AN ESSAY ON

SQUATTER SETTLEMENTIN NEPAL AS A FORM OF SOCIAL

SEGREGATION, INEQUALITY AND URBAN POVERTY
CASE OF MANOHARA

LECTURER:
Prof. Frank Eckardt

Weimar, 17.03.2015

Submitted by: Submitted to:

Pradeep Adhikari ( pdeep.aakaar@gmail.com) Bauhaus University, IFEU

WS 2014
Squatter settlement in Nepal as a form of social segregation, Inequality and urban poverty: Case of Manohara

Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 3
1.2. Social Segregation ..................................................................................................................... 4
1.3. Inequality ..................................................................................................................................... 6
1.4. Urban Poverty ............................................................................................................................. 6
2. CASE OF MANOHARA SQUATTER SETTLEMENT................................................................... 7
3. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................. 11
4. REFERANCES ................................................................................................................................. 11

Submitted by: Pradeep Adhikari (115303); pdeep.aakaar@gmail.com 2

Squatter settlement in Nepal as a form of social segregation, Inequality and urban poverty: Case of Manohara

1. INTRODUCTION

Urban poverty is one of the most common characteristics of the cities of less developed
countries. This trait in the cities is expressed by social inequalities, segregation of
marginalized people, growing number of slums and squatters, etc. Nepal is one of the
poorest countries of the world (according to World Bank Nepal ranks 157th out of 187
countries on Human Development Index) (The World Bank , 2015). The cities of Nepal
are facing the similar context of urban poverty. In 2003 the number of squatter
settlements was already 63 in Kathmandu valley only where more than 15000 people
were living as urban poor (Karki, 2007). Since this number is in increasing order, urban
poverty of Kathmandu valley can be represented by the socio-economic status, null
access to infrastructure and living conditions of these people. On one hand Nepal is
having increment in the number of urban areas, on the other; each urban area is being
expanded due to ever-growing rural-urban migration (United Nation Human Settlements
Program, 2010). Lack of proper housing policy to cater the growing number of immigrants
is the main cause of the squatter settlements in Nepal. Manohara Squatter settlement in
Bhaktapur District of Kathmandu valley is regarded to be the largest squatter settlement
in the valley at present. Here, most of the inhabitants are the immigrants that entered into
valley during Maoist Insurgency period (1994-2004). This essay is an endeavor to put
lights into the social and physical milieu of this settlement in reflection to Kathmandu
valley as the most urbanized part of the nation. The information about Manohara Squatter
settlement is based upon the survey undertaken as an academic research in 2012.

1.1. Squatter settlements in Nepal

Slums and squatters have been predominant phenomena of urbanization in South Asian
region. These informal settlements in the middle of cities have lots of issues to look at. On
one hand, it shows the inability/lack of welfare state of the nations, on the other hands,
the growing proportion of these settlements is the precursor of unprecedented form of
segregation and social inequalities in an urban ensemble. In Nepal squatter settlements,
the dominant ones can be defined as informal settlements of urban poor, marginalized
and immigrants on non-claimed land (Joshi & Bjonness, 1987) and the inhabitants are
known as 'squatters' or 'sukumbasis'. This Nepali term, sukumbasi is more important as it
can be used interchangeably with the English word, squatter, but has a more specific
meaning, it does not refer to every person occupying unused buildings or land without
legal arrangements, but rather only to those who are literally landless (Tanaka, 2009).
Lumanti, a leading organization, working on Nepal's slum/squatters sector has defined-
squatter settlements are those communities where people settled on land without any
legal right to be there, neither as tenants nor owners Squatter settlements. In Kathmandu
started in the 1950s when rural migrants moved into cities looking for employment. During

Submitted by: Pradeep Adhikari (115303); pdeep.aakaar@gmail.com 3

Squatter settlement in Nepal as a form of social segregation, Inequality and urban poverty: Case of Manohara

