums
%
33.3
Ambed
kar
Nagar
2
18
66.7
27
100.0
%
Total
%
6.7
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
8
%
30.8
27
23.9
28
93.3
18
69.2
86
76.1
30
100.0
26
100.0
113
100.0
Total
%
Source: Field Survey.
Table: 5.26. Number of separate latrine….
Nature
Notified slums
Anagol
%
26.7
Malapr
abha
Nagar
9
Open
8
Public
22
73.3
Total
30
100.0
Non-Notified slums
%
33.3
Ambed
kar
Nagar
2
18
66.7
27
100.0
%
6.7
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
8
%
30.8
27
23.9
28
93.3
18
69.2
86
76.1
30
100.0
26
100.0
113
100.0
Source: Field Survey.
According to the above table the study reveals that majority of 86 respondents
(76.1%) used public latrines while 27 respondents (23.9%) used practiced open
defecation.
Number of persons sharing Public latrines:
Only one person in the family shared the public latrine according to majority of
71 respondents (62.8%). And in case of 42 respondents (37.2%) two members of their
families shared the public latrines.
Table: 5.27. if yes for Public latrine use, how many sharing…
Members
sharing..
Notified slums
Anagol
%
60.0
Malapr
abha
Nagar
14
One
18
Two
12
40.0
Total
30
100.0
Non-Notified slums
%
51.9
Ambed
kar
Nagar
18
13
48.1
27
100.0
%
60.0
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
21
80.8
71
62.8
12
40.0
5
19.2
42
37.2
30
100.0
26
100.0
113
100.0
Source: Field Survey.
132
%
Total
%
Payment made for using public latrines:
According to table-5.28, majority of 37 respondents who used public latrines
(90.2%) did not make any payment for using the public latrine. However, a small
number of 4 respondents (9.8%) did make payment for using public latrines.
Table: 5.28. If yes use public latrine, are you paying…
Paying
Notified slums
Anagol
%
9.1
Malapr
abha
Nagar
2
Yes
1
No
10
90.9
Total
11
100.0
Non-Notified slums
%
20.0
Ambed
kar
Nagar
1
8
80.0
10
100.0
%
Total
%
9.1
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
0
%
0.0
4
9.8
10
90.9
9
100.0
37
90.2
11
100.0
9
100.0
41
100.0
Source: Field Survey.
5.4. HOUSEHOLD POSESSIONS:
Household possessions of slum dwellers in Belgaum city:
House hold possessions indicate the living standards of the families belonging
to different social groups. The economic status and the level of income determine the
level of facilities available to the persons and families. The slum dwellers in the study
area have possessed many of the modern facilities enjoyed by average income groups
in the society. The study has revealed some significant facts about the household
possessions of the respondent residents of the slums in Belgaum city.
However, from the following table it is encouraging to find 84.5% of the
respondents have facility of electricity. However, it is also disappointing to find that
15.5% of the slum dwellers in the four localities do not have the facility of electricity.
This indicates the low level of living standards as they are unable to avail most
essential needs in the modern society.
1. A large numbers of respondents constituting 86.5% do not possess telephone
facility. A small number of 13.5% could afford to possess telephones in their
homes.
133
2. It is quite encouraging to find that majority of 79.5% of the respondents possess
cell phones (mobiles) while a small number of slum residents (20.5%) do not
possess this modern communication facility.
3. It is found that despite their general level of poverty these slum residents
accounting for 57% of the total respondents possess TV sets while 43% of them
do not have this modern communication and entertainment equipment.
4. Cable connection for varied channels of Television has been made use of by
50% of the TV owners while the other 50% do not possess the facility. A very
small number of 7.5% of the respondent residents of the study areas possess the
modern equipment of computer.
5. Refrigerators are possessed by only 11% of the respondents, while 89% could
not afford the luxury of refrigerator.
6. Bicycles are owned by a large majority of 63.5% of the respondents.
7. A good number of respondents accounting for 26% possess two wheeler/ three
wheeler vehicles for their transport requirement. A majority of 74% could not
own this facility.
8. Large majority of 74% possess chairs while only 52.5% could own tables.
9. A substantial number of 40.5% of the respondents possess cots while majority
of 59.5% do not have this comfort equipment.
10. It is encouraging to find that majority of 65.5% of the respondents own the
modern kitchen facility of mixer/grinder.
11. A substantial number of 47.5% possess fans in their residences.
12. A small number of 15.5% of the respondents possess LPG/cylinders and stoves
while majority of 84.5% do not have this cooking facility.
