2 City Neighbourhood Report Hyderabad, India local languages (Korean in Busan; Telugu, Hindi or...

NeighbourhoodReport

A Report from the ‘Asian Cities: Liveability, Sustainability, Diversity and Spaces of Encounter’ Research Project

Diganta Das Tracey Skelton A. Nageswara Rao G. Nagasubbarao

by

City&

Funded by: Global Asia Institute and the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore. Copyright © 2014.

Hyderabad, India

2

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the funding for the research

project from the National University of

Singapore Global Asia Institute, Asian Cit-

ies research grant (Grant Award Number:

R 109-000-111-133). We also recognise that

additional funding for the workshop, Asian

Urban Liveability in Practice: Researching,

Collaborating, Publishing, held at NUS in

September 2013 was provided by the Faculty

of Arts and Social Sciences Tier 1 Conference

Grant (Grant Award Number: R-109-000-155-

112). This workshop provided the space for the

collaborative planning, drafting and writing of

the four city/neighbourhood reports (of which

this report is one).

The Singapore based research team

acknowledges the following in-country

research co-ordinators without whom the

research would not have been possible: Dr.

Jeongkyoung Seo (Sungkynu Institute of

China Studies) in Busan, South Korea; Dr.

Nageswara Rao (Maulana Azad National

Urdu University) and Dr. G. Nagasubbarao

(University of Hyderabad) in Hyderabad,

India.

In addition we trained and employed a

number of student researchers in all four cit-

ies who worked with us as survey collectors,

interviewers, translators and/or transcrib-

ers. Their work was an invaluable part of the

project data collection and we are extremely

grateful for their contribution.

MADHAPUR, HYDERABAD CITY, TELANGANA, INDIA TELANGANA STATE

INDIA

LAKE

LAKE

LAKE

LAKE

RAILWAY

HIGHTECH CITY ROAD

HIGHTECH CITY MAIN ROAD

CYBERABAD

100 FEET ROAD

DELHI

TELANGANA STATE

MADHAPUR, HYDERABAD CITY

HYDERABAD CITY

1c i ty & n e i g hb ourho o d r ep o r t : madh apur in h yder ab ad

1. InTRoDuCTIon

This city/neighbourhood report is one of four

reports written as policy relevant documents

from a major research project funded by the

Global Asia Institute of the National Univer-

sity of Singapore (Research Grant Number:

R-109-000-111-133). The project, Asian Cities:

Liveability, Sustainability, Diversity and

Spaces of Encounter, ran from December 2010

through to November 2013. It is a comparative

urbanism project that has examined the four

research themes of the title in four neighbour-

hoods in four cities within Asia. The cities we

studied are: Busan in South Korea; Hyderabad

in India; Kunming in China; and Singapore.

Within each of these cities we focused down on

a typical neighbourhood – neither the poorest

nor the wealthiest. The neighbourhoods were

Yeongdo in Busan; Madhapur in Hyderabad;

an intersection of the districts of Wuhua and

Panlong in Kunming; and Taman Jurong in

Singapore. The neighbourhoods were selected

on the basis that they were ordinary locales

where residents were able to make a reason-

able living and support their households,

they had employment, could afford housing,

had access to facilities and resources such as

schools and healthcare but were not neces-

sarily fully secure nor had access to the best

facilities and resources the city had to offer.

Another key criteria for selection was that the

neighbourhood had been through some form

of significant social, infrastructural or tech-

nological change (positive, negative or both)

within the past decade.

These city/neighbourhood reports pro-

duced from the Asian Cities project focus on

aspects of liveability and how these are expe-

rienced by the residents of our selected urban

neighbourhoods.

In terms of academic and policy and

planning contexts there has been a percep-

tible shift in urban studies research and

planning from a focus on ‘global’, ‘capital’

or ‘mega cities’ to one that interrogates the

more fundamental question of what is a good,

liveable city. This shift has also stimulated a

new way of understanding cities that is less

about objective indicators of urban living (for

example, quality of housing, density of trans-

port networks, amount of green spaces, etc.)

to one guided by a more subjective, contextu-

alised perspective. Such a perspective sees the

quality of urban living in relative terms. What

constitutes a good and liveable city needs to be

a measure of both objective indicators while

at the same time accounting for the subjec-

tive feelings residents have towards their

lived urban environments. Hence there will

be differences in how people define or experi-

ence urban ‘liveability’. These variances can

be explained by the differences in the socio-

cultural contexts of the cities, the diversity of

residents in the cities, as well as the divergent

historical-urban development of the cities. It

is important to understand urban liveability

as a behavioural-perceptual function, as well

as a material experience, interpreted from the

perspectives of the residents as well as those of

Map 1

Madhapur, Hyderabad

2 c i ty & n e i ghb ou rho od rep o r t : madh apur in h yder ab ad

local planners and policy makers.

The research methodologies for all four

cities were both quantitative and qualitative.

Our quantitative method was a household

survey conducted with 400 residents in each

neighbourhood (more details below). We

devised standardised questions to interrogate

the research themes: liveability, sustain-

ability, diversity, spaces of encounter with

additional questions on governance. About

ten per cent of the questions in the question-

naire were adapted for specific aspects of each

neighbourhood. Where appropriate, question

items used an even-point Likert response set.

The statements for the Likert sections were

perceptual and experiential and respondents

were asked to specify their level of agreement

or disagreement; there was no neutral option.

We adopted this ‘forced choice’ method be-

cause it encouraged decisions from residents

and also it provided a better comparative

element across the selected neighbourhoods

in the four Asian cities. From residents’ re-

sponses to these Likert items (the statements)

we were able to develop a Likert scale for our

analysis. Where appropriate, we used SPSS

to generate univariate profiles of the four

neighbourhoods, used a variety of bivariate

and multivariate analyses to better help us un-

derstand the neighbourhood dynamics. Given

the socioeconomic and cultural complexities

embedded in a multi-site study, we felt that

our study objectives were better served using

a mixed method qualitative-quantitative ap-

proach where the data from different methods

can be deployed to understand our key themes.

Accordingly, we refrained from developing

more sophisticated models, preferring to use

the survey data as a way to provide the context

in understanding the qualitative material.