the years, those, who were too poor to afford accommodation, added to the numbers and
by 2000, according to Kathmandu Metropolitan Council, there were 61 squatter
settlements with 2,031 households and 11,851 people. Rural-urban migration is the main
cause of squatters in Nepal. Besides this, natural calamities like, landslides, floods, fire in
the hill and terai regions compel the people to settle in these informal settlements and
look for some sources for their livelihood. They usually occupy vacant land preferably
around the riverbank, where, some work is possible (low pay job) for e.g. sand mining,
daily labors, animal husbandry, small grocery shops, etc. They are mostly at or near city
center where squatters can easily manage electricity, ground water resources, etc and
where they don't need to travel much to go to their work place. They set up the building
on their own, using self collected materials like bricks, bamboos, etc. The occupation is so
intensive that in some cases, for e.g., in the cases of eviction by the government, after
few days or week, they set up their homes within 2-3 days throughout the place. The
children mostly go to government schools where they don't have to pay tuition fee. Almost
all the settlements are supported by some kind of NGOs and INGOs. For e.g. Manohara
settlement in Bhaktapur District is being supported by "Dial Nepal". The living condition,
however, is far below from the mark. High density land use, lack of proper number and
management of toilets and sewerages, lack of health and hygiene measures, and over
population at the bank of river are likely to cause water pollution, bad smell, always
possible for water borne diseases epidemic. They have public tap, stone spouts, Tube
well for water supply.

1.2. Social Segregation

Social segregation is yet another aspect of cities in less developed regions with
considerable proportion of urban poor. "The processes of segregation establish moral
distances which make the city a mosaic of little worlds which touch but do not
interpenetrate. This makes it possible for individuals to pass quickly and easily from one
moral milieu to another, and encourages / the fascinating but dangerous experiment of
living at the same time in several different contiguous, but otherwise widely seperated,
worlds… it tends to complicate social relationships and to produce new and divergent
individual types" (Park, Burgess, & Mckenzie, 1925). In squatter settlements of Nepal,
segregation has mostly social and then economical implications. Most of the Inhabitants
are due to in-migrations of the people from rural areas of the nation with a very few
exceptions who are from urban settlements from excluded groups (Acharya, 2010). Lack
of proper education, skill, empowerment, good health and sufficiency of better life are the
general traits of the inhabitants that have made them involved in informal sector livings.
They also lack access in the overall political as well as social sphere of the city. Their
political access is limited within the task of casting votes during elections. Rather, they
have to go through eviction from the administrations at times. Living condition is of
course, much poor. They lack proper housing, safe drinking water, health services,
electricity supply from NEA, and so on. Since there is no programs in the government

Submitted by: Pradeep Adhikari (115303); pdeep.aakaar@gmail.com 4

Squatter settlement in Nepal as a form of social segregation, Inequality and urban poverty: Case of Manohara

policy for the welfare of the squatters (mainly housing), the squatters are socially
disparaged and poverty striken. The children (not all) of these settlements usually go to
government schools where education is free. But some proportion of the total children are
engaged in labor works with their elders like carrying bricks in the construction sites, sand
mining, etc. Ethnicity of inhabitants in the settlements depends upon the cause of
inmigration. For example, in some cases where the immigration is caused by the maoist
insurgency, have mixed ethnicity in the settlements whereas where the inhabitants are
living for longer periods and are the excluded groups of the urban settlements are from
lower castes like Podes1, Kasahais2, etc. They have to go through eviction at several
times and they do not know when the municipality bulldozers destroy their habitats. There
is another problem in settlements regarding identification. The population of these
settlement changes with times and municipality claims that there are more number of
people living than are the real squatters. Slums are already identified and are lesser in
numbers than squatters in Kathmandu valley. These poverty-striken slums and squatters
cannot afford to take health services in public hospitals and there is no health post in
these areas as government reforms. In some cases, some NGOS or INGOS have set up
few health posts; however, squatters are really deprived from getting proper health
services and are prone for epidemics with the diseases. Urban settlers have very narrow
perspectives over the squatters. This can be proved by the protests shown by the local
residents in Sundarighat when government decided to resettle the squatters from
Paurakhi Bastee in Kopundol to there (eKantipur, 2012). With all these, these squatters
are living with high density of living and they usually don't communicate with the
strangers. Due to poor economic conditions they have very low profile of living while on
the other hand, they are always under threat of evictions. They are generally living in
isolation with the mainstream urban communities along the bank of rivers in Kathmandu
valley. Economically they are usually poor and cannot afford to live a good life with proper
urban services like electricity, health services, educations, drinking water, sewerages line,
etc. They are engaged in sand mining, labor works in the construction sites, domestic
animal husbandry, etc. They are living with daily income less than $1 (according to
official from Sposh-Nepal, NGO for Manohara settlements in 2011). There is always a
chance of calamities like fire, floods, diseases epidemics, etc. Even in the case of
calamities due to the lack of proper services, the loss of lives is always on a higher side.
In Nepal, social housing is inexistent. This has direct impact on squatter settlements to be
segregated. The predomination of commercial housing projects throughout the valley as
housing sector has direct impact over the segregation of urban poor at the river banks as
informal settlements.

