Global Best Practices of Urban Slum Development

  • Pranab Kumar Panday


Throughout the world, many governments and organizations have been working on the development of urban slums. All initiatives cannot be considered as best initiatives. In order to be the best, a project requires to be effective over a long period of time. The main argument of this chapter is that best practice should have the applicability in organizations lacking successful reform. Therefore, academicians and development practitioners have stressed upon the importance of different indicators, including shared vision, a clear perception of the current reality, creativity and innovation, and learning through practicing modality while featuring a best practice. Therefore, this chapter discusses a number of best practices of slum development initiatives globally that have proved to be successful in their endeavor to ensure development for the slums in different countries of the world. In addition, to highlight different components of these programs, an attempt has also been made to discuss lessons that have been learnt for possible replication in other countries of the world.


Best practice Urban slum development Calcutta’s Basti Improvement Program Comprehensive Kampung Improvement Program Community participation Community organizations Financial management Baan Mankong Secure housing Pamoja Trust and Muungano A twin-track approach Dharavi Rajiv-Indira Housing Society Valmiki Ambedkar Awas Yojana Mythri Housing Scheme 


  1. Alder, G. (1995). Tacking poverty in Nairobi’s informal settlements: Developing an institutional strategy. Environment and Urbanization, 7(2): 85–107.Google Scholar
  2. Angel, S., & Boonyabancha, S. (1988). Land sharing as an alternative to eviction: The Bangkok experience. Third World Planning Review, 10(2), 107–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. APHRC (2002). Population and health dynamics in Nairobi’s informal settlements. Nairobi: African Population and Health Research Centre.Google Scholar
  4. Archer, D. (2012). Baan Mankong participatory slum upgrading in Bangkok, Thailand: Community perceptions of outcomes and security of tenure. Habitat International, 36(1), 178–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bartone, C., Bernstein, J., Leitmann, J., & Eigen, J. (Eds.). (1994). Toward environmental strategies for cities. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  6. Boonyabancha, S. (2001). Savings and loans—Drawing lessons from some experiences in Asia. Environment and Urbanization, 13(2), 9–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boonyabancha, S. (2005). Baan Mankong: Going to scale with “slum” and squatter upgrading in Thailand. Environment and Urbanization, 17(1), 21–46.Google Scholar
  8. Buckley, R. M., Mahavir, S., & Jerry, M. (2007). Strategizing slum improvement in India: A method to monitor and refocus slum development programs. Global Urban Development, 3(1). Retrieved May 8, 2017, from
  9. CODI. (2014). Progress report of Baan Mankong. Bangkok: Community Organisations Development Institute.Google Scholar
  10. De Soto, H. (1989). The other path: The invisible revolution in the Third World. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  11. Dhakal, S. (2002). Comprehensive Kampung Improvement Program in Surabaya as a model of community participation. Working Paper. Urban Environmental Management Project, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), December 2002, Kitakyushu, Japan. Retrieved May 6, 2017, from
  12. Hiebeler, R., Kelly, T., & Ketteman, C. (1998). Best practices: Building your business with customer-focused solutions. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  13. Keare, D. and Paris, S. (1983). Evaluation of shelter projects for the urban poor. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  14. Keehley, P., Medlin, S., MacBride, S., & Longmire, L. (1997). Benchmarking for best practices in the public sector: Achieving performance breakthroughs in Federal, State, and Local Agencies. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Luna, E. M., Ferrer, O. P., & Ignacio, U., Jr. (1994). Participatory action planning for the development of two PSF projects. Manila: University of Philippines.Google Scholar
  16. McAuslan, P. (1989). Land law, tenure and registration issues and options. Paper presented at the Urban Land Development Seminar, World Bank, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  17. Ostrom, E., Schroeder, L. D., & Wynne, S. G. (1993). Institutional incentives and sustainable development: Infrastructure policies in perspective. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  18. Øyen, E. (2004). Poverty production: A different approach to poverty understanding. In N. Genov (Ed.), Advances in sociological knowledge. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  19. Payne, G., & Majale, M. (2004). The urban housing manual: Making regulatory frameworks work for the poor. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  20. Pugh, C. (1990). Housing and urbanisation. New Delhi: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Payne, G (2001). Lowering the ladder: Regulatory frameworks for sustainable development. Development in Practice, 11(2/3): 08–318.Google Scholar
  22. Payne, G. (2005). Getting ahead of the game: A twin-track approach to improving existing slums and reducing the need for future slums. Environment and Urbanization, 17: 135–145.Google Scholar
  23. Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of learning organizations. Garden City: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  24. Shukla, R. P. (2004). Early childhood care and education (p. 106). New Delhi: Sarup & Sons.Google Scholar
  25. Sivaramakrishnan, K. C. (1994). Urban environmental governance. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  26. Struyk, R., Hoffman, M., & Katsura, H. (1990). The market for housing in Indonesian cities. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.Google Scholar
  27. Thomas, F. C. (1997). Calcutta poor. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  28. Turner, J. F. C. (1967). Barriers and channels for housing development in modernizing countries. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 33(3), 67–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Werlin, H. (1999). The slum upgrading myth. Urban Studies, 36(9), 523–1534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Weru, J. (2004). Community federations and city upgrading: The work of Pamoja Trust and Muungano in Kenya. Environment and Urbanization, 16(1), 47–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pranab Kumar Panday
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Public AdministrationUniversity of RajshahiRajshahiBangladesh

Personalised recommendations