Ha

bit

at

De

ba

teUNCHS

The United Nations Centrefor Human Settlements

March 2001Vol. 7 No. 1

CONTENTS

United NationsContinued on pg. 4

EDITORIAL 2 LETTERS 3

Five Years after Habitat II 1 Did You Know? 7

SHELTER Innovative Approaches to Tenure 8

by Geoffrey Payne Women Reconstructing Their Lives 9

by Sengul Akçar

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND POVERTY ERADICATION Thinking about Urban Inclusiveness 10

by Richard E. Stren Localizing the Gender Agenda 11

by Anne Michaud

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Democratizing the Urban Environment Agenda 12

REGIONAL FOCUS: AFRICA AND THE ARAB STATES 13

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Enabling the Informal Sector 22

by Naison Mutizwa-Mangiza

GOVERNANCE Building Capacity to Improve Urban Governance 24

by Joris Van Etten andLeon van den Dool

INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION Decreasing International Cooperation since Habitat II 26

VIEWPOINT Decentralization Does Not Always Lead to 28 Democratic Participation

by Minar Pimple and Lysa John

HABITAT NEWS 29 COUNTDOWN TO ISTANBUL+5 30 BOOK REVIEW 31 UNCHS (Habitat) OFFICES 32

Five YearsAfter Habitat IISuccesses and Set-backs

“We commit ourselves to the objectives,principles and recommendations contained

in the Habitat Agenda and pledge our mutualsupport for its implementation”. This wasthe declaration of world governments andleaders when they endorsed the IstanbulDeclaration and the Habitat Agenda at theconclusion of the Habitat II Conference inJune 1996. Five years later, it is time toreview how far the commitments of theHabitat Agenda are being implemented, andto make recommendations for future action.

In June 2001, the United NationsGeneral Assembly holds a Special Sessionfor the review and appraisal of theImplementation of the Habitat Agenda(Istanbul+5). Countries have beenpreparing reports on their own progress inthis undertaking in preparation forIstanbul+5.

The official review process forIstanbul+5 began in October 1999 withthe issuing of “Guidelines for CountryReporting” issued by UNCHS (Habitat).The guidelines were developed through aconsultative process involving Habitat staff,national governments and Habitat Agendapartners. Countries were requested tocompile their national reports through aconsultative process using broad-based,gender-balanced national committees.

Reporting was to be done under 20key commitments and strategies selectedfrom the Habitat Agenda. These aregrouped under six main themes of: Shelter;Social Development and Eradication ofPoverty; Environmental Management;Economic Development; Governance;and International Cooperation. Eventhough this was the beginning of the officialreporting process, the reports receivedfrom countries and from some HabitatAgenda partners indicated that somecountries, regional groupings and networks

© UNDP/David Kinley

2 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

UNCHS (Habitat)The United Nations Centre

for Human Settlements

EDITORIAL

March 2000 - Vol.7 No.1

EditorRasna Warah

Guest EditorWandia Seaforth

DesignerFelicity Yost

Editorial AssistantMartha Waiyaki

Editorial Policy BoardDaniel Biau (Chair)Nefise BazogluJochen EigenAxumite Gebre-EgziabherDiana Lee-SmithNaison Mutizwa-MangizaPaul TaylorFarouk TebbalRolf Wichmann

Regional Advisory BoardAlioune Badiane (Africa and the Arab States)Roberto Ottolenghi (Latin America and theCaribbean)Disa Weerapana (Asia and the Pacific)Pietro Garau (North America)Lars Ludvigsen (Europe)

Published byUNCHS (Habitat)P.O. Box 30030Nairobi, KenyaTel: (254-2) 623988/623147/621234Fax: (254-2) 623080/624266/624267Telex: 22996 UNHAB KEE-mail: rasna.warah@unchs.orgWorld Wide Web: http://www.unchs.org/

ISSN 1020-3613Opinions expressed in signed articles arethose of the authors and do notnecessarily reflect the official views andpolicies of the United Nations Centrefor Human Settlements (Habitat). Allmaterial in this journal may be freelyquoted or reprinted, provided theauthors and Habitat Debate arecredited.

In 1996, the world’s governments gatheredin Istanbul for the Second United NationsConference on Human Settlements

(Habitat II) to deliberate on the future ofhuman settlements in the context of a rapidlyurbanizing world. Habitat II was the last in aseries of United Nations Conferences held inthe 1990s to deliberate on major issuesrelated to sustainable development in the 21st

century. By the time we went to Istanbul,there was already talk of “conference fatigue”and questions on what new insights couldcome out of this Conference. Yet the outcomewas welcomed by sceptics and enthusiastsalike. The Habitat Agenda acknowledged theneed to accept urbanization as inevitable, towork out strategies to maximize its economic,social and cultural benefits but also to ensurethat problems associated with rapidurbanization did not result in a large part ofthe population being marginalized andexcluded.

The new century is set to be the centuryof the urban revolution. It is estimated that bythe year 2030 more than 60 per cent of theworld’s population will live in towns and citiesand that the bulk of the new urban populationwill be in developing countries, where alreadyat least one billion urban residents live in life-and health-threatening conditions. It is,therefore, fitting that early in the millennium,the world will gather in New York to reviewthe progress made in the implementation ofthe Habitat Agenda and to agree on furtheractions and initiatives.

The review process has beenstructured around 20 key commitmentscoming out of the Habitat Agenda. Thesehave been organized under six broad themes:Shelter; Social Development and Eradicationof Poverty; Environmental Management;Economic Development; Governance andInternational Cooperation.

This issue of the Habitat Debateattempts to capture some experiences andperspectives from around the world on eachof the six themes. A comprehensive reviewwill be presented to the General Assemblyduring the Special Session, which takes placefrom 6 to 8 June 2001. In addition,governments and Habitat Agenda partnerswill have the opportunity to present theirexperiences in the committees of the SpecialSession and in the events that will be heldparallel to the official session.

The review process of theimplementation of the Habitat Agenda hasalready highlighted some important lessons,such as the increasing inter-dependence ofcountries in the age of globalization, and thecontinuing value of the principle ofpartnership. It has also shown a continuingcommitment to renew and foster political willat all levels to provide secure and improvedliving conditions for the urban poor; topromote gender equality and inclusiveness inhuman settlements development; to intensifyefforts for ensuring transparent, responsible,accountable, just and effective governance anda recognition of the added significance ofinternational cooperation in theimplementation of the Habitat Agenda. It ismy hope that we shall come out of theIstanbul+5 process with renewedcommitment to work together, to ensure thathuman settlements remain places of hope,prosperity and social advancement.

Anna Kajumulo TibaijukaExecutive DirectorUNCHS (Habitat)

3The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

LETTERS

If you have any thoughts, suggestions orcomments on Habitat Debate, please sendthem to:Letters to the EditorHabitat DebateUNCHS (Habitat)P.O. Box 30030Nairobi, KenyaFax: (254-2) 623080E-mail: rasna.warah@unchs.orgPlease include your postal address.We welcome your contributions.

