Street Vendors in Mumbai - Urban Design Research Institute

number should be 250,000 or more. TheNational Policy for Urban Street Vendors(2006) states that around 2% of the totalpopulation of a city is engaged in streetvending. By this measure the total numberof street vendors should be around250,000. Street vendors thus constitutea large section of the urban work force,and perhaps the most victimised.The total employment providedthrough street vending becomes largerif we consider the fact that it sustainscertain industries by marketing theirproducts. A lot of the goods sold by streetvendors, such as clothes and hosiery,leather and moulded plastic goods,household goods and some items offood, are manufactured in small scale orhome-based industries. These industriescollectively provide employment to alarge number of workers but they couldhave hardly marketed their products ontheir own. In this way street vendors helpsustain employment in these industries.Street vendors in Mumbai,as elsewhere, are mainly those whoare unable to get regular employment.This section of the urban poor tries tosolve their problems through their ownmeagre resources. Unlike other sectionsof the urban population they do notdemand that government create jobs forthem, nor do they engage in begging,stealing or extortion. They try to livetheir life with dignity and self-respectthrough hard work and limited capital.The poorer sections too are ableto procure their basic necessities mainlythrough street vendors, as the goodssold are cheap. The study by the authormentioned earlier showed that the lowerincome groups spend a higher proportionof their income in making purchasesfrom street vendors mainly because theirgoods are cheap and thus affordable.Had there been no street vendors in thecities the plight of the urban poor wouldbe worse than what it is at present.In this way one section of theurban poor, namely, street vendors,helps another section to survive. Hencethough street vendors are viewedas a problem for urban governance,they are in fact the solution to someof the problems of the urban poor. Byproviding cheaper commodities streetvendors are in effect providing subsidyto the urban poor, something that thegovernment should have done.Profile of Street VendorsIn the following sections we shallprovide a profile of the street vendorsin Mumbai. The data presented, unlessmentioned otherwise, is presented froma study conducted by the author in 2000.This study has been updated recently.The other sources of data are the studyconducted by TISS-YUVA in 1998 and astudy conducted by SNDT University incollaboration with ILO in 2001. TISS-YUVA had conducted a survey of streetvendors on BMC lands while the othertwo studies were based on samples. Wehave quoted more recent data from studyconducted by the author in 2010 as anupdate of the 2000 study of seven cities.Social CompositionThe sex ratio from our surveyof 2010 shows that 27% of the streetvendors are females. Around half of thestreet vendors (51%) belong to OtherBackward Classes and around 12% areScheduled Castes. Tribals form only 5%of the population. The open categoriesconstitute Only 15% of the vendorscovered had resided less than 15 yearsin the state. The majority were residentsof Mumbai for a long period of time.The literacy levels of the vendorsshowed that 25% were illiterate whilearound 22% have primary education.Around 32% of the hawkers have studiedup to the secondary school and the resthave higher educational qualifications.Some of the hawkers were graduates(3%) who had taken up this professionas no other work was available.The TISS-YUVA study foundthat there was a positive link betweeneducational level and income. The bettereducated sold goods which were moreexpensive and hence more profitable.In our study too we found that illiteratevendors, especially the females, soldvegetables and flowers in small quantities.IncomeThe TISS-YUVA survey foundthat the average income of hawkers in1998 ranged from Rs. 50 to Rs. 80 perday. The SNDT-ILO (2001) study did notcollect data on income of the vendors.Instead it made a list of the expenditure.According to this study, the averagemonthly expenditure of a street vendoris Rs. 2088 per month (approximate Rs.66 per day). In our study (2000) we triedto explore how much vendors sellingdifferent products earn. Petty vegetablevendors, mainly women, operating fromthe streets of the working class areasin Central Mumbai (Parel, Lal Bagh etc.)earned Rs. 35 to Rs. 50 per day. Theincome of male vendors varied from Rs.50 to Rs. 100 per day. There are caseswhere the income is higher and a fewlicensed hawkers even pay income tax.These are exceptions rather than the rule.The study of 2010 showed10% earned less than Rs. 140 a dayand 47% earned between Rs. 141 andRs 200 a day. The upper income groupconstituted 17% who earned betweenRs. 220 to Rs. 350 a day. These figuresare undoubtedly a jump in income ascompared to ten to twelve years ago.However if we take into account that theminimum wage for unskilled workers inMumbai, as per notification of the LabourDepartment, was Rs. 217 per day in2010 the impressive increase in incomeis not that impressive. Most vendors donot earn the equivalent of a need basedminimum wage. Moreover if we takeinto account the number of dependentseach street vendor has in his residenceand in his village, the income if furthereffaced. We found that the averagenumber of dependents per hawker was3 in Mumbai or in their villages of origin.We must also point out thatthese figures are pre-rent. In other wordsaround 10% of the income of the streetvendors in the city is usurped by themunicipal authorities as bribes. Our studyof 2010 found that all street vendors,except those who were very old or weredestitute women, paid bribes to be onthe street. This further effaced theirincome. The amount of bribe collectedevery year by these corrupt authoritiesamounted to Rs. 400 crores a yearduring 1998 to 2000. We did not assesthe amount of money collected at thepresent but if we take into account thatthe average bribe collected is around242 / 08 livelihood08 / 243