Our country sample size of 400 is not

large by conventional social science survey

samples which often cross the thousand mark,

and a key concern among the team was to en-

sure that sub-group sizes would not be a con-

cern for the statistical analysis we adopted. So,

our procedure was to make sure we established

a minimum 20% of total sample for the sub-

samples of each key variable (e.g. male versus

female for the gender variable) as defined by

the objectives of the study.

Table 1 above shows the country profiles

of our key variables. The gender dimension

is important because liveability issues are

closely tied to how men and women negoti-

ate their daily lives, work, and family. The

Country Sample Size

Gender owner non-owner newcomers % less than

5 yrs

Long-time Residents

Male Female

Singapore 400 40.2 59.8 82.4 17.6 22.7 77.3

Busan 400 41.5 58.5 61.9 38.1 13.0 87.0

Hyderabad 400 72.8 27.2 32.0 68.0 37.7 62.3

Kunming 400 52.0 48.0 55.7 44.3 47.9 52.1

Table 1

Key attributes of country

survey samples


sustainability question is explored through

the owner, non-owner variable, and we think

that respondents who owned their residential

premises have a stronger stake in the neigh-

bourhood when it comes to issues that have to

do with infrastructure, amenities and servic-

es. Lastly, we wanted a better understanding of

a “settled residential community” as this will

influence the diversity and spaces of encoun-

ters themes, especially in the ways newcomers

are accepted into the neighbourhood.

Table 1 shows that on the gender variable,

the spread is rather even, with the exception

of Hyderabad, where cultural considerations

meant that more males volunteered to be in-

terviewed. The 20% guideline was unable to be

fulfilled in two instances. Singapore’s policy to

encourage home-ownership meant that all its

public housing estates contained essentially

owner occupied units. Nevertheless, Taman

Jurong was the study site because it contained

a number of rental housing units, and because

of this, we achieved 17.6% non-owners in our

Singapore sample. Busan has low residential

mobility generally because of slow population

growth and ageing; the Yeongdo neighbour-

hood reflects this trend.

Our qualitative research methods con-

sisted of face-to-face interviews and neigh-

bourhood walking and recording (field-note

observations and photography). Interviews

were conducted with at least 30 neighbour-

hood residents who volunteered to be part of

the more in-depth research to collect behav-

ioural and perceptual data relating to liveabil-

ity, sustainability and diversity. This was done

via questions such as residents’ likes and dis-

likes, problems and difficulties, satisfaction

and happiness related to neighbourhood and

city dwelling. Ten interviews were conducted

with ‘city officials’ such as community leaders,

politicians, municipal officials, planners and

policy makers. Interviews were conducted

in local languages (Korean in Busan; Telugu,

Hindi or English in Hyderabad; Mandarin or

the local Chinese dialect in Kunming; English,

Malay, Tamil or Mandarin in Singapore). They

were then translated and transcribed into

English.

The whole project data set consists of

1600 surveys, 120 residents’ interviews and

40 ‘city officials’ interviews, combined with

researchers’ observations and photographs of

each neighbourhood. Grey materials, statisti-

cal data sets and other neighbourhood and

city based materials were also collected and

analysed. In addition to these policy-oriented

reports the project team (identified on the

back cover) will be producing a range of aca-

demic publications.

2. InTRoDuCInG THE CITY

Hyderabad, originally located along the

bank of the Musi river, is the state capital

of Telangana and functions as the central

administrative, commercial, industrial and

knowledge hub of the state1. At a larger spatial

scale, Hyderabad forms the urban core of the

4 c i ty & n e i g hb ourho od rep o r t : m adh apur in h yder ab ad

Hyderabad Metropolitan Area (HMA) which

by spatial extent is the second largest urban

development area in India, occupying a land

size of about 7,257 square kilometres (HMDA,

2014). From its humble origins as a small town

founded in 1591, it has developed to become

one of India’s fastest growing metropolises

with a population of approximately 9.4 mil-

lion (Census of India, 2011) which is further

expected to increase to about 19 million by the

year 2041 (GoAP, 2013).

Today, Hyderabad is one of India’s leading

hubs of the knowledge-based industries. It is

currently home to many of the most promi-

nent informational technology companies,

both domestic and foreign, including TCS,

Infosys and Wipro, as well as Microsoft, Fa-

cebook and Google. Hence, it is of no surprise

that Hyderabad is one of India’s most globally

connected cities whose global-city aspirations

are never veiled.

2.1 HISToRICAL BACkGRounD

Hyderabad’s urban built form and its social-

cultural fabric owes its distinction to its

unique sociopolitical history. The city’s urban

origins trace back to the Qutb Shahi Dynasty

in the early 16th century (Austin, 1992) which

oversaw the establishment of the early founda-

tions of a modern city. During this period, a

Persian-inspired ordered grid pattern of thor-

oughfares and streets emerged throughout the

city, punctuated by fine new buildings, civic

and trading spaces. Hyderabad soon emerged

as the principal trade hub of the Indian sub-

continent as well as a cultural centre where

arts and religion flourished. Today, the mag-

nificent ‘Charminar’, also known as the ‘Four

Minarets’—a rectangular monument raised on

four grand arches, erected in the city-centre –

remains the city’s foremost historical land-

mark from the Muslim dynasty.

The Mughal invasion of Hyderabad in the

late 17th century paved the way for the rule

of the Nizams or governors who were initially

appointed by the Mughal emperor. Later,

Hyderabad, still ruled by the Nizams, declared

itself independent from the Mughal court and

became the largest princely state in British

India (Rao, 2007). In the immediate post-in-

dependence period, Hyderabad was integrated

into a union with India, and was made the

state capital of the state of Andhra Pradesh,

which was itself a union of three broad re-

gions: 1) coastal Andhra in the east facing the

Bay of Bengal, 2) Telangana in the northwest

which houses Hyderabad, and 3) Rayalseema

in the south (Kamat, 2011). In 2014, Telangana

was formally bifurcated from Andhra Pradesh

Photo 1

The iconic Cyber

Towers – displaying the

global-city aspiration of

Hyderabad


and inducted as the newest state of India. The

other two regions of Andhra Pradesh together

became Seemandhra state. Hyderabad will be

the joint capital of both the states for 10 years.

