This paper is influenced by Sue Hendler’s concerns about the interlinked issues of feminism, ethics and social justice in planning. It uses a feminist-inspired ‘everyday life’ framework to explore the implication of recent settlement planning on the lives of urban poor people in Delhi. The work argues that, at the very least, planners need to understand the everyday lives of the urban poor if they are to execute socially just decision making in the planning of new settlements for them. Moreover, it suggests that using feminist approaches to planning may provide a more ethical starting point in a context of what Watson (2003) identifies as the ‘conflicting rationales’ between different groups in the urban arena.
AtkinsonRTaylorEWalterM (2008) The Urban and Regional Segregation of Indigenous Australians: Out of Sight, Out of Mind?Hobart: University of Tasmania.
2.
AvritzerL (2002) Democracy and the public Space in Latin America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3.
BeallJ (2002) Living in the present, investing in the future: Household security among the urban poor. In: RakodiCLloyd-JonesT (eds) Urban Livelihoods: a People-Centered Approach to Reducing Poverty. London: Earthscan Publications, pp.71–87.
4.
BhatAKDhruvarajanR (2001) Ageing in India: Drifting intergenerational relations, challenges and options. Ageing & Society21: 621–640.
5.
CarneyD (1999) Approaches to Sustainable Livelihoods for the Rural Poor. ODI Poverty Briefing2, January1999.
6.
ChabalPDalozJ-P (1999) Africa Works: Disorder as Political Instrument. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
7.
de CerteauMGiardLMayolP (1998) The Practice of Everyday Life, Volume 2. Translated by TomasikTJ. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
8.
De HaanA (2002) Migrants, livelihoods, and rights: The relevance of migration in development policies. Social Development Working Paper No. 4. Department for International Development, London.
9.
DrinkwaterM (2001) Programming Principles for a Rights Based Approach: Experiences to Date in Southern and West Africa. Cairo: CARE.
10.
du PlessisJ (2005) The growing problem of forced evictions and the crucial importance of community-based, locally appropriate alternatives. Environment and Urbanization17(1): 123.
11.
EdensorT (1998) The culture of the Indian street. In: FyfeNR (ed.) Images of the Street: Planning, Identity and Control in Public Space. London: Routledge, pp.205–221.
12.
EisensteinHJardineA (eds) (1980) The Future of Difference. Boston, MA: GK Hall.
13.
FainsteinS (1992) Planning in a different voice. Planning Theory 7/8:27–31.
14.
FainsteinSS (2000) New directions in planning theory. Urban Affairs Review35(4): 451–78.
15.
FernandesL (2004) The politics of forgetting: Class politics, state power and the restructuring of urban space in India. Urban Studies41(12): 2415–2430.
16.
FrancisE (2000) Making a Living: Changing Livelihoods in Rural Africa. LondonRoutledge.
17.
GilbertAWardP (1988) Land for the rich, land for the poor. In: GuglerJUrbanization of the Third World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.129–137.
18.
GilroyR (2008) Places that support human flourishing: Lessons from later lifePlanning Theory and Practice9(2): 145–163.
19.
GilroyRBoothC (1999) Building an infrastructure for everyday lives. European Planning Studies7(3): 307–324.
20.
GoetzAM (1988) Feminism and the limits of the claim to know: Contradictions in the feminist approach to women in development. Millennium – Journal of International Studies17 (3): 477–496.
21.
Hazards Centre (2005) Blueprint for an Apartheid City. New Delhi, India.
HendlerS (2005) Towards a feminist code of planning ethics. Planning Theory and Practice6(1): 53–69.
24.
JainAK (2003) Making planning responsive to, and compatible with, reforms. Cities20(2): 143–145.
25.
KeatingNPhillipsJ (2008) A critical human ecology perspective on rural ageing. In: KeatingN (ed.) Rural Ageing: A Good Place to Grow Old?Bristol: Policy Press.
26.
KellettPBishopW (2006) Reinforcing traditonal values: Social, spatial and economic interactions in an Indonesian Kampung. Open House International31(4): 58.
27.
KuklysWRobeynsI (2004) Sen’s capability approach to welfare economics. Cambridge Working Paper in Economics 0415, Cambridge University, Cambridge.
28.
LennonKWhitfordM (ed.) (1994) Knowing the Difference: Feminist Perspectives in Epistemology. London: Routledge.
29.
LongNLongA (1992) Battlefields of Knowledge: The Interlocking of Theory and Practice in Social Research and Development. London: Routledge.
30.
MackintoshM (2003) Health care commercialisation and the embedding of inequality. RUIG/UNRISD Health Project synthesis paper. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, Geneva, Switzerland.
31.
MasikaRJoekesS (1996) Employment and sustainable livelihoods: A gender perspective. BRIDGE Report No. 37. Available at: www.livelihoods.org).
32.
MCD Executive Engineer (2003) Memo No D/06/ EECD(S): 111/2002-03 Removal of unauthorised temporary shops along the roads at Squatter Resettelmtns Scheme at Bhalaswa.