Iread with interest the letter whichappeared in Habitat Debate Vol.6 No.2 by

Mr. Babar Mumtaz of Development PlanningUnit, London, focusing on how governmentsof Third World countries should view slumsand squatter settlements. In many ThirdWorld countries, particularly in Asia andAfrica, migration to urban areas is a result ofpopulation pressure and economic stagnationin rural areas rather than the economicopportunities of urban areas. Rapidurbanization in most of these countries resultsin acute urban poverty leading to a myriad ofsocio-economic, environmental and politicalproblems. The squatter settlements in manyThird World cities contribute to the creationof public health hazards which cannot betolerated or encouraged by any responsiblestate or municipal authority. Mr. Mumtaz’sassertion that slums and squatter settlementsare an asset to cities is therefore exaggerated.

In my opinion, the governments of thesecountries should have a national urban policysetting out guidelines and limits to such rural-urban migration in the context of nationaleconomic prospects and policies and to utilizethe hitherto untapped resources in thehinterland. Settlements and infrastructurehave to be developed in such areas todiscourage people from migrating to big cities.With the present day technology, smallsettlements can be provided with most of theamenities and advantages which big citiesenjoy.N.D. DicksonUrban Planning ConsultantUrban Development AuthorityNawala, Sri Lanka

Anna Kajumulo Tibaijuka’s editorial inHabitat Debate Vol.6 No.3 was timely,

pointed and forceful. As she rightly pointedout, it is Third World countries, especiallyAfrican countries, that will be most adverselyaffected by the water crisis.

We would like to emphasize the needto focus on water pollution by nuclear wastewhose poisonous effects can span hundredsof generations. The consequences of peoplebeing compelled to use polluted water canbe an added tragedy. Unless the corporatesector is made to be more public-spirited,the prospect of “privatizing” water could

turn out to be another nightmare asglobalization and privatization expand to takecontrol of resources, water being one of themost indispensable and precious of theseresources.Hewage JayasenaDirector, Buddhist Socio-EconomicDevelopment Institute (BSEDI)Colombo, Sri Lanka

The article “Reducing Impact ofEarthquakes” by Aliye Celik (Habitat

Debate, 2000, Vol.6 No.2) states: “The bestsolution is to build higher-cost structures thatare more durable. However, in developingcountries, in order to provide more housing, itwill not be possible to provide more but saferhousing unless practical and affordable solutionsare found to build safe and cheap buildings.”

This is absolutely correct for manycountries, and not only for developingcountries. For example, Turkey is a countrywith the highest seismic risk. 95 per cent ofthe Turkish population resides in seismichazardous destructive zones. And in 50 percent of Turkey’s territory, destructiveearthquakes such as the one that occurred inIzmit in 1999 could occur any time.Developing seismic safe and inexpensivebuildings is extremely important inearthquake-prone areas, especially indeveloping countries. In recent years, severalstructural systems to deal with earthquakeshave been developed in Russia. These arehighly reliable, safe and inexpensive. Wewould be willing to share these systems andto cooperate with other countries interestedin implementing them.Prof. Jacob EisenbergDirectorMoscow Earthquake EngineeringResearch Centre (EERC)State Committee of the RussianFederation for Construction Housing andMunicipal Economy (Gosstroy of Russia)Director, International Association forEarthquake Engineering (IAEE)Moscow, Russia

It is not often that informal settlementresidents get to read publications that they

can easily understand. Global issues are oftendocumented in technical language and most

of the information does not get to thecommunity level anyway. Habitat Debate isan exception. Keep up the good work,Habitat.Zipporah ChegeMathare Community VolunteerShelter Action OrganizationNairobi, Kenya

Last year, UNCHS (Habitat)’s Moscowoffice began producing Habitat Debatein Russian. Following are a fewreactions from readers.

We believe that the Russian version ofHabitat Debate will provide a new

stimulus to the sustainable human settlementsdevelopment activities both in the RussianFederation and in other CIS countries.Ms. Ruzanna R. AlaverdyanDeputy Minister for Urban DevelopmentRepublic of Armenia

The Ministry for Architecture andConstruction of the Republic of Belarus

is grateful for Habitat Debate in its Russianversion. The Russian version of this bulletinwill be a valuable source of information forthe Republic and will enable it to carry outits activities within the framework of theHabitat II follow-up, global reports andmonitoring of urban indicators.Mr. Gennady F. KurochkinMinister for Architecture andConstructionRepublic of Belarus

4 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

Continued from pg. 1

of partners had already established theirinternal mechanisms for discussingimplementation and /or monitoring progress.

As of March 2001, UNCHS hadreceived a total of 82 national reports. Thesehave been analyzed by region and synthesizedinto regional reports. The regional reportswere presented to the respective regions in aseries of regional meetings held betweenSeptember and November 2000. Nationalreports varied widely from country tocountry. A few of the most obvious differencesin terms of coverage included:l quantity and quality of hard data tosupport general statements;l scope and depth of coverage of allthe items under the six themes;l dis-aggregation of information toshow pre- and post - Istanbul initiatives;l evidence of a broad-basedparticipation in the implementation of theHabitat Agenda and in the formulation of thecountry report.

The following summaries highlightsome of the main issues and trends in eachregion.

AfricaLegislative and institutional

frameworks such as town and countryplanning acts and housing policies have beenformulated and others reviewed to matchnew challenges. Housing finance institutionsin the region are typically small and providea very small proportion of total housingfinance.

There has been large expansion ofinformal settlements and lack of adequatebasic services. Factors that constrain thesupply of land in African countries havebeen identified and these includecustomary land rights, land speculation,lack of up to date cadastral and land datasystems.

Most countries emphasized the needto target the shelter needs of both rural andurban populations. Although Africa is theleast urbanized continent with only about 35percent of its population living in urban areas,it is currently experiencing high rates ofpopulation increase and the world’s mostrapid rate of urbanization. Many countrieshave been disrupted by war and armedconflicts.

Widespread poverty and low levels ofeconomic development in many countries ofthe region present a daunting challenge.Coupled with this is the rate at which HIV/AIDS infections are occurring. Twenty two

million Africans are already infected with theHIV virus. Most are people in the prime oftheir working and parenting lives.

Strengthening the role of localauthorities in social development and povertyeradication has been identified as a key areaof concern, as is the need to enhance theprivate sector, particularly those engaged insmall-scale activities. Lack of capacity toimplement and translate legislative reforms,especially capacity building in gender analysis,planning and mainstreaming, is one of theconstraints affecting many countries in theregion.

African countries have also expressedthe need to improve macro economicmanagement as well as creation of enablingenvironment for private sector developmentand growth through privatization policies.Informal economic enterprises absorb over60 percent of the workforce in urban Africa.It is the one sector that continues to showabsorptive capacity and is the most rapidlyexpanding employment segment of thecontemporary African urban economy. In thenext decade an estimated 90 per cent ofadditional jobs in Africa’s urban areas willcome from micro and small-scale enterprises.Levels of unemployment have escalatedacross urban Africa, averaging 30 per cent inmost cities. Public sector retrenchments anddeclining absorption capacity in the formalprivate sector are mainly to blame.

Constitutional reforms and reviews andsupport to the political and institutionalstructures of emerging democracies are high

priority issues in Africa. The relationshipbetween central government and localauthorities, however, is still poorly developedeven in some countries wheredecentralization is enshrined in nationalconstitutions. In addition, local authoritieshave low management and administrativecapacity and lack resources.

The international cooperation focus onpoverty eradication has allowedgovernments in the region to include urbanpoverty reduction initiatives into theirpoverty eradication strategies. Enhancedinternational cooperation and developmentassistance to improve local capacities andreduce poverty will be required.