Rs. 50 a day from each vendor, thetotal amount could be mind boggling.Working ConditionsThe working conditions of thevendors are as tough. Most of them (90%)leave their homes by 6 a.m. or 7 a.m.and return late at night. Around twothirdsof hawkers (65%) reside 10 kms.or more from their places of work. Theyuse the suburban trains for commuting.Thus we find that the working day ofa street vendor, irrespective of her /his income is more than 12 hours.The gruelling conditions ofwork include being exposed to sunand rain on the streets. They arealso exposed to fumes from vehiclesevery day. This results in respiratorydiseases and other ailments.Women vendors are moreexposed to ailments because of lackof toilet facilities on the streets. Wefound that all women vendors wecovered on Dr. Ambedkar Road, Parel,suffered from kidney problems.The study by SNDT Women’sUniversity and ILO found that 85% ofthe sample suffered from diseasesresulting from tension, such as high bloodpressure (hypertension), hyperacidityand migraine. These are due to thetensions the street vendors face onthe streets. They are on the constantlook out for eviction staff or they haveproblems in finance or they are in debt.Women Street VendorsThe income of women vendorsis lower than those of males. Thewomen squatting on the pavementsin the working class area of CentralMumbai have started hawking afterthe closure of the textile mills in thatarea. Their husbands had workedas permanent workers in the textilemills and are now unemployed forthe past several years. These womenprovide for most of the expenses forthe household through their meagreincomes, as they are the main earners.We have not come across asingle case where a female hawker’stotal household income is more thanRs. 4,000 per month. In most cases(more than 90%) their householdincome ranges between Rs. 2,000and Rs. 3,500 per month. Undoubtedlythese women belong to families thatare below the urban poverty line.Women vendors take upthis profession mainly because ofpoverty. They have fewer resourcesthan the male vendors and theirinvestment is less. This in turn meansthat their income would be lower.Another reason is that they haveto divide their time between earning onthe street and taking care of the home.Most women vendors we came acrossin Lalbaug-Parel area worked till 9 amand went home to cook and clean. Theyreturned in the late afternoon but wenthome by 9 pm. The males could stay forlonger periods and could sell more. Therewere some cases where the husbandor son took charge when the womanwent home their income was higher.Harassment and BribesWe have discussed aboutthe bribes that the hawkers pay to theauthorities to remain on the streets.Street vendors in Mumbai work underconstant threat of eviction. Occasionallymassive drives are taken up by someover-enthusiastic municipal officers.These people make it a point to destroythe livelihoods of the working poor andthey take great pride in their ruthlessness.Two of these people merit mention.The first is an officer calledKhairnar and the other is Rokade. Bothwere/are Deputy Commissioners inthe municipal corporation. Kairnar wasknown as the ‘demolition man’ becauseof his destruction of slums and streetvendors.It is thus surprising to find thesame person supporting Medha Patker’sprotest against demolition of Golibarslum in Santa Cruz. One does not knowwhether it is a case of the leopardchanging its spots or sheer hypocrisy.Similarly in 2003 a DeputyCommissioner, Rokade, earned notorietywith the working poor because of hisdestruction of the wares of street vendors.This person said that his aim was tofinancially cripple the street vendorsso that they could not dare to operatein future. The same person is backas the head of encroachments and iscontinuing in the same ruthless manner.We have observed that whatactually happens after these raids isquite different from what people aremade to believe. Street vendors returnto their places after a few days. Theyare desperate because the raids makethem paupers. The municipal authoritiesconfiscate their goods without providinga seizure list or panchanama. As aresult there is no proof of what hasbeen confiscated. This is a violation ofthe rights of these people.If the policeconduct a raid in the premises of anotorious criminal a panchanama is madeof the goods confiscated. A street vendorsis treated as even worse than thesecriminals. Our study shows that only 22%of those who were evicted could get backmost of their goods that were confiscated.The raids in fact do not solvethe problem of encroachment. In someways they encourage encroachment. Asmentioned earlier, the street vendor whois in debt after the raids has to returnto make up for his losses. Moreover therents increase considerably after theseraids. We noticed this after the raids ofKhairnar and Rokade in 2000 and 2003,2010-11 respectively. Street vendors payhigher bribes to the municipal staff toeither prevent raids or to be forewarnedof raids so that they can escape beforethe demolition men take over. Henceraids actually help the municipaland police officials to earn more.The solution to the problemof encroachment does not lie inruthlessness. The urban poor have forlong been pushed around by insensitivebureaucrats. They don’t realise thatstreet vendors keep people on the streetsmaking them safe for people, especiallywomen. Without street vendors we couldhave an increase in crime on the streetsas we can see in some cities in Africa.In most cities in South Africa,Kenya and Nigeria one will not findany people on the streets after sunsetbecause of fear of robbed. The streetvendors in these cities have been evictedto make way for ‘world class cities’.244 / 08 livelihood08 / 245