2.2 GLoBALIzATIon AnD HYDERABAD

Hyderabad today is widely known as one of In-

dia’s leading hubs of knowledge-based indus-

tries and is quite bold in its endeavour to join

the roster of globally significant cities. None-

theless, less than 20 years ago, Hyderabad was

by all accounts a rather quiet metropolis with

a reputation that was stuck in its glorious early

modern past under the reigns of its Muslim

rulers. Its ascendance onto the global map in

the late 1990s has therefore been nothing shy

of remarkable.

This transformation from relative obscu-

rity to global significance came at the critical

juncture of several key forces and processes,

namely 1) India’s economic liberalization,

from a relatively closed economy to a liberal

market economy, and 2) politico-adminis-

trative decentralization wherein decision-

making powers became increasingly shared

between the federal and the state govern-

ments (Krueger, 2002). Capitalising on these

larger processes of change, the state sought

loans from the World Bank under the struc-

tural adjustment program to pursue state-wide

economic reforms inscribed by a neoliberal

developmental logic and its associated link

with an entrepreneurial model of governance.

Similar to the World Bank’s city-centric

growth strategies (World Bank, 1999), the

state pursued a regional-growth strategy that

identified and mobilized Hyderabad as an

engine of growth. This was articulated in the

Andhra Pradesh Vision 2020, a policy docu-

ment prepared by consulting firm McKinsey &

Company. The visioning document set a ‘new

and comprehensive growth agenda’ (GoAP,

1999) for the state that aimed to integrate the

state’s economy into both national and global

economies through a focus on global growth

sectors—notably, IT, biotechnology and phar-

maceutical sectors. Accordingly, this restruc-

turing of the economy necessitated massive

capital investments in premium infrastruc-

ture and services. Crucially, this embraced

new ‘urban’ context was rooted in aspirations

of ‘global cityness’ and the construction of

spectacular urban imagery, which were per-

Photo 2

Charminar


ceived by policy makers to be integral compo-

nents to the success of the growth strategy.

The convergences of the aforementioned

developments cleared the ground for a mas-

sive reconfiguration and rescaling of the

urban landscape in Hyderabad. In particular,

sector-specific enclaves, served by a multitude

of state-of-the-art premium infrastructural

services and facilities such as uninterrupted

water and power supply, fibre-optic networks,

as well as flyovers and expressways were devel-

oped to facilitate investments. This included

HITEC City (Hyderabad Information Technol-

ogy Engineering Consultancy City), a $350

million knowledge enclave offering 1.4 million

square feet of IT space. With the initial suc-

cess of development of the knowledge enclave

and Hyderabad emerging as an IT destination

of repute, the state government initiated the

making of Cyberabad – a 52 square kilom-

eter knowledge enclave – largely inspired by

Malaysia’s Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC)

project. Cyberabad was carved out of 17 vil-

lages including part of Madhapur, our neigh-

bourhood of study for this project.

The success of this spatial engineering

policy, complemented by favourable IT policy

initiatives, attracted many international IT

giants to set up offices and research centres in

Hyderabad. These policy initiatives provided

a boost to Hyderabad’s urbanization, buoyed

by a new wave of migration to the metropolis

as many began seeking employment in this

new economic growth centre. Along with this

massive influx of people, the policy initia-

tives spawned massive developments of gated

residential apartments, ‘intelligent’ office

buildings, shopping malls and accommoda-

tion for working men and women around the

Cyberabad area, critically reconfiguring the

built form of the Madhapur neighbourhood

and larger Hyderabad within which it is geo-

graphically embedded.

2.3 uRBAn ISSuES In HYDERABAD

The spatial expansion of the city to peri-urban

regions and the rapid population increase has

meant that the challenges of managing the

city have grown tremendously in recent years

– resulting in the development of unplanned

urban sprawl. The existing infrastructure

cannot keep up with the increasing demand,

which in turn brings stratum-specific implica-

tions for Hyderabad.

Our project found that the complexities of

this rapid and intense development of the new

urban growth centre of Cyberabad have had

contradicting impacts on the peripheral urban

spatialities. The former village of Madhapur

has seen significant growth in personal wealth

for some residents who owned and urbanised

their land or sold it. However, many residents

were either displaced or forced to make a

living as marginal service workers. Everyone

in the neighbourhood though suffers from

worsening basic infrastructure provision,

especially in relation to water and sanitation,

traffic and refuse management.

In Hyderabad, indicators largely point

towards increasing stratification in urban ser-


vice levels. The development of infrastructural

support, notably, water supply, power distri-

bution, better roads and transport facilities,

waste and sewage treatments have, in general,

been concentrated largely in certain premium

pockets of the city. This does not at all suggest

that there has been a decline in urban service

levels for the urban marginal; at present, there

have been some slight improvements in some

cases. Rather, our observations suggest that

the rapid development has not translated to

more equitable distributions of public resourc-

es, and by extension, significant enhancement

of urban services especially for the lower lay-

ers of Hyderabadi society. Overall, the issue

of urban poverty and the associated aspects

of urban marginality relating to housing and

basic amenities remain the most prominent

challenges that rapidly growing Hyderabad is

facing today.

In addition, the huge migration from the

surrounding rural areas to Hyderabad has

resulted in a rapid increase of slum settle-

ments within the city (Rao, 2007). There are

over 1600 identified slum locations within the

metropolis, constituting a slum population of

almost 2 million (GHMC, 2006).

The city’s rapid population growth is

also adding pressure to an already stretched

transportation capability. Traffic density in

Hyderabad has increased drastically in recent

years, spurred by the increase in private vehi-

cles and motorbikes. It is estimated that there

is a total of more than 2 million vehicles plying

the roads in Hyderabad, and the increase in

the number of private vehicles is about 10% per

annum (Ramachandraiah, 2007). Investments

in public transportation such as bus expan-

sion routes and fleets have fallen behind the

surge in demand, further straining the traffic

condition in Hyderabad. Public transport ac-

counts for only 40% of total passenger trans-

port (Ramachandraiah, 2007). In addition,

Hyderabad’s urban form is characterised by

relatively low road capacity of about 6% (Ra-

machandran, 2012) and composed of generally

narrow and unplanned networks of carriage-

Photo 3

Significant change of

Madhapur’s landscape

within decades –

development of land

and properties have

been significant (source:

Diganta Das, 2012)


ways, combined with poor traffic manage-

ment, leading to massive congestion. Effective

maintenance of roads and bridges is lacking

and appropriate parking facilities are in short

supply, which in turn further exacerbate the

traffic congestion.