13. Other household facilities are owned by 33.5% of the respondent residents of
the four slum localities in Belgaum city.
134
Table-5.29. Good level of living standard for a majority of the residents is slum areas in Belgaum city
Notified slums
IV.iii Electricity
Yes
No
IV.iv Telephone
Yes
No
IV.v Cell Phone (Mobile)
Yes
No
IV.vii TV
Yes
No
IV.vii Cable Connection
Yes
No
IV.viii Computer
Yes
No
IV.ix Refrigerator
Yes
No
IV.x Bicycles
Yes
No
IV.xi Two/Three Wheeler
Yes
No
IV.xii Chairs
Yes
No
IV.xiii Tables
Yes
No
IV.xvi Cots
Yes
No
IV.xvii Mixer/Grinder
Yes
No
IV.xviii Fans
Yes
No
IV.xix LPG/Stove/ Cylinder
Yes
No
IV.xx Others
Yes
No
Total
Non-Notified slums
Total
%
Chisquare
p-value
76.0
169
84.5
4.3902
0.2223
24.0
31
15.5
7.6464
0.0539
4.2645
0.2343
4.8144
0.1859
0.3200
0.9562
5.4054
0.1444
5.1073
0.1641
7.4857
0.0580
6.0291
0.1102
8.9397
0.0301*
8.4010
0.0384*
22.969
0.0000*
8.7399
0.0330*
60.691
0.0000*
18.438
0.0004*
5.8130
0.1211
Anagol
%
Malapra
bha
Nagar
%
Ambed
kar
Nagar
%
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
%
45
90.0
44
88.0
42
84.0
38
5
10.0
6
12.0
8
16.0
12
6
12.0
2
4.0
9
18.0
10
20.0
27
13.5
44
88.0
48
96.0
41
82.0
40
80.0
173
86.5
35
70.0
40
80.0
41
82.0
43
86.0
159
79.5
15
30.0
10
20.0
9
18.0
7
14.0
41
20.5
30
60.0
26
52.0
34
68.0
24
48.0
114
57.0
20
40.0
24
48.0
16
32.0
26
52.0
86
43.0
24
48.0
26
52.0
24
48.0
26
52.0
100
50.0
26
52.0
24
48.0
26
52.0
24
48.0
100
50.0
4
8.0
1
2.0
7
14.0
3
6.0
15
7.5
46
92.0
49
98.0
43
86.0
47
94.0
185
92.5
5
10.0
2
4.0
9
18.0
6
12.0
22
11.0
45
90.0
48
96.0
41
82.0
44
88.0
178
89.0
25
50.0
31
62.0
33
66.0
38
76.0
127
63.5
25
50.0
19
38.0
17
34.0
12
24.0
73
36.5
11
22.0
8
16.0
18
36.0
15
30.0
52
26.0
39
78.0
42
84.0
32
64.0
35
70.0
148
74.0
30
60.0
37
74.0
38
76.0
43
86.0
148
74.0
20
40.0
13
26.0
12
24.0
7
14.0
52
26.0
20
40.0
24
48.0
27
54.0
34
68.0
105
52.5
30
60.0
26
52.0
23
46.0
16
32.0
95
47.5
30
60.0
27
54.0
12
24.0
12
24.0
81
40.5
20
40.0
23
46.0
38
76.0
38
76.0
119
59.5
30
60.0
26
52.0
38
76.0
37
74.0
131
65.5
20
40.0
24
48.0
12
24.0
13
26.0
69
34.5
10
20.0
10
20.0
38
76.0
37
74.0
95
47.5
40
80.0
40
80.0
12
24.0
13
26.0
105
52.5
15
30.0
10
20.0
6
12.0
0
0.0
31
15.5
35
70.0
40
80.0
44
88.0
50
100.
169
84.5
11
22.0
15
30.0
21
42.0
20
40.0
67
33.5
39
78.0
35
70.0
29
58.0
30
60.0
133
66.5
50
100.
50
100.
50
100.
50
100.
200
100.