33.
MukhijaV (2001) Enabling slum redevelopment in Mumbai: Policy paradox in practice. Housing Studies16(6): 791–806.
34.
NewtonC2009. The reverse side of the medal: About the 2010 FIFA World Cup and the beautification of the N2 in Cape Town. Urban Forum20: 93–108.
35.
NijmanJ (2000) The paradigmatic city. Annals of the Association of American Geographers90(1): 135–45.
36.
Nippert-EngC (1996) Calendars and keys: The classification of home and work. Sociological Forum11(3).
37.
NussbaumM (2000) Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38.
NussbaumM (2003) Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: Sen and social justice. Feminist Economics9(2/3).
39.
PayneG (2001) Urban land tenure policy options: Titles or rights?Habitat International25(3): 415–429.
40.
RangaswamyR (2007) ICT for development and commerce: A case study of Internet cafes in India. Paper presented to the 9th International Conference on Social Implications of Computers in Developing Countries. Sao Paulo, Brazil. May. Available at http://research.microsoft.com/users/nimmir (accessed 8 November 2010).
41.
ReardonT (1997) Using evidence of household income diversification to inform study of the rural nonfarm labour market in Africa. World Development25(5): 735–747.
42.
RileyLWKoAL (2007) Slum health: Diseases of neglected populations. BMC International Health and Human Rights7(1): 2.
43.
RitzdorfM (1994) A feminist analysis of gender and residential zoning in the United States. In: AltmanIChurchmanA (eds) Women and the Environment. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 255–280.
RobeynsI (2005) The capability approach: A theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities6(1): 93–117.
46.
RoyA (2001) A public muse: On planning convictions and feminist contentions. Journal of Planning Education and Research21(2): 109.
47.
RoyA (2009) Why India cannot plan its cities: Informality, insurgence and the idiom of urbanization. Planning Theory8(1): 76–87.
48.
SaarikoskiH (2002) Naturalized epistemology and dilemmas of planning practice. Journal of Planning Education and Research22(1): 3.
49.
SandercockL (1995) Voices from the borderlands: A meditation on a metaphor. Journal of Planning Education and Research14:77–88.
50.
SandercockLForsythA (1992) A gender agenda: New directions for planning theory. Journal of the American Planning Association58: 49–59.
51.
SclarEDNorthridgeME (2003) Slums, slum dwellers, and health. American journal of public health93(9): 1381.
52.
ScoonesI (1998) Sustainable rural livelihoods: A framework for analysis. Working Paper No. 72, Institute of Development Studies, Brighton.
53.
SenAK (1985) Commodities and Capabilities. North-Holland Amsterdam.
54.
SenA (2004) Capabilities, lists, and public reason: Continuing the conversation. Feminist Economics10(3): 77–80.
55.
ShatkinG (2004) Planning to forget: Informal settlements as forgotten places in globalising metro Manila. Urban Studies41(12): 2469–2484.
56.
SibleyD (1995) Geographies of Exclusion. London: Routledge.
57.
SmithDE (1988) The Everyday World as Problematic: A Feminist Sociology. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
58.
SnyderMG (1995) Feminist theory and planning theory: Lessons from feminist epistemologies. Berkeley Planning Journal10: 91–106.
59.
TippleG (2005) The place of home-based enterprises in the informal sector: Evidence from Cochabamba, New Delhi, Surabaya and Pretoria. Urban Studies42(4): 611–632.
60.
SpeakS (2005) The relationship between children’s homelessness in developing countries and the failure of women’s rights legislation. Housing, Theory and Society22(3): 129–146,
61.
SpeakSGrahamS (1999) Service not included: Private service restructuring, neighbourhoods and social marginalisation. Environment and Planning A13: 1985–2001.
62.
TippleGSpeakS (2009) The Hidden Millions: Homeless in Developing Countries. London: Routledge.
63.
ViratkapanVPereraR (2006) Slum relocation projects in Bangkok: What has contributed to their success or failure?Habitat International30(1): 157–174.
64.
WatsonV (2003) Conflicting rationalities: Implications for planning theory and ethics. Planning Theory and Practice4(4): 395–407.
65.
WatsonV (2006) Deep difference: Diversity, planning and ethics. Planning Theory5(1): 31.
66.
WhiteheadAKabeerN (2001) Living with uncertainty: Gender, livelihoods and pro-poor growth in rural sub-Saharan Africa. Working Paper 134, Institute of Development Studies, Brighton.
67.
WuF (2000) The global and local dimensions of place-making: Remaking Shanghai as a world city. Urban Studies37: 1359–77.
68.
WuL (1999) Rehabilitating the Old City of Beijing: A Project in the Ju’er Hutong Neighbourhood. Vancouver: UBC Press.
69.
YeatmanA (1986) Women, domestic life and sociology. In: PatemanCGrossEFeminist Challenges. Sydney: Allen and Unwin, pp.157–72.