Asia and the PacificThe Asia-Pacific region is

characterized by great differences in socio-economic development. South-East and EastAsia saw high economic growth for severaldecades prior to the economic crisis of1997. The economy of China, however,continued to grow at high rates. South Asia’sdevelopment had been much slower and wasless affected by the crisis.

Nonetheless, fuelled earlier byeconomic growth, urbanization continuesunabated. While population growth isexpected to decrease to 1.11 per cent forthe period 2000 to 2010, the formation ofhouseholds will continue at a much higherlevel (growth rate of 2.29 over the sameperiod). This will keep housing demand indeveloping countries of the region at a very

© Rasna Warah

5The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

high level. Industrialized countries in theregion face different problems such as thechanging housing needs of the ageingpopulations and the increase in single personhouseholds.

Among the major trends in the regionis the shift of government policy towards anenabling role and more reliance onpartnerships with the private sector as wellas with NGOs and local communityorganizations. In many countries with nationallevel organizations, self-reliance of well-organized communities is playing a significantrole. This is particularly visible in the well-established democracies. More centralizedstates tend to move towards more inclusiveshelter policies more cautiously. Policies tendto include various actors, but tend to placeresponsibility on the private sector to delivershelter to all strata of the population. Somecountries encourage shelter provision for thepoor by a requirement for developers, whichobliges them to set aside a portion of anydevelopment for low-income groups.

Eviction is the greatest threat to mostexisting slum dwellers in Asia. However,some countries have instituted legal measuresto prevent forced evictions. For instance, inBangladesh the High Court, in a landmarkdecision has declared the eviction ofsquatters without rehabilitation illegal. Stillthere are too few other examples wheregovernments recognize slum dwellers’ rightsto stay where they are unless an acceptablealternative can be found.

There have been specific measuresadopted that support the participation ofwomen in decision-making. These includelegislation, such as that adopted in Indiabefore the Habitat II Conference, that a thirdof the seats in local councils be allotted towomen. Subsequently, 800,000 women tooktheir places in local level politics in India, inboth urban and rural areas.

The rapid growth of motorization inthe vast majority of cities has significantlycontributed to urban air pollution. Industrialpollution of air and water quality also remainsan area of major concern requiring legislativeaction and effective enforcement. Animportant development since Habitat II hasbeen the ratification of the 1997 Tokyoagreement on emission of carbon dioxide andsetting up of Air and EnvironmentConservation Acts.

Widespread recognition andunderstanding of the negative environmentaland economic development impacts of the

overuse of the private automobile has been amajor concern since 1996. Expanding andenhancing access to public transport andlight rail transit systems have been openedor are currently under construction in KualaLumpur, New Delhi, Manila, Jakarta, Bangkokand Singapore, among others. However, thewidespread use of two-wheelers ormotorcycles in the largest cities in Asia arehaving a negative impact on emissions levels/air quality, traffic congestion and quality-of-life.

Economic development in the regionwas shaken by the Asia financial and currencycrisis of 1997, which also had an impact onglobal growth momentum and world trade.In the region itself, the shock of the instabilityhad unprecedented effects on the real estatesector, growth rates, inflation, unemploymentand the social and political fabric of thesociety.

Employment in the informal sectoraccounted for a large percentage of allemployed persons. In the Philippines, thissector accounts for 50.6 per cent of allemployed persons. In urban areas, it accountsfor 36 per cent. In Korea, small companieswith less than 4 staff had increased from 85per cent in 1993 to 87 per cent in 1998 andwomen represent 33 per cent of allbusinesspersons.

Effective coordination at the regionallevel remains constrained but sub-regionalconsultations have been held around the draftWorld Charter of Local Government, and theidea of a Pacific Habitat Agenda has beendiscussed to deal with the specificurbanization issues of that sub-region.

West AsiaHousing conditions and policies are

very diverse in the West Asia region wheremost countries suffered a serious economicsetback after the Gulf War in 1991. Housingpolicies were, however reviewed andadvanced in the majority of the countries inthe region before and after the Second UnitedNations Conference on Human Settlements(Habitat II).

The characteristics of the housingstock and demand are different in the oilproducing gulf countries of the GulfCooperation Council (GCC) from othercountries in the region. The existing housingstock and the actual housing demand areinfluenced by a number of factors such as theconsiderable expatriate population ofworkers and employment-seekers in the GCCarea and the unprecedented flow of

Palestinian refugees (particularly to Lebanon,Syria and Jordan).

Moreover, the high natural growthrates of population in Egypt, Jordan, Syriaand Yemen have contributed to the alreadyexisting housing crisis in these respectivecountries. Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria andYemen have strengthened their housingdelivery processes by involving and increasingthe role of the private sector and the variousactors of the civil society. Another importantdevelopment taking place in the shelter fieldin the region is the strengthening of the roleof women in housing and urban developmentas stated by the national reports from bothEgypt and Iraq.

Within the Western Asia region thereis a marked difference in social progress andthe scale of poverty between the GulfCooperation Council (GCC) and the rest ofthe countries. These wide regional disparitiesare accompanied by disparities withincountries in several cases. While the majorityof people in GCC have adequate shelter,access to basic urban services, health andeducation, there are still gaps in meeting theneeds of all sectors of the population in othercountries.

Environmental issues remainparamount in the region, most of which areexacerbated by harsh climatic conditionswhich make resources such as water scarce.One of the major issues is the lack of potablewater for cities in the entire region.Environmental pollution resulting from theprolific use of the private automobile in urbanareas and coastal urban centres (portsdealing in the export of crude oil) is a causeof concern in many countries.

Progress has been made to promotegovernance, especially in the last decade.Legislative reforms and policies havesupported an overall visible change inwomen’s role in the region, especiallythrough the election of women as mayors ormembers of municipal councils. However,little information has been collected ontransparent, accountable and efficientgovernance of cities.

OECD and TransitionCountries

The main shelter issue in the region isnot construction of new units, but urbanrenewal and conservation of historic sites andcultural heritage. Conservation, renovationand modernization of existing housing stockis probably the main area of activity in theshelter sector in Western Europe, and even

6 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

of these disadvantaged categories in localhousing markets. Other policy changesinclude the amendments to legislationgoverning tenancy and the non-profit housingsector in an effort to target low-incomepeople.

There is a worrying trend of increasingsocial divisions, especially in the metropolitanregions. Furthermore, the ethnic dimensionin the segregation processes has becomemore evident. A number of countries havebeen involved in the promotion and improvedsystems that support organizations of thevulnerable and disadvantaged. The aim is toensure the promotion of their interests andtheir involvement in the local, national,economic, social and political decision-making processes.

Issues related to urban transportsystems are high on the agenda of manyEuropean countries. New technologies, aswell as concerns and political support from awide range of actors, have led to improvingtransport systems towards moreenvironmentally sound options.

Many countries are placing emphasison privatization and competition in thedelivery of urban services. The cooperationof other sectors has shown the increase ofavailable sources of funding, and improvedquality and level of services. However,improved service delivery has increased thecost of many services, with the result thatmany low-income urban inhabitants no longerhave access to some urban services.

Latin America and theCaribbean

This is the most urbanized region inthe developing world, with 75 per cent of itspopulation residing in urban areas. 40-60 percent of urban residents reside in informalsettlements. Invasion of land and buildings bythe organized poor has been a feature ofurban areas.

There is a recognition of the influenceof popular urban movements and civil societyin general, who play an important role innegotiating programmes for security of tenureand settlements upgrading, mainly throughself help construction. This has reduced theincidence of invasions. Many countriesrecognize housing rights in their constitutionsand there is widespread guarantee of securetenure for renters.

