EODR 2.0: All Show, No Substance
• Mumbai’s Redevelopment Mirage
• Glossy Event, Ground Reality Ignored
• Glossy Event, Ground Reality Ignored
Unmesh Gujarathi
Sptouts News Network
What was hailed as a landmark initiative for addressing Mumbai’s redevelopment gridlock—Ease of Doing Redevelopment (EODR) 2.0—has been widely criticized as a grand spectacle lacking in substance. Held with much fanfare by CREDAI-MCHI, the event promised clarity and progress for thousands of housing societies across the city. However, ground-level realities and post-event disclosures paint a starkly different picture.
CREDAI-MCHI’s EODR 2.0 Event: Inflated Numbers, Empty Seats.
Before the event, CREDAI-MCHI claimed that more than 5,000 housing societies were expected to take part in the redevelopment discussions. However, press releases issued afterward quietly revised the number down to just around 3,000. According to inside sources who spoke with Sprouts News, even this reduced figure does not reflect the actual footfall, which was significantly lower. More importantly, the event failed to answer the most critical question: how many societies actually moved forward with actionable redevelopment proposals?
The Transparency Deficit: No Data, No Metrics, No Accountability at EODR 2.0
Sprouts News observed a conspicuous lack of transparency throughout the exhibition. No datasets or progress reports were made public—there were no statistics on developer-society engagements, no updates on signed Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs), and no roadmap for project approvals. This glaring information void has raised serious doubts about the sincerity of the organizers.
Activist Backlash: EODR 2.0 Branded a “PR Stunt” for Mumbai Developers
Civic groups and housing activists have described EODR 2.0 as a public relations event camouflaged as a policy platform. “It was more about optics than outcomes,” remarked an activist who requested anonymity. The event was heavily attended by media representatives, but there was minimal interaction with affected society members or tenant associations. Instead, emphasis appeared to be placed on image-building and leadership visibility.
Unanswered Questions: How EODR 2.0 Ignored Tenant Rights & Legal Hurdles
During the event, terms like “trust,” “dialogue,” and “sustainable development” were liberally used. Yet, Sprouts News reporters on the ground found little evidence that any of these ideals translated into practical measures. Concerns regarding stalled redevelopment projects, tenant displacement, legal bottlenecks, and environmental risks were either ignored or superficially addressed through glossy presentations.
For lakhs of Mumbaikars living in dilapidated structures and awaiting redevelopment, EODR 2.0 was supposed to be a ray of hope. But the absence of concrete commitments has only deepened public disillusionment. Citizens who had expected accountability and action received instead a familiar dose of vague promises and bureaucratic ambiguity.
Also Read: NFDC Payment Delays Leave MSMEs Struggling for Dues.
Regulatory Reforms Missing: Why EODR 2.0 Failed Mumbai’s Housing Crisis
Despite its stated objectives, the event did not provide even basic reassurances—no grievance redressal mechanisms, no policy reforms, and no discussion on long-pending regulatory approvals. In a city where unsafe buildings routinely collapse and families are left in limbo for years, such exhibitions, critics argue, merely scratch the surface of a deep-rooted crisis.
The Aftermath: Will EODR 2.0’s Broken Promises Spur Real Change?
Sprouts News will continue to monitor post-event developments and hold relevant stakeholders accountable for the promises made at EODR 2.0. For now, what remains is a grand stage with little substance and yet another missed opportunity to bring Mumbai’s redevelopment woes closer to resolution.
