Mumbai’s slum rehabilitation process has displaced an estimated 9.5 residents for every one person who is ultimately rehoused, according to a study highlighting the scale of displacement associated with redevelopment projects in the city. The finding raises questions about whether rehabilitation programmes are adequately protecting residents who are affected when informal settlements are cleared for redevelopment.

The study examined the outcomes of slum rehabilitation and redevelopment in Mumbai, where large numbers of residents live in informal settlements on valuable urban land. Such projects are generally intended to replace existing settlements with formal housing while allowing redevelopment of the surrounding land. However, the reported ratio indicates that many residents affected by redevelopment may not ultimately return to a rehabilitated home.

The disparity between displacement and rehousing also points to the difficulties faced by residents during the redevelopment process. Families can be required to leave their homes while projects are undertaken, and delays, eligibility requirements and changes in project plans can influence whether they eventually receive permanent rehabilitation housing. The study’s findings suggest that the number of people displaced can substantially exceed the number successfully rehoused.

Mumbai’s slum rehabilitation model has long attempted to combine improved housing for eligible residents with private or public redevelopment of urban land. Developers undertake projects under schemes that provide rehabilitation accommodation to qualifying occupants, while additional development potential can be used to make projects financially viable. The process, however, has often involved disputes over eligibility, relocation and the completion of rehabilitation housing.

The reported 9.5-to-one ratio brings renewed attention to what happens to residents who are displaced but do not return to the redeveloped site. For families dependent on established neighbourhood networks, nearby employment and local services, relocation can have consequences beyond the loss of a physical home. The study therefore adds to broader concerns about whether redevelopment should be assessed only by the number of housing units created or also by the number of residents who remain securely housed.

The findings underline the need for closer scrutiny of rehabilitation outcomes in Mumbai, particularly for residents affected by redevelopment projects. Ensuring that displacement does not permanently push families out of the city requires transparent eligibility processes, timely construction of rehabilitation homes and effective safeguards for affected communities. The study’s reported ratio highlights the gap that can exist between the stated objective of rehabilitation and the experience of residents undergoing redevelopment.