3. MADHAPuR—THE TRAnSITIonInG

nEIGHBouRHooD

In keeping with the aims of this project, this

research critically examines how residents

in an ordinary neighbourhood (in this case

Madhapur) experience and conceptualise live-

ability within the context of significant social,

infrastructural or technological change.

Madhapur, once a sleepy suburb com-

posed primarily of a village, quickly trans-

formed into the locus of the city’s emerging

IT and knowledge agglomeration, served by

world-class infrastructure and surrounded by

premium real estate belts once it was identi-

fied as the site for HITEC City in 1997, and

later part of the larger Cyberabad. In less

than two decades there has been rapid and

dramatic state-led urban restructuring. Once

a peri-urban space, it is now contiguous with

the city’s most affluent residential locality,

the Jubilee Hills. This emphatic transforma-

tion in turn is producing new geographies and

socialities of the neighbourhood which make

it fertile ground for a critical interrogation

of the concept of liveability—the focus of this

research report.

3.1 GLoBALIzATIon AnD RuRAL-

uRBAn TRAnSFoRMATIon

Nearly two decades earlier, Madhapur, situ-

ated at the western periphery of Hyderabad,

was largely an agricultural backwater, away

from the urban core of the city. The residents

of Madhapur depended largely on cattle-rear-

ing and farming on ancestral lands for their

livelihoods. Despite its relative proximity to

the urban core of the city, due to slower invest-

ments and infrastructural support, Madhapur

and surrounding villages remained relatively

underdeveloped until HITEC City (and later

Cyberabad) came into being.

The selection of Madhapur for the con-

struction of Cyber Towers (Photo 1), as part of

the state’s spatial engineering policy to attract

and build up a critical mass of IT industries

in the area, marked a significant rupture

from the locality’s agrarian past. Suddenly

Madhapur became a site to provide IT busi-

nesses with state-of the-art infrastructure

for their operations which included, among

others, dedicated high-speed internet con-

nectivity, 24-hour electronic security systems,

banking facilities and uninterrupted power

and water supply.

The continued growth of the knowledge

enclave has resulted in complex changes in the

demography of the neighbourhood, in particu-

lar increased in-migration of skilled software

professionals coming into the neighbourhood.

The shift towards a knowledge-based economy

has paved the way for greater social stratifi-

cation with the emergence of the digeratis,


who now form a considerable bulk of the new

middle class. It is noteworthy that along with

the digerati class, there has been a constant

flow of migrants to Madhapur from surround-

ing rural regions in search of better economic

opportunities.

While the initial developments in

Madhapur constituted primarily infrastruc-

tural support to IT companies, subsequent

developments catered for the consumption

demands of the emerging digerati population

as part of the larger urban restructuring of

the space. The emerging digerati class, highly

skilled and sought after, draws better incomes

and demands premium goods and services.

Consequently one of the main drivers behind

Madhapur’s restructuring are the emerging

globally mobile middle class and affluent pop-

ulations who are the most conspicuous rep-

resentations and validations of a globalising

urban space. As such, production of the built

form of this space reflects a convergence of the

particular demands of this emerging group,

and both the private and public responses

to accommodate them. The built form of the

space has been spatially engineered to meet

the consumption needs of these new-middle

class populations. The luxury high rise belts,

mammoth shopping malls, exotic restaurants,

designer retailers and office complexes, served

by ‘world-class’ infrastructure, flyovers and

expressways, are the urban manifestations of

the changing socioeconomic geographies of

the neighbourhood.

Photo 4

Madhapur has seen rapid

recent developments

– ranging from housing

to shopping malls and

luxury hotels (Source:

Diganta Das, 2012)

10 c i ty & n e i g hb ourho od rep o r t : m adh apur in h yder ab ad

4. AnALYSIS oF THE SuRvEY RESuLTS

To achieve the objectives of this project, we

conducted a survey with 400 locals residing

in Madhapur, from October, 2011 to January,

2012. The survey addressed a broad range of

issues pertinent to the central themes of this

project which included, people and diversity

of spaces, urban infrastructure, amenities and

services, as well as governance.

In addition, this project employed a

face-to-face interview procedure to capture

a deeper snapshot of both behavioural and

perceptual contours on the ground in relation

to issues above. We conducted in-depth inter-

views with 40 stakeholders—which included

local residents, city officials such as elected

representatives, policy makers, municipality

officers and local academicians. In addition to

probing deeper into their opinions about is-

sues asked in the questionnaire, the interviews

also sought respondents’ opinions about what

they liked and disliked about Madhapur, and

their recommendations to make the neigh-

bourhood more liveable. Key results from both

the questionnaire and the interviews relating

to liveability in Madhapur are discussed below.

Where pertinent, we have inserted partici-

pant quotes from our respondents to further

illustrate key findings, as well as to provide

subjective accounts relating to the issues in

discussion beyond figures and numbers.

4.1 SoCIo-DEMoGRAPHY

Among the respondents we spoke to, an

overwhelming majority of 84% were of Telugu-

descent followed by 14% non-Telugu (Figure 1).

This ethnic distribution suggests that while

there has been a huge influx of migrants to

Madhapur in recent time, intra-state popula-

tion shift is a dominant pattern rather than

inter-state. In other words, much of the migra-

tory flows into Madhapur have originated

from regions and localities within the state

itself. Proximity to HITEC City and being in

a linguistically and cultural familiar environ-

ment were important to residents who had

migrated.

Looking at the distribution of educational

attainment of respondents, we observed that

a large number of respondents hold at least

undergraduate level qualifications (Figure 2).

The distribution here indicates that

our respondents are generally fairly highly

educated and qualified. This is not surprising

given that Madhapur is the site of the city’s

knowledge and high-tech enclave—Cyberabad,

Photo 5

Advertisements for

accommodation are

seen ubiquitously in the

neighbourhood (Source:

Diganta Das, 2012)


attracting many of the globally mobile and

highly educated to work and settle there.

Therefore they are generally overrepresented

in the neighbourhood’s socio-demographic

composition. Nonetheless, despite this over-

representation, our sample did capture a

broad spectrum of respondents in terms of

educational qualifications: 12% of the respond-

ents only completed primary education while

a further 20% did not undergo any formal

education.

A finding that further attests to the

migrant-based population relates to owner-

ship status of housing in the neighbourhood.