Source: Field Survey. *p<0.05
135
5.5. DRINKING WATER FACILITY
Sources of drinking water in slum areas of Belgaum city:
Public taps have been the major source of drinking water both in notified and
non-notified slum localities in the city of Belgaum. Majority of 109 respondent slum
dwellers in the four localities constituting 54.5% have mentioned that public taps have
been the source of drinking water. A substantial number of 64 respondents accounting
for 32% of the total had their private taps for obtaining drinking water. Bore wells were
used for getting drinking water by 21 respondents (10.5%) in the two slum areas. Other
sources of drinking water were used by a small number of 6 respondents (3%). The
responses indicate dependence on public taps for drinking water by larger number of
slum dwellers in the city.
Table: 5.30. Distribution of respondents according to area and sources of drinking
water
Sources of
drinking
water
Notified slums
Anagol
%
Private tap
21
Public tap
42.0
Malapr
abha
Nagar
13
29
58.0
Bore well
0
Others
Total
Non-Notified slums
%
26.0
Ambed
kar
Nagar
13
35
70.0
0.0
0
0
0.0
50
100.0
%
Total
%
26.0
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
17
%
34.0
64
32.0
24
48.0
21
42.0
109
54.5
0.0
11
22.0
10
20.0
21
10.5
2
4.0
2
4.0
2
4.0
6
3.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
200
100.0
Chi-square= 29.9834, d f=9, p=0.0004
Source: Field Survey.
Distance between home and source of water:
The average distance between the source of water and the homes of the
respondent slum dwellers was 26.4 mtrs. The distance varied from a minimum of 21.4
meters in Old Gandhinagar to a maximum of 40.7 mtrs. in Malaprabhanagar. The
distance for fetching water from the source is not much and hence water is available
within easy reach for the households in the slum areas of the city. A significant
difference was observed between respondents belonging to different slum areas with
respect to average distance travel area (F=3.4905, p<0.05) at 55 level of significance.
It means that, the respondents belonging to Malaprabha Nagar slum area have
significant higher average distance travel area as compared to other slum areas.
136
Table: 5.31 Area and average distance from source of water.
Anagol
Mean
31.0
Malaprabha
Nagar
40.7
SD
34.4
45.8
Ambedkar
Nagar
24.4
Old Gandhi
Nagar
21.4
Total
F-value
P-value
26.4
7.3
12.8
23.3
3.4905
0.0175*
Source: Field Survey. *p<0.05
Adequacy of water supply in the slum areas of Belgaum City:
Supply of water in the slum areas covered by the study has been found adequate
by majority of 162 respondent slum dwellers (81%) in the four slum localities of
Belgaum. The positive responses regarding the adequacy of water supply ranged from a
minimum of 76% in Anagol to a maximum of 84% in Old Gandhi Nagar areas.
However, a small number of 38 respondents (19%) found the supply inadequate.
Table: 5.32. Distribution of respondents according to area and adequacy of water
supply…
Adequate
Notified slums
Anagol
%
76.0
Malapr
abha
Nagar
41
Yes
38
No
12
24.0
Total
50
100.0
Non-Notified slums
%
82.0
Ambed
kar
Nagar
41
9
18.0
50
100.0
%
Total
%
82.0
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
42
%
84.0
162
81.0
9
18.0
8
16.0
38
19.0
50
100.0
50
100.0
200
100.0
Source: Field Survey.
Quality of Water Supplied in Slum areas:
Majority of 100 respondents (50%) in the four localities of the two slum areas
have affirmed that the quality of water supplied wad good. A substantial number of 77
respondents (38.5%) however were not inclined to express their opinion either way
which implied that they are not exactly happy about the quality of water supplied in
their areas. A small number of 23 respondents (11.5%) affirmed that the quality of
water supplied in their areas was not good.
Table: 5.33. Distribution of respondents according to area and water quality.
Quality
Notified slums
Anagol
%
Good
24
48.0
Not good
7
Can’t say
Total
Malapra
bha
Nagar
Non-Notified slums
%
29
58.0
14.0
5
19
38.0
50
100.0
Ambed
kar
Nagar
%
23
46.0
10.0
7
16
32.0
50
100.0
Old
Gandhi
Nagar
Total
%
%
24
48.0
100
50.0
14.0
4
8.0
23
11.5
20
40.0
22
44.0
77
38.5
50
100.0
50
100.0
200
100.0
Chi-square= 3.0285, d f=6, p=0.8053, NS
Source: Field Survey.