Natural disasters such as earthquakes,hurricanes and landslides have had a seriousimpact on development efforts in the region.There have been regional and sub-regional

level responses to disaster mitigation andmanagement.

Decentralization has been widelyaccompanied by participation of civil societyin local governance. The issue of genderequality in local governance and urban issueshas been widely addressed in the region. Forexample, violence against women has beenaddressed through legislation and specificprogrammes. Gender equality has been asignificant criterion in home ownership andsubsidized schemes and there are significantnumbers of women heading households ashome owners.

There has been a drastic reduction inbi-lateral and multi-lateral assistance to theregion (only 3 per cent of such fundsworldwide go to this region). This is partlyexplained by the high average GrossDomestic Product of the region, but theregion also has very high disparities betweenthe rich and the poor. There is also moredirect channeling of aid to NGOs who areperceived to be more responsive to thepoorest sections of the population. Housingis ranked low in development assistance,except for natural disasters.

Local governments are unable todirectly enter into agreements with bi-lateraland multi-lateral agencies due to legislativeconstraints. This is seen as obstacle toeffective decentralization.

This article is based on regional reportsprepared by UNCHS (Habitat) inconsultation with the various UN RegionalCommissions and Member States. Theregional reports are part of thepreparatory process of Istanbul+5, theSpecial Session of the UN GeneralAssembly for the Review and Appraisal ofthe Implementation of the HabitatAgenda, due to take place in New York inJune 2001. The above synthesis wasprepared by Wandia Seaforth,Networking/Information Officer inUNCHS (Habitat)’s Urban Secretariat.

For more information, please contact:Axumite Gebre-EgziabherCoordinator, Istanbul+5UNCHS (Habitat)P.O. Box 30030Nairobi, KenyaE-mail:Axumite.Gebre-Egziabher@unchs.orgTel.: (254-2) 623831Fax: (254-2) 624264Internet: www.istanbul5.org

© Rasna Warah

more so in Eastern Europe and theCommonwealth of Independent States (CIS),where the quality of many old dwellings isgenerally poorer than in many countries inWestern Europe.

Another issue faced in all countries inthe region is the ageing of the population,with its related consequences for the type ofdwellings required. With growing numbersof older people, demand for smaller housingunits close to services in densely developedinner cities is expected to rise. While some20 per cent of the population in Europe wasmore than 60 years old in 2000, the figure isprojected to increase to 26.7 per cent in2025. Similar figures for North America are16.3 per cent and 24.4 per cent respectively.

In countries with economies in transitionwhere social welfare systems have declinedconsiderably, there is a strong need to addressthe needs of tenants as housing markets arebecoming increasingly commercialised.

Several of the countries in the Balkansand in Caucasus have experienced civil strifeduring the last few years, with largepopulations being international refugees orinternally displaced persons. In thesecountries, the issue of secure tenure is of majorimportance. In Kosovo, for instance, the entireland registration system has to be totallyrecreated anew, following the destruction.

Several countries in Western Europehave been or are in the process ofimplementing new legislation to improve thesituation of homeless people., Some countriesare targeting refugees and asylum-seekerswith a view to ensuring improved integration

7The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

Did you know?Some basic facts from UNCHS (Habitat)’s

State of the World’s Cities Report 2001

Shelterl 75% of the world’s countries have constitutions or national laws that promote the full and progressive realisation of the right

to adequate housing.l 61% of countries in the world have constitutions or national laws that protect against forced evictions.l Households in cities of developing countries need an average of 8 times their annual income to buying a house; in Africa, they need

an average of 12.5 times their annual income, while in Latin America, they only need 5.4 times their annual income. The highest rentsare in the Arab States, where a household spends an average of 45% of its monthly income on rent.

l One out of every four countries in the developing world have constitutions or national laws which prevent women from owning landand/or taking mortgages in their own names. Customary or legal constraints to women owning land or property are highest inAfrica, the Arab States, Asia and Latin America.

l Real estate costs are highest in Asia and the Pacific where one square metre of land for a serviced plot costs an average of US$ 3.1.Africa is at the lowest end of the real estate market with an average price of US$ 0.15 per square metre.

l Less than 20% of households in Africa are connected to piped water and only 40% have access to water within 200 meters of theirhouse.

Societyl 5.8% of children in cities of the developing world die before reaching the age of five years.l 29% of cities in the developing world have areas considered as inaccessible or dangerous to the police. In Latin America and the

Caribbean, this figure is 48 %.l In cities of the developing world, one out of every four households lives in poverty. 40% of African urban households and 25% of

Latin American urban households are living below the locally defined poverty lines.

Environmentl City dwellers in Africa only use 50 litres of water per person per day. The highest median price of water is also highest in Africa.l In highly industrialised countries, almost 100% of households are connected to piped water. The average water consumption for

these households is 215 litres per person daily.l Less than 35% of cities in the developing world have their wastewater treated.l In countries with economies in transition, 75% of solid wastes are disposed of in open dumps.l 71% of the world’s cities have building codes with anti-cyclone and anti-seismic building standards based on hazard and vulnerability

assessment.l Buses and minibuses are the most common mode of transport in the world’s cities. Cars are the second most common mode used,

while walking is the third most common mode. Travel time in Asian cities appears to be the longest with an average of 42 minutesper trip.

Economyl 37% of the population in cities of the developing world is employed within the informal sector.l 70% of the world’s cities have developed city-to-city international co-operation. 68% of these cities are affiliated to one or more

international association of local authorities.l 63% of the world’s cities have established new public-private partnerships in the last five years.

Governancel 49% of the world’s cities have established urban environmental plans.l The absolute quantity of local government income varies enormously, with total local government revenue per person in cities of

highly industrialised countries being 9 times that of cities in the developing world, 39 times that of African cities and 18 times thatof Latin American cities.

l 60% of the world’s cities involve civil society in a formal participatory process prior to the implementation of major public projects.l 70% of cities in the world undertake regular independent auditing of municipal accounts. 78% of the world’s cities publicly announce

contracts and tenders for municipal services. 55% of cities have laws that govern disclosure of potential conflict of interest.

8 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

Innovative Approaches to Tenureby Geoffrey Payne

commands a price within a range of sub-markets in which tenure status is only one ofmany considerations in determining values.The actual legal status may not even be clearto those involved — what matters is theperception of risk involved.

Under these conditions, lack of officialdocuments may expose a household to aprecarious existence, but if the household issurrounded by thousands or hundreds ofthousands of others in the same situation, theperceived risk may prove to be negligible.Many households appear willing to payproperty taxes on the basis that every pieceof paper helps increase legitimacy, providingthey can afford the charges, or obtain tangiblebenefits in the form of improved services,whilst others feel that such documentation isnot an adequate incentive to meetbureaucratic requirements.

What lessons does current researchsuggest governments should consider whenformulating or implementing an urban landtenure policy? The first is that tenure issuescannot be isolated from other related policiesof urban land management. Tenure has to beseen as part of a package of policy measuresintended to improve the efficiency and equityof urban land and property markets andimproving the living conditions of the poor,especially women.

Secondly, it is vital to assess the extentto which existing options have provedsufficient to encourage people to invest theirown efforts and resources to improve theirlives and livelihoods through housinginvestments and to build on what optionswork well.