1
Podes are the low caste group people of Nepal who usually are engaged in the occupations related to cleaning
the sewerages.
2
Kashais also are the low caste group people who work as butchers.

Submitted by: Pradeep Adhikari (115303); pdeep.aakaar@gmail.com 5

Squatter settlement in Nepal as a form of social segregation, Inequality and urban poverty: Case of Manohara

1.3. Inequality
Squatter settlements in Kathmandu valley is a proper example of social inequality being
prevailed in Nepalese urban context. It was in 2001 that City Development Strategy of
Kathmandu Metropolitan City was formulated. "This was the first initiative from local
government's side to organize squatters as a part of urban development agenda and a
clear sign of local governments' realization that squatters' issues cannot be ignored.
Afterwards, during tenth five years plan3 (2002-2007), 1.5 millions (USD 20,400) was
allocated for improving housing slums and squatters. The strategy proposed for the
housing infrastructure in the plan was largely focused on Kathmandu Valley where the
plan intended to lead the Long-term Development Concept of Kathmandu Valley in a
coordinated manner. Apart from the valley, the plan intended to establish satellite towns
or settlement centers.” (United Nation Human Settlement Programme (UN-HABITAT),
2010, p. 17). However the implementation was not up to the mark due to the limitation of
resources and priority towards informal settlements. Apart from these, there is not any
contribution from government's side in the welfare of these informal settlements. Even the
slums in Kathmandu have their legal tenure over lands which squatters do not have.
Apart from few NGOs and INGOs, there is no contribution from governments' side for the
welfare of the squatters. Living condition of squatters is poor. The houses are self made
ones with rags and self collected materials. There is no separate provision of basic needs
for these people like food, shelter and clothing. Others like infrastructure facilities, social
debts, social respect from urban residents and state mechanism are by far unthinkable.
Till date only one housing program has been launched for squatters. That is Kirtipur
Housing Project at the south of Kathmandu valley in Kirtipur. Another housing project is
going on in Ichangu on the N-East of the valley. But there is protest going one there by
the local residents against this government's move. According to research performed by
Balaram Acharya in Shankhamul Squatter settlements in November -December 2010,
nearly 80% of the people hesitated to say dwellers of the squatters as they are charged
frequently by the word of magante (beggers), chor (thief), khate (homeless street people),
durbesani (drugs addicted), etc (Acharya, 2010, p. 190). Social disparity is on the peak at
present against squatters in Nepal. Moreover, they are excluded from basic human
requirements like health, insurance, security, and self-identity. These sorts of social
exclusions generate more poverty and the whole settlements are under the vicious circle
of poverty. The other consequences of social inclusion are the chances of drugs
addictions, crimes, and other anti social acts.

1.4. Urban Poverty

"There is very rare or no consensuses to define Urban Poverty but two broad
complementary approaches are prevalent; economic and anthropological interpretations.

3
Five Years Plan is the government economic plan that was started in 1960s with development plans formulated
for every five years time. Tenth Five year plan started from

Submitted by: Pradeep Adhikari (115303); pdeep.aakaar@gmail.com 6

Squatter settlement in Nepal as a form of social segregation, Inequality and urban poverty: Case of Manohara

Conventional economic definitions use income or consumption complemented by a range

of other social indicators such as life expectancy, infant mortality, nutrition, the proportion
of the household budget spent on food, literacy, and school enrolment rates, access to
health clinics or drinking water, to classify poor groups against a common index of
material welfare." (Masika, Rachel, 1997). "Anthropological studies of poverty have
shown that people’s own conceptions of disadvantage often differ from those of
professional experts. Great value is attached to qualitative dimensions such as
independence, security, self-respect, identity, close and non-exploitative social
relationships, decision-making freedom and legal and political rights" (1997, p. 3). Unlike
rural poverty, urban poverty is complex and multidimensional—extending beyond the
deficiency of income or consumption, where its many dimensions relate to the
vulnerability of the poor on account of their inadequate access to land and housing,
physical infrastructure and services, economic and livelihood sources, health and
education facilities, social security networks, and voice and empowerment (Asian
Development Bank, 2014, p. 1). Squatter settlements in Kathmandu Valley are the
conglomeration of all these indicators. They have limited or no access to employment
opportunities, poor and insecure or no housing and services, with no social protections
and limited or no access to health and educational opportunities. As described in the
economic survey of Nepal 2007, poverty based on income and consumption is narrow,
poverty analysis had been conducted on the basis of social aspect such as; health,
nutrition, average life expectancy, access to school, etc. Moreover, not only the socio-
economic dimension but the social and political dimensions as well have been adopted in
poverty (His majesty's Government, 2007). The ground for poverty is the land ownership
that, unlike slums, squatters of Kathmandu valley are the real landless people in the
country. They are as such, regarded as illegal settlements in the city. Other studies done
on individual squatter settlements have demonstrated social consequences of urban
poverty. For e.g. study in Sankhamul squatter settlements in 2010 showed that even the
job holders had bitter experiences in their work place due to the reason that they were
squatters. The newly married couples of Sankhamul squatter settlement wanted to leave
the settlements but could not due to the economic constraints (Acharya, 2010, p. 190).
With all those parameters, squatter settlements have been considered as the settlements
of urban poor.