It was observed that 68% of the respondents

are tenants while only 32% are home-owners.

The neighbourhood has seen a rise in develop-

ment of working young men’s and women’s

accommodation in recent times (see Photo

5) – largely to cater to the needs of software

professionals working in Cyberabad which has

fuelled the rise in the tenant population.

4.2 nEIGHBouRHooD

When asked about broad place-specific at-

tributes of the neighbourhood, the responses

we gathered were generally quite positive.

For example, 79% of those asked agreed that

Madhapur is a well-maintained neighbour-

hood, while a further 13% strongly agreed

(Figure 3).

This is broadly similar to our findings on

the respondents’ perceptions on the cleanli-

ness of the neighbourhood. 73% agreed and a

further 17% strongly agreed that Madhapur is

a clean neighbourhood (Figure 4). However,

in-depth interviews and our own observations

inform that some pockets of Madhapur need

more effort to keep clean – especially along

the main road of Madhapur. Improvement of

proper drainage systems and regular cleaning

by authorities may help in improving the con-

ditions. Further to this, active participation

of the public towards building capacity and

keeping their neighbourhood clean is impor-

tant, which helps in achieving the objective of

liveable neighbourhood planning.

When it comes to safety issues—nearly

96% largely agreed that the neighbourhood is

Telugu

84%

14%

Non-Telugu

2%

20% No formal education

12% Primary

18% Secondary11%

10 + 2

2% Vocational

38% University

Figure 1

Ethnic composition of

residents in Madhapur

Figure 2

Educational level of

residents in Madhapur

12 c i ty & n e i g hb ourho od rep o r t : madh apur in h yder ab ad

safe (Figure 5). This broad concurrence may

be explained and reinforced by their percep-

tions of police coverage in the neighbourhood.

When asked about regular police patrolling in

the neighbourhood, nearly 90% of respondents

agreed that there are adequate police patrols.

It is also noteworthy that private security

guards play an important role in maintaining

the security, in relation to gated apartments,

shopping malls, hotels and restaurants situ-

ated in the neighbourhood, which further

strengthen the safety perception of the neigh-

bourhood.

4.3 PEoPLE, SPACES oF EnCounTER

AnD nEIGHBouRLInESS

While conceptualising issues around diversity

in the neighbourhood, we gathered attributes

relating to people and spaces of encounter.

More than 90% respondents agreed that the

neighbourhood is friendly.

Further, when asked whether neighbours

look out for each other, 83% agreed indicating

a strong feeling of neighbourliness and con-

cern for their neighbours (Figure 6). Through

in-depth interviews we found that the level of

neighbourliness in Madhapur is beyond every-

day exchange of niceties. Residents often meet

for informal gatherings in the neighbour-

hood and participate and celebrate festivals

together.

The survey also revealed that there is

general receptivity among the locals towards

migrants from other regions. For example,

more than three-quarters of those surveyed

Figure 3

Madhapur is a

well-maintained

neighbourhood

Figure 4

Madhapur is a clean

neighbourhood

Figure 5

Madhapur is a safe

neighbourhood

Strongly Disagree

Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

73%

Agree

65%Agree

17%

31%Strongly

Agree

1%

1%

9%

3%

79%

Agree

13%1%

8%


are happy to have people of different regions

and/or states in their neighbourhood. In-

depth interviews also revealed that estab-

lished residents of Madhapur generally have

a welcoming attitude towards new-comers.

Residents realise that Madhapur is a dynamic

neighbourhood and due to the proximity of

Cyberabad, new-residents from different

states come to live in Madhapur – that brings

in new cultures and living habits. Overall,

long-term residents welcome these diversities.

Further, nearly 88% agreed that migrants from

other regions contribute positively to the city’s

economy (Figure 7).

Nonetheless, even as the respondents

acknowledged the economic contributions of

migrants, they seemed cautiously mindful that

migrants do heighten competition for jobs.

Nearly 41% respondents agreed that migrants

have reduced the availability of suitable jobs

for locals in Madhapur (Figure 8).

While in terms of employment there

are some concerns, 60% felt that this hadn’t

translated into overcrowding for housing in

the neighbourhood. However, interviews with

respondents did highlight the increasing

rental rates of accommodation in the neigh-

bourhood.

‘Due to the arrival of newcomers, the

rental rates are very high. The room rents

have nearly doubled because the people

who live here are all job holders and have

high positions in their workplace’

(respondent)

Figure 6

Neighbours look out

for each other

Figure 7

Migrants from other

regions contribute

positively to the

city’s economy

Figure 8

Less jobs for locals due to

influx of new residents

Strongly Disagree


63%

Agree

51%Disagree

13%

28%Agree

25%Strongly

Agree

2%

8%

10%

75%

Agree

8% 1%16%


However, beyond jobs and rent related

concerns, our data indicates that the presence

of migrants have not undermined residents’

attachment to their neighbourhood. Nearly

92% of respondents answered that they do have

a sense of belonging to the neighbourhood

(Figure 9).

These, perceptual contours towards mi-

grants that edge on the positive side provide

strong evidence that at this stage, the influx

of migrants are not seen to be problematic,

possibly because the majority of migrants are

Telugu speakers and so culturally connected

to long-term local residents. Hence, despite

the relatively high percentage of migrants in

the social make-up, residents are generally

welcoming towards newcomers and it appears

that this is a historical trait of the city itself.

‘Hyderabad is a composite city with

people of different cultures, religions

and castes… Hyderabad is very

welcoming to others’

(respondent)

4.4 LIvELIHooD AnD InFRASTRuCTuRE

In this section we consider peoples’ responses

and perspectives in relation to actually living

in the neighbourhood, effectively the elements

that constitute urban liveability in these times

of rapid urbanisation and social change in

the neighbourhood. We examine the research

findings relating to livelihood issues, relating

to employment, housing, health care and edu-

cation. We then focus on more infrastructural

issues within Madhapur relating to transport,

public space, water and electricity.

4.4.1 CoST oF LIvInG, EMPLoYMEnT

AnD HEALTHCARE

As for selected measures relating to livelihood,

there is general consensus that Madhapur has

a lot to offer in terms of employment opportu-

nities. From our interviews with the residents,

one aspect of urban life that emerged very

strongly was employment. In fact, a funda-

mental attraction for many who have made

their way to the neighbourhood is the avail-

ability of jobs.