Thirdly, it is important not to put allone’s eggs in one or two baskets, but to offera wide range of options, so that the diverseand changing needs of households can be meton a long-term basis through competition.

How such objectives can be realizedwill inevitably vary from time to time and placeto place. Where customary tenure exists inor around expanding cities, its role within thewider society will inevitably come underreview, though its removal may be easier to

legislate for than to achieve. Similarly, policiesto enforce official norms may offer short termattractions, but are unlikely to address thestructural imbalances between supply anddemand within societies where incomeinequalities are substantial. Evidence suggeststhat certificates of use or occupancy,community land trusts and other forms ofwhat could be called intermediate forms oftenure, provide a valuable means of increasinglegitimacy and providing a valuable breathingspace whilst the administrative capability torecord and clarify rights is improved.

The illusion that all cities can conformto some professionally-based sense of orderis inevitably tempting for those involved inurban management. However, the realitysuggests that people themselves haveevolved responses which professionals, andparticularly governments, would do well tolearn from.

Geoffrey Payne is PrincipalConsultant at Geoffrey Payne andAssociates based in London, U.K.

Reference

1. Research was carried outin India, South Africa, Kenya,Brazil, Peru, Colombia, Egypt,Russia, Botswana, Cote d’Ivoire,Burkina Faso, Senegal, Turkey andT h a i l a n d .

SHELTER

As with the weather, perceptions of theimportance of tenure and property rights

depend upon one’s degree of exposure. It iswidely assumed that freehold titles offer thegreatest protection and security. However,current research on innovative approachesto tenure for the urban poor1 hasdemonstrated that many other tenure optionshave proved equally effective in meetingpeople’s diverse shelter needs.

The research has also shown thaturban land tenure and property rights are farmore complex than what the conventionalblack and white, legal/illegal, or formal/informal distinctions may suggest. Forexample, millions of people in cities of theSouth live quite securely in settlements whichlack any legal status, whilst others find thateven formal titles may not protect them fromeviction.

The reality is that tenure systems existwithin a continuum in which even pavementdwellers may enjoy a degree of legalprotection and there may be many gradationsor sub-markets between those with thelowest level of recognition and the fortunateminority at the top. The vast majority inbetween live in a grey area whereby theycan claim some degree of de facto rightsthrough adverse possession, legal ownershipof the land, if not the buildings on it, or theacquisition and development of land in areasnot recognized by the authorities. Theclassical alternative to legal ownershipthrough squatting is now rare in most cities,as even marginal areas attract a commercialvalue high enough to find a place in the landmarket.

Undoubtedly, globalization hasreinforced these tendencies. The opening upof domestic economies to internationalcompetition has encouraged governmentsand private land-owners to realize thecommercial potential of all urban and peri-urban land holdings. This commercializationhas enabled some to acquire undreamed ofwealth and encouraged those lower downthe social and economic ladder to follow suit.The result is that virtually all urban land now

Millions of people live quite securely in settlementswhich lack any legal status.©Rasna Warah

9The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

—

Women Reconstructing Their Livesby Sengul Akçar

l doubled up in a relative’s houseswhen the earthquake destroyed the home; orl living in illegal/unrecognized shelter(slums, i.e. ‘gecekondu’)

This last category are outside today’sgovernment’s permanent shelter plan.

Currently, the Turkish government isundertaking the construction ofapproximately 40,665 permanent houses.The Public Works Ministry and the TurkishRepublic’s Agency for Social Housing arecoordinating housing replacement withfinancing provided by the EuropeanInvestment and World Bank. This accountsfor less than half the number of units thatwere highly damaged or totally destroyed.Once permanent houses are allocated to legalowners, the plan is to close the prefabsettlements and tent camp sites and evacuateresidents immediately. In light of the demandfor replacement housing, a severe housingshortage is virtually guaranteed.

Those who are not legal owners willcertainly face serious shelter problems giventhat rents are sky rocketing and manymoderately damaged buildings in the cityhave undergone inadequate repairs. Thepoorest households in this group will find itvirtually impossible to find permanenthousing that is affordable, adequate, andreliable, unless an alternative planning processis put in place now.

Locating Women in thisProcess

It is almost a universal truth that it iswomen, not men, who take up the practicalquestions of how and where to shelter andsustain their families in everyday life. Thus itshould not be surprising that displaced

Turkish women sought to organizethemselves after the Marmara earthquakesto enable their families to survive and functionin communities spanning the provinces ofIzmit, Adapazar, and Düzce. In thesecommunities, women were assisted by theFoundation for the Support of Women’s Work(FSWW). FSWW is a fifteen-year old non-governmental organization (NGO) dedicatedto serving as a resource/partner organizationthat supports poor women to becomeeconomically active through grassrootswomen’s initiatives.

After the earthquake, the FSWWworked in partnership with governmentalagencies, local municipalities, other NGOsand professionals. With funding from NOVIBand the American Jewish World Services, theFoundation built eight Women and ChildcareCentres —first, under makeshift conditionsin tent cities, and later in temporary housingsettlements in three different provinces. TheCentres, which provided a safe and pleasantenvironment for children and a common“public living room” for local women havealso built the capacities of the women andchildren in the community. For example:l Young children are receiving qualityday care and education services run bycommunity mothers, not outside professionals.l Women are organized inproduction groups and are earning incometo counter the loss of family assets. They areexploring new job opportunities and smallbusiness potential that their settlements andthe region provide. They are learning newskills (e.g. carpentry, recycled paper making)to enrich the variety of their products.l Women are collecting anddisseminating information in their ownsettlements; meeting and negotiating with thelocal administrators to get involved in thereconstruction process, and conductingdialogue meetings with local administrations.l Women are being supported to actas effective community outreach workers, andstrengthening their networks with womenfrom Turkey and from other parts of the world.

Since September 1999, more than10,000 women have been involved in theCentres’ activities. Their accomplishments interms of information gathering, advocacy andmonitoring are truly impressive and unequalledby any other community-based effort.

Sengul Akçar works for the Foundation forthe Support of Women’s Work (FSWW), anon-govermental organization based inIstanbul, Turkey.

On 17 August 1999, Turkey’s mostdestructive earthquake hit the

Marmara region affecting approximately80,000 square kilometres of a highlyindustrialized and densely populated areawhere 23 per cent of Turkey’s populationlives. Eighty-six days after the first earthquake,a second one struck Düzce and Bolu areaand caused even more damage. According toofficial figures, 18,373 people died and48,908 people were injured. Officially352,396 houses suffered some degree ofdamage.

Right after the earthquake, people livedin tents as temporary prefabricated settlementswere being built. Today people still live inprefabricated settlements and tent camp sites.The residents of these temporary housingsettlements can be divided into threecategories, based on their pre- and post-earthquake housing tenure status and problems:1. Homeowners with rights tohousing aid/credit for lightly and mediumdamaged homes, or in the case of totaldestruction, with rights to construct their ownhomes themselves, or to wait for stateconstructed housing.2. Tenants, including those who livedin units owned by their relatives, thosewithout any rent contract, those who wereevicted as a result of rent hikes and thosewho left to allow their landlords to claimoccupancy for government aid. Tenants lackstate support but require safe and affordablerental properties or affordable credit to buynew housing3. People with undefined statusbefore the earthquake, who were:l paying on a house before theearthquake, e.g. as cooperative members;

The 1999 earthquake in Turkey

10 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND ERADICATION OF POVERTY

varied tremendously, from new policyemphases at one extreme, to entirely newconstitutions or constitutional amendmentsempowering local authorities, on the other.But by the end of the decade, a large numberof developing countries had undergone realdecentralization, in the sense that their citiesand local governments not only had moresubstantive powers to provide for theircitizens, but were beginning to gain financialresources to make these powers meaningful.A substantial opening of political andeconomic space had taken place at the locallevel.