2. CASE OF MANOHARA SQUATTER SETTLEMENT

A case study was done on the squatter settlement for academic purpose in Tribhuvan
University architectural studies on 2011 by a group of students. A team of five students
spent some days in Manhohara squatter settlement in Bhaktapur and talked to the
squatters. With all the information they collected in their study, a presentation was done in
the university. All the data presesented here are based upon the information that was
presented.

Submitted by: Pradeep Adhikari (115303); pdeep.aakaar@gmail.com 7

Squatter settlement in Nepal as a form of social segregation, Inequality and urban poverty: Case of Manohara

Manohara squatter settlement lies at the bank of highly polluted Manohara River in Thimi
Bhaktapur district, towards the east of Kathmandu Valley. The settlement was started
around 2002-2003, when Nepal was undergoing with political conflict and Maoist
insurgency. People from different parts of the nation have come to stay there. Most of
them are the poor people and have migrated due to the lack of employment and life
safety during the insurgency period.32% of the respondents told that cause of their
migration was employment, 30% told their reason was poverty 22% told their being
homelessness was the main reason and 10% told they came due to natural disaster and
6% told that they were war victim (Maoist war with the government) and came for their
lives safety. Bank of river are the easy place to settle as squatters in Nepal. The important
reasons for this are the higher ground water level and easy to dump the domestic wastes
and sewerages. These regions are not under regular inspection from the administrations
as well as the urban residents. So it is easier to encroach in these areas. At the same
time, the encroachment also would not cost a single penny. That is why they are usually
illegal settlement. Encroachment usually starts with few people and it goes on expanding
in linear direction along the bank. Same happened to this settlement.

At present there are 4,500-5,000 people living in nearly 750 households in this settlement.
Among them, 600-1,000 is the floating population. However, it is interesting to know that
the buildings and the land they are using are being bought and sold among themselves or
new squatters. Sand mining is the main source of income to them. They dig out sand from
Manohara River as labor every day. Sometimes, when municipality bans to dig out sand
from river and they become unemployed. Many people also rear domestic livestock like
pig, goat and poultry like ducks, hens, etc. Few also have small shops in their houses and
make some earnings from them while some people with some money do some kinds of
business out of the settlement. Taking into account, the relationship with the main town
Manohara Squatter settlement is absolutely segregated in term of infrastructure and
social services. The squatters find it comfortable to isolate because they are not bound to
pay any social services amount for example, the land tenure, the water charges, etc. To
add more, they can just make their living (however poor it may be) on their own by
engaging themselves in small retail shops, animal husbandry, labor works, etc.

Social amenities and infrastructure of this area are much below in comparison to the main
city settlement. The roads linked to this area are without the pavements and black-
topped. They are muddy and are pathetic to use during the rainy season due to non-
existence of storm water management. There is electricity supply in most of the houses
but without municipal water supply. 42% of the houses do not have electricity while 45%
are using electricity illegally without paying and only 13% of houses have legal electricity
supply. For water sources, they use hand-pump and tube wells to use underground
source of water. 40 % use Tube wells and hand-pumps while 44% use traditional stone
spouts for water. Meanwhile 16% people use public tap for water. There is an only

Submitted by: Pradeep Adhikari (115303); pdeep.aakaar@gmail.com 8

Squatter settlement in Nepal as a form of social segregation, Inequality and urban poverty: Case of Manohara

primary school in the settlement for the children to take education which is funded by
NGO and run by teachers of the same settlements. The concerns of the teachers are not
only to teach the children but also to ask and convince parents of the settlements to send
their children to the schools. Talking about the children taking formal educations, 76% of
the students study in government schools and 24% of the students go to private school.
Like other informal settlements, Manohara Squatter Settlement also has few NGOs and
INGOs working for the people of the settlements. For e.g. Dial-Nepal is supporting with
child-care initiatives in this settlement. Recently, with the aids from various NGOs,
INGOs (e.g. Pacific Asia, Neighbors Forever, World Friends, Korean Agencies) a
multipurpose hall has been constructed.