‘We came here because Madhapur [and

Hyderabad] is good place(s) for staying.

Here, a lot of opportunities are opened

for us to earn money. The educated

people get jobs more comfortably… in the

villages, there are less opportunity for

jobs, therefore, many have made their

way here to earn money and make

a living”

(respondent)

About 70% of those surveyed agreed that

there are ample employment opportunities

near their neighbourhood and that they were

able to find employment here that matches

their skills or qualifications (Figure 10).

Interestingly, these findings contrast with

the earlier finding on the increased employ-

ment competition posed by migrants. Seen

together, these findings suggest that respond-


ents are of the view that the competition

posed by migrants, while perceptible, is not

significant enough to erode their confidence in

Madhapur’s job market.

Despite the broad concurrence that

employment opportunities are plentiful, and

by extension, a good guarantee of livelihood,

most are of the view that the cost of living is

becoming expensive in Madhapur. Hence the

positives of employment opportunities can be

offset because of increases in the cost of living.

When asked if the neighbourhood was becom-

ing an expensive place to live, 95% agreed that

it was.

This general concern about relative

increases in the cost of living emerged very

strongly in the interviews. Such increases

are both significant and unabated against the

backdrop of rapid development of the neigh-

bourhood. For some, the cost of living may

push some of the poorer segments of the resi-

dents to leave the neighbourhood for relatively

cheaper options. In our research we observed

squatting/ land guarding where the poorest

people were living in make-shift shelters to

keep their jobs in the area. A municipal cor-

porator from Madhapur and a local political

leader commented that:

‘If the middle class people desire to live

near Cyberabad, they have to earn 50–60

thousands Rupees to lead a (good) life.

There is no chance for the poor to live

here. If they want to rent rooms, they are

charged 4000–6000 (Rupees a month).

Figure 9

Sense of belonging

to Madhapur

Figure 10

There are ample

employment

opportunities in

Madhapur that

matches skills

Figure 11

The healthcare facilities in

Madhapur are expensive

Strongly Disagree


N/A

54%

Agree

37%Agree

18%Disagree

57%Strongly

Agree

14%

23%Strongly

Agree

4%10%

69%

Agree

0.3% 8%

1% 5%

16 c i ty & n e i ghb ou rho od rep o r t : m adh apur in h yder ab ad

So, there is no place here for the common

man. It is very difficult.’

Accommodation rental prices are not the

only element of increased living costs, many

vital urban services – such as healthcare are

moving beyond the reach of many residents.

An overwhelming 94% of our respondents

opined that the healthcare facilities in the

locality are expensive (Figure 11).

A possible reason for the lack of avail-

ability of affordable healthcare is because of

the lack of public healthcare facilities in the

neighbourhood. When asked what types of

health care are available in Madhapur, 94%

responded private clinics and hospitals. The

private healthcare facilities have developed

in the neighbourhood to meet the demands of

the professionals and highly paid employees in

the IT sector. There has been limited invest-

ment in the provision of public healthcare in

the neighbourhood. Similar reflection may be

observed in relation to the provision of public

education. The government aided school is

poorly provisioned and overcrowded. Access-

ing private health care and education pushes

up the cost of living and is out of reach for

many of the neighbourhood residents. This

means that there is a high risk of limited to no

upward social mobility for poorer residents in

the neighbourhood which will impact on social

sustainability for many families.

4.4.2 TRAnSPoRT

Nonetheless, when it comes to transport

infrastructure, the residents generally agree

that the cost of commuting by public transport

is still affordable. Nearly 75% of those surveyed

agreed on the affordability of public transport.

However, when it comes to adequacy of public

transport, residents opined that Madhapur

is a neighbourhood with a rapidly increasing

population and so needs more public trans-

port options and mobility-related infrastruc-

ture.

In terms of the distribution of respond-

ents’ regular mode of transport, walking and

motorbiking emerged as the most common

means of commuting to work (37% and 28%

respectively). It is noteworthy that there has

been some effort to create dedicated cycling

lanes around the Cyberabad region to encour-

age professionals to use cycles for everyday use

rather than motorised vehicles. The develop-

ment of dedicated cycling lanes and popularis-

ing cycling will go a long way towards building

a healthy and liveable neighbourhood. How-

ever, this is not being integrated beyond the

Cyberabad campuses and offices and is not yet

a dense enough network to be effective.

Photo 6

Land-guarding in and

around Madhapur (source:

Diganta Das, 2011)


When asked about the adequacy of roads

and parking facilities, nearly half of the re-

spondents said they are inadequate and more

infrastructure is needed (Figure 12).

Their dissatisfaction increased further

when asked about the adequacy of footpaths.

Eight out of ten respondents said that there

are inadequate footpaths in the neighbour-

hood despite the high numbers of people

walking. Since 4 out of 10 of those we surveyed

commute to work by walking, there is an ur-

gent need to sufficiently construct footpaths to

ensure the safety of pedestrians in Madhapur.

This general disaffection towards the

existing transportation infrastructure helps

explain the broad optimism towards the pro-

posed elevated metro rail (for which construc-

tion began towards the end of our research

project). Support for the metro registered

nearly 90% among the respondents surveyed.

Specifically, a large majority of 89.5% believed

that the metro would reduce traffic congestion

in Madhapur (Figure 13).

‘I wish that the Metro Rail come soon

to Madhapur. It is much useful for the

common people. Why? Because bus ticket

charges have gone up and there is extreme

traffic jam there. If the Metro Rail is

built, we can reach anywhere on time.

There are many advantages with it … ...

(respondent)

As evident from surveys, dominant issues

concerning urban transportation in the neigh-

bourhood are that of traffic congestion, irregu-

lar public transport and lack of pedestrian

paths. This indicates that the improvements

in road networks thus far are still falling be-

hind demand, and the neighbourhood thereby

remains very vulnerable to congestion, and

the concomitant slow, polluting, noisy traffic.

Interestingly, even as respondents expressed

optimism with the planned Metro, they were

equally wary that the Metro will perhaps make

Madhapur a more expensive neighbourhood.