137
Figure-5.16 Percentage distribution of respondents according to area and quality
of water
Figure: Percentage distribution of of respondents according to area and quality of
water
70.0
58.0
60.0
Percenatge
50.0
48.0
48.0
46.0
38.0
40.0
44.0
40.0
32.0
30.0
20.0
14.0
14.0
10.0
8.0
10.0
0.0
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Good
Ambedkar Nagar
Not good
Old GandhiNagar
Can't say
Source: table-5.33
Average Quantity of water used:
The study has revealed that the average quantity of water used by the
respondents in the four localities of the two slum areas in Belgaum city was 95.7 litrs.
Locality wise the average quantity of water used by the respondents varied from a
minimum of 79.3 liters in Old Gandhinagar to a maximum of 16.9 litrs in Ambedkar
Nagar. A significant difference was observed between respondents belonging to
different slum areas with respect to average quantity of water purchased (F=2.7992,
p<0.05) at 55 level of significance. It means that, the respondents belong to Ambedkar
Nagar slum area have significant higher average quantity of water purchased as
compared to other slum areas.
Table: 5.34.Area and average quantity of water purchased
Anagol
Mean
106.2
Malaprabha
Nagar
80.0
SD
92.0
37.6
Ambedkar
Nagar
116.9
Old Gandhi
Nagar
79.3
Total
F-value
P-value
95.7
2.7992
0.0413*
116.5
38.2
80.3
Source: Field Survey. *p<0.05
138
Figure-5.17 Comparison of different slums areas with average quantity of water
purchased
Figure: Comparison of different slum areas with average quality of water purchased
116.90
120.00
106.20
100.00
79.30
80.00
Mean value
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
Anagol
Malaprabha Nagar
Ambedkar Nagar
Old GandhiNagar
Source: table-5.34
Expenditure on water by respondents in the slum areas of Belgaum City:
The average expenditure on water per month by the respondent residents of the
four slum localities in Belgaum City was Rs. 102.63. The expenditure on water per
month ranged from a minimum of Rs. 79.30 in Old Gandhinagar to a maximum of Rs.
148.67 in Malaprabha nagar. The expenditure on water by the respondent residents in
notified slum areas of Anagol and Malaprabhanagar was much more then in nonnotified slum areas of Ambedkarnagar and Old Gandhinagar. A significant difference
was observed between respondents belonging to different slum areas with respect to
average expenditure on water (F=5.7769, p<0.05) at 55 level of significance. It means,
the respondents belonging to Malaprabha Nagar slum area have significantly higher
average expenditure on water as compared to other slum areas.
Table: 5.35. Area and average expenditure on water
Anagol
Malaprabha
Ambedkar
Old Gandhi
Nagar
Nagar
Nagar
Total
F-value
P-value
5.7769
0.0014*
Mean
137.81
148.67
30.71
29.75
102.63
SD
48.22
198.40
8.52
9.53
121.34
Source: Field Survey. *p<0.05
139
5.6 CONCLUSION:
Urbanization is basically influenced by the incidence of poverty and
underemployment and seasonal unemployment of rural people. The study covered a
total number of 200 respondent residents in four residential areas of Anagol and
Malaprabha Nagar in the notified slums and Ambedkar Nagar and old Gandhi Nagar in
non-notified slum areas of Belgaum city each area consisting of 50 respondents
categorized under APL and BPL income groups. The study focused on the analysis of
the data pertaining to the slum environment of the four slum localities in Belgaum city
covered by the field survey. The majority of the families of the respondent residents of
the four slums in Belgaum had an optimum size of members. The distribution of the
respondents based on the ration card category indicates that majority of the respondents
in all the four slum areas, accounting for more than two percent of the total, belonged to
the lower income groups holding ration cards under the category of BPL(below poverty
line). the total number of BPL ration card holders in the four slum areas was 148
accounting for 74 per cent of the total while the total number of those holding ration
cards under the APL (above poverty line) category averaged 52 constituting 26 per cent
of the total. There is a greater representation of respondents belonging to BPL category
as the slum areas obviously are inhabited by economically weaker section of the
society.
The majority of 112 respondents (56 per cent) did not mention about the garbage in
their areas and there is need for proper action regarding the removal of the garbage by
the authorities of the municipal city corporation of Belgaum who are mainly
responsible for maintaining sanitation in the city areas. Thus employment seeking in
urban areas had attracted migrants in larger number to the city. Similar reasons had
compelled migrants to settle in slum areas of the city. The study has revealed that
majority of 86 respondents (76.1 per cent) used public latrines while 27 respondents
(23.9 per cent) used practiced open defecation. The respondents belong to Ambedkar
Nagar slum area have significant higher average quantity of water purchased as
compared to other slum areas.
140