The “Seeing Like a State” problem oflarge bureaucracies failing to deal with thecomplexities and nuances of localities andsmall number of people was seriouslyundermined, as smaller local governmentgroups (whose elected members respondedto their constituents) took over importantpolicy functions. Many of the new municipalcouncils, particularly those with electedmayors and councillors, where so-calleddemocratic choice was exercised throughalternative parties or groups of councillors,began to take a special interest in the plightof the poor and other vulnerable groups. Thisinterest was strengthened by the electoralprocess in some countries (such as India, somehave argued), and in others, reinforced bynew constitutions that enjoined localgovernments to take their “developmental”responsibilities seriously. For example, in thecurrent Constitution of the Republic of SouthAfrica, article 153 states that a municipality“must…structure and manage itsadministration, budgeting, and planningprocesses, to give priority to the basic needs ofthe community, and to promote the social andeconomic development of the community”.

Another factor that has strengthenedthe tendency of municipalities and localgovernments to pay more attention to socialdifferences and inclusivity in their policies isglobalization. Whether or not it is rational todo so, cities and city-regions all over theworld – in both the North and the South –must compete with each other in theinternational arena if they wish to prosper.

Thinking about Urban Inclusivenessby Richard E. Stren

They must compete for hard investments(such as industrial plants, commercial andfinancial centres, loan funds for municipalinfrastructure etc.), as well as for prestige ofplace. To compete in a globalizing economy,cities must improve their “livability”. Thisincludes taking care of the poor andmarginalized.

Diversity and InnovationIf we expand our concern for the poor

and vulnerable to the whole population, thereis another general reason why cities –especially those cities concerned with theirplace in the larger economic system – shouldbe concerned with inclusiveness. We mightcall this “the productivity of social diversity”.

Around the world, in both the Northand the South, cities are more socially andeconomically diverse than small towns,villages and rural areas; and large cities aremore diverse than small cities. Urbanizationas a process brings groups of diverse peoplestogether, producing, argue many economists,“agglomeration economies”, or economieswhich operate at a higher level of complexityand sophistication because they containmore specialized economic and socialfunctions. Often it is particular social groupsthat connect with the outside world in aparticular way, or develop a highly valuedspecialty, who lead the way economically inbig cities. This process adds value to nationaleconomies, to the extent that the largest citiestypically account for a very high proportionof the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) ofmost countries.

Throughout the centuries, cities havebeen a source both of social stress and ofinnovation – the latter is the chief strength ofthe city, the former its greatest challenge.Greater social diversity brings inevitableconflict, higher and more aggressive levels ofcivil society organization, and more politicalcontention. All things being equal, there is morecrime and violence in bigger cities. This tensionbetween diversity and productivity, on the onehand, and political conflict, on the other, mustbe managed if we are to obtain the maximumbenefits from these massive social experimentswe call cities.

“Socially Sustainable”Cities

With my Canadian colleague MarioPolese, and a number of other researchers, I

Until recently, the question of how torespond to and how to effectively

incorporate social diversity in our cities washardly ever considered. Most urbandevelopment policies focused on the supplyof basic needs i.e. infrastructure and necessitiessuch as food, housing and education. Whilediverse groups needed to be taken intoaccount, the larger issues were “supplydriven” rather than “demand driven” fromthe point of view of agencies andgovernments.

In the 1970s, the typical urban projectwhich responded to this development logicwas the large-scale “sites and services”project. Large-scale projects which neededto deal expeditiously with many thousandsor even hundreds of thousands of people inone fell swoop had little ability to look at thevery complex reality of how people, and smallgroups of people at that, organizedthemselves in real life. This is the problem ofwhat James Scott has called “Seeing Like aState”.

The 1980s saw the ascendancy of“urban management”, essentially a technicalapproach to improved management of urbanservices. Issues of social policy did notbecome important until the late 1980s and1990s. And, in the urban field, social policyissues were promoted more in Latin Americathan in other regions, possibly because of themore substantial importance of sociologistsand anthropologists in that region in settingthe agenda for research and thus, ourunderstanding of the basic issues facingpeople.

Decentralization and theOpening of Political Space

As social questions began to take theirplace as an integral part of the developmentdiscourse, an independent, but parallelprocess was taking place in the field ofadministrative and policy reform. Beginningin the late 1980s, many countries began toadopt plans for the decentralization ofimportant functions and powers from thenational to the local level of government. Bythe early 1990s, most countries had begunthis process. These decentralization plans

11The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

the political support of higher authorities. Manycities in Africa and the poorer parts of Asiaoperate with extremely limited revenues; as aresult, their ability to improve public servicesis limited or virtually non-existent. This leads toa vicious cycle whereby the less governmentscan do for their citizens, the less their citizenswill be prepared to pay taxes and grant themlegitimacy.

While we must focus on local policiesresponding to locally defined problems,municipalities are often very much under thelegal and political influence of higher levels ofgovernment whose leaders may have very

have tried, in a recent book entitled, “TheSocial Sustainability of Cities”, to address thequestion of urban governance from aperspective of social inclusiveness. Ourassumption when we started to work on thebook was that the effective integration ofdiverse social groups into the political andpolicy framework is absolutely essential ifcities are to be sustainable over time. Notonly is the proper treatment of social diversityessential to economic productivity (and thuseconomic sustainability), but it is also essentialto environmental sustainability, since therecognition of, and sensitivity to, diversityform the basis of all efforts to preserve thenatural environment.

Our approach to governance is parallelto our approach to social diversity. As aconcept, or idea, governance means therelationship between state agencies andgovernments, on the one hand, andcommunities, civil society and even privatesector groups, on the other. “Governance” isthus a broader and more inclusive term than“government”, and has come into general usesince the 1990s when it became more widelyaccepted that a much broader range ofstakeholders and social groups should takepart in the policy-making process.

Of course, there can be “good” or“bad” governance at any level, depending onthe extent to which the process is transparentand accountable and protects the rights andfreedoms of citizens. “Socially sustainablecities”, which are very similar to “inclusivecities”, must be managed in a fashion that iscompatible with the harmonious evolutionof civil society, fostering an environmentconducive to the compatible cohabitation ofculturally and socially diverse groups whileat the same time encouraging socialintegration.

Inclusive cities (or socially sustainablecities) are, therefore, cities in which allcitizens are incorporated in decisions andpolicies; none, in particular, the poorest andmost vulnerable, are left out. All may bothconsider themselves, and be considered byothers, to be full and first-class citizens. Thisdefinition sounds simple, and as a mandate itis incontestable, but it is exceedingly difficultto accomplish, even in wealthy cities whereresources are available for many initiatives.

Our book shows how different areasof policy, depending on the circumstances,may be central to the definition and effectiveoperation of inclusiveness.

For instance, many cities fail to achieveperfect social integration simply because theylack the resources to address the issue or lack

different interests. Inclusive governance ismost difficult to achieve in large cities, whereit may be hamstrung by both local and higherlevel political influences.