4.4.3 PuBLIC SPACE

As for other neighbourhood infrastructure

and services, the responses garnered, in gen-

eral, were less favourable and point towards

Figure 12

Madhapur has adequate

road and parking

infrastructure

Figure 13

Metro train will reduce

traffic issues

No

Yes

10.5

89.5

%

4%5%

43%StronglyDisagree

48%Agree


inadequacies in their provision. For instance,

77% of respondents agree that the neighbour-

hood needs more facilities in relation to basic

sports and exercise facilities. The lack of

adequate safe playing areas for children in the

neighbourhood also emerged as a major con-

cern among parents. In addition, about 84%

of respondents felt that the neighbourhood

needs good access to green spaces, a finding

that is supported as well as explained by resi-

dents during our conversations.

What may be gleaned here is that the

rapid unplanned and unregulated transforma-

tion of the built space in Hyderabad, and this

neighbourhood in particular, often means

compromising the natural environment with-

out subsequent action to address the associ-

ated issues that bear upon residents’ everyday

quality of living. This is one of the negative

effects of the rapid urbanisation taking place

in the neighbourhood.

4.4.4 WATER AnD ELECTRICITY

Water provision, or lack of it, is a critical issue

for most parts of Hyderabad. It is important

to note though that Cyberabad benefits from

a reliable and good quality water supply. Our

research found that a significant majority of

respondents (70%) reported that they only

have irregular access to clean water, while a

further 4% said they never had access.

This finding suggests critical deficits in

the provision of clean drinking water. We also

identified the diversity of water sources people

have access to (Figure 15). While 59% have

access to formal water resources (provided

by municipal authorities), even this type of

provision is neither reliable nor consistent.

Residents’ confidence in the public service

provider is critically low. This is evidenced

from the significant reliance on informal

sources of water and private water-tank ser-

vices, which registered as the next two widely

used modes of water collection, used by 22.8%

and 10.6% of the respondents respectively.

Similarly, for a huge majority, or 89.5%

of the respondents, the power supply in

Madhapur is not reliable (Figure 16). This

suggests that the deficit in power supply is

generally felt across the socio-demographic

continuum. While water and power supply

are considered basic public services, irregular

provision has affected the overall liveability of

the neighbourhood.

4.6 WHAT RESIDEnTS LIkE AnD Do

noT LIkE ABouT MADHAPuR

When asked about some of the not so good

aspects of living in Madhapur, almost all

respondents highlighted the worsening traffic

conditions; drinking water issues as well as

water and air pollution which they believed

carry negative implications for the liveability

of the area.

Some expressed that these aspects of

dwelling in the neighbourhood have worsened

over time and demanded urgent action from

the authorities. Upon probing their thoughts

on the larger implications of these urban

issues, some highlighted the impact on their


health and general wellbeing. For them, their

concern about pollution is closely intertwined

with that of the negative effects on their health

and wellbeing. Respondents also attributed

road accidents to the heavily congested roads.

Amongst those who were dissatisfied with the

traffic conditions, some pointed out that the

construction and maintenance of roads have

not been able to keep up with the increasing

number of vehicles. The prevailing perception

amongst most respondents was that the rapid

population increase has exerted tremendous

pressure on the city’s urban infrastructure,

particularly on water, power and traffic.

When asked about the good things of

living in Madhapur, three attributes emerged

very strongly: 1) availability of jobs and op-

portunities, 2) amenities and services and

3) neighbours and friends. There is general

agreement among residents that the greatest

attraction point in Madhapur is the avail-

ability of jobs and opportunities. According

to them, Madhapur’s urban development has

created a spectrum of jobs that not only caters

to the educated and highly skilled, but also

to those who are less educated or untrained.

Another good thing about living in Madhapur

is the availability of amenities and services –

often at the door stop. For example access to

food & vegetable vendors, a weekly market,

availability of kirana (general) stores and

other everyday services make Madhapur more

liveable. When asked what he felt are the best

things about living in the neighbourhood, one

respondent replied:

Figure 14

Access to clean

drinking water

Figure 15

Water sources

in Madhapur

Figure 16

Power supply

in Madhapur

Formal sources

Private water-tank source

Nearby hand-pumps / wells

From other neighbourhood

Informal sources

Not reliable

Reliable

59.0

10.6

3.8

3.3

22.8

89.5

10.5

%

%

4% never

70%Intermittently

26%Regularly


it’s a good place to live. There is

availability of our daily needs, a good

place for the entertainment and outing

with family

(respondent)

Talking about neighbours and friends,

respondents valued having a diverse mix of

people in the neighbourhood and having large-

ly peaceful and accommodative neighbours.

A recurrent motif amongst our respondents

when asked about what makes them feel that

they belong to the neighbourhood is their

relations with family members, their neigh-

bours and friends. Others also cited friendly

neighbours as the greatest perk of living in

Madhapur.

4.7 SuMMARY oF SuRvEY:

DISCuSSIonS, RECoMMEnDATIonS

This survey has enabled the identification of

some of the urgent urban issues of the resi-

dents in Madhapur relating to liveability—

specifically the lack of planning and regula-

tion combined with problems with urban

infrastructure and services. While there have

been improvements in this neighbourhood,

strategic and effective planning, infrastruc-

tural support, urban services and amenities

are still inadequate. We argue that these areas

are in urgent need of improvement as they

affect people negatively and influence their

perspectives of local municipal and political

institutions.

On the positive side, some of the issues

raised by the residents are dimensions of

urban liveability which can be improved upon

in the short to medium term. For example,

to enhance the walkability of the local neigh-

bourhood, footpaths should be constructed to

ensure the safety of pedestrians. Facilitating

bicycle lanes should be helpful in encourag-

ing cyclists in the neighbourhood and towards

developing a green and healthy neighbour-

hood. The development and maintenance

of neighbourhood green-spaces with basic

sports and exercise facilities for children

and elderly people will go a long way towards

enhancing liveability of the neighbourhood.

Well-regulated parking spaces and designated

auto-rickshaw stands will also help towards

management of traffic in the neighbourhood.

Nonetheless, there remain more challeng-

ing structural issues such as the rising cost of

living and the dearth of public services (such

as provision of drinking water, affordable

healthcare facilities) which demand greater

and careful planning as they affect the lowest

stratum in society the most, but they also have

an impact on all residents.