Taking into account, the demographic information about Manohara Squatters, 33% are
under 15% years of age, 33% fall in age group 16-30 years, 22% fall under 31-45 years
group, 8 % are under 45-60 years and rest are 4%. Thus more than 60 percent are the
working groups and are concerned much with making some kind of livelihoods. Even the
children work for earning. It has also been found out that of all the earning people, only
14% are earning more than NRs4 5000 (equivalent to around $510), 46% are earning in
between NRs (3000-5000) , 39% are earning in between NRs 1000-3000 and 1 % are
earning below NRs 1000. The average family size is 4.4. The number of family that
depend upon the labor works as their main source of income is 252 while 99 family
depend upon service work for their survival income. 73 households do small scale
business while 6 households grow crops in the encroached space nearby. But social and
economic conditions of these people are not up to the mark. With all the factors like
segregation of class and social inequality, lack of proper educations, there is equal
chance of spoiling of the children due to the indulgence towards drug addictions and
urban crimes. The settlement is prone to water-borne diseases due to the lack of health
and sanitary measures in the livings. The data shows that 36% of the households have no
toilets and they use open areas and riverside as their toilets. 48% have toilets yet the pit
latrine type without any scientific measures to maintain the sanitation in the community.
1% households have modern toilets while 15% have toilets with latrine pipe directly
opening to river. As people say, in every 10 to 15 days somebody dies in the settlement.

It is inevitable that the government cannot ignore the existence of squatters. As already
mentioned above, with the draft of City Development Strategy in 2001, squatters were
recognized as a part of urban development agenda and they won't be ignored (United
Nation Human Settlement Programme (UN-HABITAT), 2010, p. 18). But even after more
than a decade has passed, there has not been any efficient reform to address the
squatters' issue. As a result the number of squatters and squatter settlement has
increased and the urban poverty, inequality and segregation are becoming more and

4
$1 is equivalent to 98 Nepalese Rupees (NRs)

Submitted by: Pradeep Adhikari (115303); pdeep.aakaar@gmail.com 9

Squatter settlement in Nepal as a form of social segregation, Inequality and urban poverty: Case of Manohara

more prominent. After Kirtipur Housing project in 2007-2008 for squatters for Bishnumati
Corridor, no housing projects have been formulated from government side except the
apartment at Ichhangu, Bhaktapur which is yet to be completed. But these are not going
to provide shelter for more than 1,200 squatters and still more than 15,000 squatters are
regarded to be illegally settling within the urban Katmandu. The housing condition of the
squatters in Manohara is relatively better than other ones but, much lower than the basic
standard of housing. 5% of houses have area less than 342 sq. ft5. 64% have area
between 342-684 sq. ft, while, 27% houses are larger enough between 684 sq. ft. and
1026 sq. ft. This shows that since the encroachment is illegal and free they started
making their houses according to their family size and the materials they could gather to
construct a house. Talking about the materials that they used for their houses, roofing
materials are plastics cover (9% houses), plastic mat cover (4% houses), Tin sheet (22%
houses), worn-out GI sheet (60%) and Jute-bag cover (5%). But all these materials are
not the new ones but collected in the second-hand shops. Similarly, wall materials are
also varied from bricks to jute-bags6. From survey it is found out that 37% of houses have
bamboo panels as their wall materials. Similarly, 20% have GI sheets and next 20% have
concrete hollow blocks as their wall materials. 8% houses have jute-bag as their wall
materials and 7% houses have thin plastic being tied up as their wall. 2 % houses are
made up of bricks while 1% houses have mud walls. However, these houses cannot
resist against rain and storms. Since they use fire-woods to cook food (59% houses), the
use of dry bamboo panels, thin plastic (poly-ethene), jute bags has made the settlement
vulnerable in case of fire as well. Lack of proper clothing and exposure to the ground in
the interior make life difficult to the poverty-stricken people in the winter. The problem is
not less severe in rainy season, lack of storm-water management make the nights
sleepless to these people.