But as the world globalizes, diversityis going to be more, not less, important. Andthe successful governance of diversity willdistinguish the most accomplished andcreative cities from the rest.

Richard E. Stren is visiting fellow at WoodrowWilson Center for Scholars, WashingtonD.C. and Professor of Political Science atthe University of Toronto, Canada.

Localizing the Gender Agendaby Anne Michaud

Coming home from a full week of negotiations and renewed promises in Istanbul, it soon became obvious that in many countries, the commitments made by national

governments on gender equality (especially paragraph 46 of the Habitat Agenda concerning thedevelopment of gender dissagregated data and gender aware processes at the local and urbanlevel) would not be automatically transferred into actions. One of the reasons for this is thatmany of the responsibilities attached to these actions were devolved to local governments andcities. More and more responsibilities are being given to local levels of government while thecommitments made by the national governments at international fora are in most cases notattached to the local mandate. Trying to find out who is accountable for which results can easilybecome a ghost hunting adventure. This is why so many initiatives have been undertaken sincethe Istanbul conference to create the opportunity for local governments to own thosecommitments and concretize them.

Amongst these initiatives is the International Union of Local Authorities (IULA) WorldwideDeclaration on Women in Local Government, which has been ratified by many local governmentssince 1998. The next steps in implementation concern equal participation of elected women inlocal government and gender mainstreaming of local governments policies and service delivery.

Other initiatives have taken the form of international cooperation in the Femmes et Ville(Women and City) programme. Issues such as women’s safety and engendering urban crimeprevention strategies have been addressed. “A City Tailored to Women: the Role of LocalGovernments in Achieving Gender Equality”, a joint publication of the City of Montréal and theFederation of Canadian municipalities, has been widely disseminated.

Since 1992, the Comité d’Action Femmes et Securité Urbaine (CAFSU) has been activelypromoting ways to increase women’s sense of security in and around Montreal, Canada.Thanks to a formal and ongoing partnership between this women’s group and local publicinstitutions, women’s demand to get off night buses at locations closer to their destinations ledto “Service Entre Deux Arrêts” (Service Between Two Stops). This service, offered bySTCUM, the public transport system in Montreal, has not only improved women’s security inthe city, but has also increased the use of night buses by women. Since the project started in1996, it has been replicated in other Canadian cities and municipalities such as Toronto andLaval. At the international level, the project is being promoted through the Femmes et Ville , andthrough UNCHS (Habitat)’s Best Practices and Safer Cities Programmes.

All of these activities have also been developed in a context of growing strategicpartnerships between grassroots women’s organizations and local governments, at the locallevel as well as at the global level, especially through the activities led by the Huairou Commissionand its member networks worldwide. Ensuring women’s participation in local governance,whether as elected officials, representatives of civil society or simply as citizens, can only beachieved when there are strong communities in which women can bring their knowledge,skills and unique expertise to urban governance debate and practice.

Anne Michaud is the Coordinator of the programme Femmes et Ville (Women andCity), in Montréal, Canada. She is also a member of the Huairou Commission and ofthe International Union of Local Authorities Women in Local Government task force.

12 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

Democratizing the Urban Environment Agenda

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

Why Focus on the UrbanEnvironment?

It is now widely recognized that cities playa vital role in social and economic

development in all countries. Urbanizationbuilds diversified and dynamic economieswhich raise productivity, create jobs andwealth, provide essential services, absorbpopulation growth, and become the keyengines of economic and social advancement.Thus, efficient and productive cites and townsare essential for national economic growthand welfare; equally, at the local level, strongurban economies generate the resourcesneeded for public and private investments ininfrastructure, education, health andimproved living conditions.

The development potential for cities isincreasingly threatened by environmentaldeterioration. Aside from its obvious effectson human health and well-being,environmental degradation directly impedessocio-economic development. Water, air andsoil pollution, for example, impose extra costson business and industry, and on householdsas well as public services. Inefficient use anddepletion of natural resources raises inputprices and operating costs throughout theeconomy, and also deters new investment.Heightened risk form environmental hazardshas the same effect. In terms of impact, it isusually the poor who suffer most cruelly anddirectly from environmental degradation,although the lives and health of all urbanresidents are also affected. Failing to deal withthe problem today, moreover, leads to muchgreater problems (and costs) in the future.For development achievements to be truly“sustainable”, cities must find better ways ofbalancing the needs and pressures of urbangrowth and change with the opportunitiesand constraints of the environment.

Responding to Opportunitiesand Constraints

Although many cities seem to havedifficulties in coming to grips with therequirements of sustainability and are sufferingsevere environmental and economic damageas a result, there are many encouraging signsthat environmental deterioration is not anecessary or inescapable result ofurbanization and economic change. Some

Continued on pg. 21

© UNDP/Emma Robson

cities seem to have madeprogress in striking theright balance - in findingdevelopment pathswhich are moreeffectively attuned toe n v i r o n m e n t a lopportunities andconstraints.

Indeed, mountingevidence from citiesaround the world showsthat the fundamentalchallenge has to do withurban governance:learning how to planbetter and moreeffectively manage theprocess of urbandevelopment, avoidingor alleviating problemswhile realizing thepositive potentials of citygrowth and change.New and more positiveapproaches to urbanmanagement can helpmobilize and effectively apply local resources.

Involving StakeholdersA common focus of many innovative and

effective approaches is a central concern withthe actual process of urban environmentalplanning and management.

Many cities have found that successfulenvironmental planning and managementrequires understanding, agreement, andcoordinated action by the full range of public,private and popular sector groups andorganizations (stakeholders) atneighbourhood, community, city and nationallevels. Cities recognize that it is important toundertake a wide-ranging process ofidentifying and involving stakeholders. Citiesalso recognize that this process involvesgroups which may be outside the formalplanning and management systems, such aswomen, private sector groups and interests,and the marginalized and disadvantagedgroups, especially the urban poor, at bothcity and neighbourhood levels.

To identify relevant stakeholders for aspecific issue, many cities around the world

apply the following simple test:l Whose interests are affected by theenvironment-development issue at hand - orby environmental management strategies andactions that may be decided?l Who possesses information andexpertise needed for strategy formulationand implementation?l Who controls relevantimplementation instruments or has the meansto significantly influence environment-developmental interactions?

Clearly, no city can realistically expectto tackle successfully all of its environmentaland development issues at once. It isimportant to be selective and to setpriorities, so that attention and action maybe focused on a limited array of problemsand tasks in a strategic sequence. The criteriafor prioritization have, in many cases, beenworked out through a participatory processand typically derive from consideration bothof the impacts associated with eachenvironmental problem and of the localcapacities to respond.

13The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

REGIONAL FOCUS

Implementing the Habitat Agenda inAFRICA and the ARAB STATESby Alioune Badiane

In Africa and the Arab Region, the beginningof the 21st century will be remembered not

least because of the mammoth problemsfacing the continent: mass poverty, poorgovernance, civil wars, conflicts and disasters.Recognizing this challenge and the imperativefor the international community to deal withthese issues as a matter of priority, the UnitedNations Secretary General launched in 2000the UN in Africa Initiative, an effort aimed atstrengthening UN’s support for Africanpeople and governments towards sustainabledevelopment. In February 2001, thePresidents of the International Monetary Fundand the World Bank made a joint mission toAfrica where they met with variouspresidents of African countries andrepresentatives of various sectors of thesociety. Their key message was that they wishto listen and will be guided by the continent’slogic in their concerted efforts to help Africabenefit from, and participate in, the globaleconomy and move towards sustainabledevelopment.