Nonetheless, the survey also revealed that

people’s perception of liveability is not solely

nor fundamentally influenced by the avail-

ability of sound infrastructure and amenities,

alongside appropriate provision of urban ser-

vices. Interestingly, despite the shortcomings

associated with the neighbourhood (evidenced

above), the sense of satisfaction with living in

the neighbourhood emerges strongly among

the respondents, certainly more than we as


researchers had expected from our time spent

in Madhapur. Perhaps, residents’ opinions are

shaped by a comparison with their quotidian

lived experiences between the past and exist-

ing urban situation or in relation to places

they lived before migration. There is a general

consensus that there have been some improve-

ments in certain key dimensions that make

up their concept of urban liveability such that

these mitigate the everyday deficits of living in

Madhapur.

5. ConCLuSIon

Hyderabad is a vibrant, metropolis with a

rich history, and potentially with a success-

ful future in the global economy. In the last

few decades it has seen a massive economic

transformation and an associated urban

reconstruction as it stridently moves towards

actualising its global city aspirations. In

this, Hyderabad has done well in increasing

its profile in the global economy as well as

meeting people’s employment aspirations.

Nonetheless, the optics of the global city

betray the ‘third world’ urban landscape that

continues to exist within the city’s pockets and

peripheries. Hyderabad is, by all accounts, a

city of extremes and contradictions, evident

from the gleaming modern urban landscape

in Cyberabad, and the squalor of slums

punctuating the urban fabric of the larger

metropolis. While expanding the economic

and urban potential of the city by investing

in state-of-the-art infrastructure specifically

catered to attract foreign capital seems to hold

great promise for the state government, city

authorities and common citizens, a signifi-

cant section of the city’s population remain

marginalised and disadvantaged in the provi-

sion of basic infrastructure, amenities and

services.

Whether Hyderabad succeeds in its en-

deavour to become a global city is contingent

not only on whether it can meet the challenges

of competing within the global economic land-

scape, but also on how well it addresses issues

relating to urban liveability within the context

of the 21st century. At present, there is an

urgent need to pay closer attention to develop-

ing planned, regulated, adequate and decent

urban infrastructure and services while

ensuring comprehensive coverage of these

important and even vital provisions across

all sections of the rapidly growing population

of this city. Ensuring successful provision of

basic but adequate amenities at the neighbour-

hood level would lead to better liveability for

residents. Better liveable neighbourhoods will

pave the way for a liveable city.


noTES

1 On June 2, 2014, Telangana was formally

bifurcated from erstwhile Andhra Pradesh

and formed as the new state of the Repub-

lic of India, with Hyderabad as its capital.

Seemandhra state, the remaining region

of erstwhile Andhra Pradesh will share

Hyderabad as its administrative capital for

a maximum of ten years. It should be noted

that we conducted our research before

the bifurcation was agreed, and we were

researching at times of intense protest and

disruption. The Telangana issue was ex-

amined in the neighbourhood survey and a

point of debate in our in-depth interviews.

REFEREnCES

Austin, I. 1992. City of Legends: The Story of

Hyderabad. New Delhi: Viking Penguin

India.

GHMC. 2006. Chapter V: Basic Services to

the Urban Poor in Hyderabad—City

Development Plan. Hyderabad: Greater

Hyderabad Municipal Corporation.

GoAP, Government of Andhra Pradesh,

Municipal Administration & Urban

Development. 2013. Approval of

Metropolitan Development Plan-2031

for Hyderabad Metropolitan Region.

Hyderabad: Hyderabad Metropolitan

Development Authority.

GoAP, Government of Andhra Pradesh. 1999.

Andhra Pradesh Vision 2020. Hyderabad:

Government of Andhra Pradesh.

Kamat, S. 2011. Neoliberalism, urbanism

and the education economy: Producing

Hyderabad as a ‘global city’. Discourse:

Studies in the Cultural Politics of

Education 32 (2):187-202.

Ramachandraiah, C. 2007. Public Transport

Options in Hyderabad. Economic and

Political Weekly 42 (23):2152-2154.

Ramachandran, M., ed. 2012. Metro Rail

Project in India: A case study in project

planning. New Delhi: Oxford University

Press.

Rao, N. 2007. Cities in Transition:

Growth, change and governance in six

metropolitan areas. London: Routledge.

Rudolph, L.I., and S. H Rudolph. 2001.

Iconisation of Chandrababu: Sharing

Sovereginty in India’s Federal Market

Economy. Economic and Political

Weekly:1541-1550.

World Bank. 1999. Global urban and local

government strategy 1999. Available from

http://www.worldbank.org/html/fpd/

urban/strategy/chap1.pdf.

SCHoLAR BAnk

There are four city/neighbourhood reports that have been

produced from the Global Asia Institute research project:

Asian Cities: Liveability, Sustainability, Diversity and

Spaces of Encounter. They have been deposited in the

National University Scholar Bank and can be accessed

from the general Internet link given below. Each report

can be searched by title or author’s name

City and Neighbourhood Report: Busan, Korea (2014)

by Mihye Cho, Jeongkyoung Seo, Tracey Skelton

City and Neighbourhood Report: Hyderabad, India (2014)

by Diganta Das, Tracey Skelton, A. Nageswara Rao,

G. Nagasubbarao

City and Neighbourhood Report: Kunming, China (2014)

by Harvey Neo, Pow Choon Piew, Tracey Skelton,

City and Neighbourhood Report: Singapore (2014)

by Chang Jiat Hwee, Ho Kong Chong, Tracey Skelton

SB@NUS: http://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg

hyderabad,india

kunming,china

busan,korea

singapore

pro ject ti tl e :

Asian Cities: Liveablity, Sustainability, Diversity and Spaces of Encounter

The project is funded by the Global Asia Institute of the National University of Singapore (NUS).

Principal Investigator and Project Leader

Associate Professor Tracey Skelton (NUS)

Overseas City Research Leaders

Busan, South Korea, Dr Mihye Cho (Singapore University of Technology and Design)

Hyderabad, India, Dr. Diganta Das (Nanyang Technological University)

Kunming, China, Dr. Havey Neo (NUS)

Other team members: Dr. Jiat Hwee Chang, Dr. Pow Choon Piew, Associate Professor Ho Kong Chong and Professor Brenda Yeoh (all at NUS)

2 City Neighbourhood Report Hyderabad, India local languages (Korean in Busan; Telugu, Hindi or...

Documents

Transcript of 2 City Neighbourhood Report Hyderabad, India local languages (Korean in Busan; Telugu, Hindi or...