In spite of all the problems related to poverty, the problem that the squatter feel bigger is
the fear of uncertainty. They always have fear of eviction that they would become
homeless again. Unless they are regarded as landless and taken under urban policy, their
fear will not be stop to haunt them. Besides the poor living conditions lack of health and
education have worried them about the children (33% of population under 15 years of
age). The infants and mothers in the settlements are equally vulnerable to infection and
some kind of diseases. Government hospitals in the city are always crowded and these
people can't afford to take health services from private health institutions. With all the life
style they have and the way they appear, sometimes, they are not anticipated as social
animal by the urban residents. The political influence visit their place only during elections
and issues of squatter are often misused for the election campaign. But after winning
election the leaders never turn back to this settlement as the people in the settlement say.

5
1 sq. ft = 0.09290304 sq. M.
6
Jute bags are the materials that make cement bags.

Submitted by: Pradeep Adhikari (115303); pdeep.aakaar@gmail.com 10

Squatter settlement in Nepal as a form of social segregation, Inequality and urban poverty: Case of Manohara

They are not considered to have any self identity and self respect. That is why they feel
inferior and have strong attitude of being introvert. That is the reason that the people do
not feel easy to talk to strangers.

3. CONCLUSION

Squatter settlements in Kathmandu show how urban Kathmandu welcomes the rural
people coming in for the sake of better livelihood. Yet the population of the city is
increasing. On the one hand Kathmandu is struggling to turn into good metropolitan city
with all the urban planning attributes. Whilst, the size of informal settlements is increasing
and encroachment is looking to capture the entire riverbanks of the city. With this, on the
one hand, people of these settlements are living a squalid life, on the other, the pollution
of river, encroachment of public land, difficulties to execute the riverfront projects, loss of
religious and cultural values of the holy rivers, etc are impeding against the making of the
city. Increasing numbers of antisocial cases in these informal settlements shows the lack
of education and civic sense among the people and the emergence of new social and
economic group of people in the city. At the same time social inequality is piling up and so
is the disparity among the people in the city. The government claims that it has made a
huge investment in the field of health and education throughout the nation. But in the
heart of capital city, people are devoid of getting housing services, proper health services
and proper education. Housing is the most and foremost important task to put forward for
these settlements. Identification of the squatters has already started and housing for
slums and squatters have been the talk of the town. However, lack of social housing, lack
of government's initiation in the housing sector, and inability of investors to see profit in
providing shelter to informally settled people of city are the red signals for the overall
development of the informal settlements as well as the whole city.

4. REFERANCES

Acharya, B. (2010). Urban Poverty: A Sociological Study of Shankhamul Squatter.

Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology Vol. 4 , 179-192.

Asian Development Bank. (2014). Urban Poverty in Asia. Mandaluyong: ADB.

eKantipur. (2012, July 07). eKantipur.com. Retrieved March 03, 2015, from eKantipur
Website: http://www.ekantipur.com/the-kathmandu-post/2012/07/06/nation/locals-
protest-dampens-squatters-home-hopes/236864.html

His majesty's Government. (2007). Economic Survey. Kathmandu: HMG/Nepal.

Submitted by: Pradeep Adhikari (115303); pdeep.aakaar@gmail.com 11

Squatter settlement in Nepal as a form of social segregation, Inequality and urban poverty: Case of Manohara

Joshi, J., & Bjonness, H. C. (1987). "Housing for the urban poor", Report from a
seminar. Housing for the Urban Poor. Trondheim: Univ. of Trondheim and The Oslo
School of Architecture.

Karki, M. (2007). Enhancing the role of IOE in Shelter Design. Kathmandu.

Masika, Rachel. (1997). Urbanisation and Urban Poverty: A Gender Analysis. Brighton:
Institute of Development Studies: University of Sussex.

Park, R. E., Burgess, E. W., & Mckenzie, R. D. (1925). The City. London: The University
of Chicago.

Tanaka, M. (2009). From confrontation to collaboration: a decade in the work of the

squatters' movement in Nepal. International Institute for Environment and Development
Vol. 21, Issue 1 , 143-159.

The World Bank . (2015). The World Bank Group. Retrieved March 9, 2015, from The
World Bank Group website: http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/nepal/overview

United Nation Human Settlement Programme (UN-HABITAT). (2010). Nepal Urban

Housing Sector Profile. Nairobi: UNON, Publishing Services Section.

United Nation Human Settlements Program. (2010). Nepal Urban Housing Sector
Profile. Nairobi: UN-HABITAT.

Submitted by: Pradeep Adhikari (115303); pdeep.aakaar@gmail.com 12