Together with global, regional, nationaland local partners, UNCHS (Habitat)’sRegional Office for Africa and Arab States(ROAAS) is providing a crucial link tosolutions in human settlements, where peoplelive and work, where most problems aremanifested and where key solutions can beprovided.

A crucial part of Habitat’s immediate-term goal is to assist the Africa and ArabStates region in implementing the HabitatAgenda. To this end, the Centre is constantlyengaged in policy dialogues with all partners,assisting in the identification, formulation andexecution of various projects with and/or onbehalf of the various partners, and facilitatingcollection and dissemination of practice-derived information and knowledge. Thework programme is implemented in therespective partner-countries through a teamof chief technical advisers and nationalproject coordinators as well as “anchoringinstitutions” from where approaches and

lessons derived from the various projects aredisseminated to enhance sustainability.

A crucial approach of the Centre is todevelop institutional capacity in managementof human settlements in Africa. Habitatbelieves that while providing physicalinfrastructure in Africa is important,procedural and methodological processes ofdeveloping, maintaining and improving suchinfrastructure is even more important, i.e.building institutional capacity. Unless this isdone, aid and technical assistance to thecontinent will only serve to perpetuatedependence.

The following articles cover areas suchas disaster management, poverty, diversityof interventions, urbanization, challenges ofhousing and implementation of the HabitatAgenda. A crucial vehicle in Habitat’s workis management of practice-derivedinformation so as to enable cross-fertilizationof experiences between countries, regionsand sectors. The Regional Office for Africaand the Arab States recently launched its ownweb-site through which on-site practitionerscan communicate not only with theheadquarters but also among themselves.This facility is being developed with the aimof linking all local, national, regional and globalpartners in pursuit of sustainable humansettlements development in Africa. We hopethat our readers will find the issues raised inthese articles relevant and thought-provoking, and we would like to appeal forfeedback on how we can improve our work.We stand ready to always learn from ourpartners.

Alioune Badiane is Chief of UNCHS(Habitat)’s Regional Office forAfrica and the Arab States (ROAAS).

UNCHS (Habitat) Regional Officefor Africa and the Arab StatesP.O. Box 30030Nairobi, KenyaTelephone: (254-2) 621234,623221, Facsimile: (254-2) 623904,623328 (Regional Office)624266/7 (Central Office)E-mail: roaas@unchs.orgWorld Wide Web:http://www.unchs.org/roaas

© Rasna Warah

REGIONAL FOCUS

AFRICA AND THE ARAB STATES

ContentsImplementing the Habitat Agenda inAfrica and the Arab States by Alioune Badiane (i)13Meeting the Challenge of Diversityin the Arab States by Mohamed El Sioufi (ii)14Sustainable Dar es Salaam by Lawrence Limbe and Martin Kitila (iii)15Cameroon: On the Road toSustainable Development by George Fogweh (iv)16From Relief to Development:Some Lessons from the AfricanExperience by Eduardo López Moreno (v)17Housing the Nation: South Africa’sNational Housing Strategy by David Kithakye (vi)19Nigeria: An Urban Explosion by Paul Okunlola (vii)20

ROAAS (i)

14 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

Meeting the Challenge of Diversity inthe Arab Statesby Mohamed El Sioufi

associated with long-term developmentprogrammes and for ensuring sustainability.Local authorities are a logical partner forUNCHS (Habitat)’s activities at the municipallevel in post-conflict contexts wherelegitimate democratically elected nationalregional governments might not yet beestablished and the political future isuncertain.

For instance, in the self-proclaimed“Somaliland” in North-west Somalia, Habitathas worked towards building local capacitieswhile addressing immediate needs. The“Urban Settlements Governance andManagement” Programme (USGMP), fundedby UNDP, the European Community, Italy,the Netherlands, Sweden and other UNagencies, was designed to provide technicalsupport to several municipalities, in order torestore their institutional capacities toundertake rehabilitation and reconstructionactivities. The programme has concentratedon building technical capacities of localauthorities. It recognizes that the cities in theregion suffered not only from the physicaldestruction caused by the civil war and laterabandonment, but more importantly fromloss of human resources and the institutionalcapacity to manage them.

An “Immediate Measures Action Plan”was designed to assist five municipalities in

building institutional capacities, improvingfinancial and administrative management andestablishing effective and efficient processes.Working procedures, on-the-job training andmentorship were soon established. Mappingwas also identified as a priority to providebase maps so that physical planning forrehabilitation activities could commence.Local structures had to be reintroduced fromscratch: municipal buildings had been lootedand no records, management staff, or budgethad been left.

By supporting local authorities toestablish immediate-measures action plansthrough participative approaches theUSGMP has helped establish immediateactions in a framework that is linked to short-and longer-term development needs andpriorities.

Up-scaling NationalProgrammes

The cities of Ismailia in Egypt and Tunisin Tunisia have been members of the jointUNCHS/UNEP Sustainable CitiesProgramme (SCP). In the case of Ismailia, theexperience of the project in its first phasehas focused on capacity building of IsmailiaTown local authorities in the application ofthe broad-based environmental planning andmanagement techniques including holding city

The Arab States Region is a most diverseregion despite the fact that it comprises

only 22 States. The region includes areassuffering from ongoing conflict, areasemerging from conflicts, least developedcountries, developing countries and oil-richcountries.

Consequently, the implementation ofthe Habitat Agenda through developmentaltechnical cooperation in this region includesa variety of capacity-building interventions.These include post disaster rehabilitation andreconstruction (Somalia, Iraq); settlementupgrading and poverty alleviation (Morocco,Sudan); shelter policy and delivery systems(Djibouti, Yemen); urban planning andmanagement (Dubai, Libya); urbanenvironmental planning and management(Egypt, Tunisia); and urban indicators(Bahrain). The programmatic themesaddressed, funding modalities and partnersare also diverse and cover a range from fulldonor funding (UNDP, UNCDF, the EC andbilaterals) to full government funding withcases combining both sources of funding.

In order to share the experience gainedfrom operational activities in the Arab StatesRegion, UNCHS (Habitat) works closelywith many regional partners1 who shareresponsibilities in the implementation ofactivities, documentation and disseminationof lessons learned, as well as development ofnormative work leading to policy andcapacity-building guidelines and trainingmaterials. These partners also co-organizeregional conferences, workshops andseminars concerning the implementation ofthe Habitat Agenda.

This article describes a few examplesof capacity building initiatives. Setting up aplatform for replication is a common themethat underlies all capacity buildingprogrammes in the region. This is achievedthrough involving partners at the national andlocal levels and building their capacities tobecome agents of change and catalysts forreplication.

Re-building local capacitiesBuilding institutional capacity at the

local level is essential for increasing theabsorptive capacity for capital investment

Cairo skyline. © UNCHS/Rasna Warah

ROAAS (ii)

15The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

consultations and thematic working groups.This has improved decision making processesas a means for improving urban governance.

During the first phase, several priorityprojects were identified and feasibility studieswere made through multi-sectoral integratedapproaches. In its second phase theexperience was replicated at theGovernorate level in four smaller towns.Furthermore, based on a need for upgradingthe capacities of all development partners asidentified in the first phase, the projectfocused on establishing a training centre anda local NGO undertook training of localwomen’s and youth’s NGOs in incomegeneration activities. In addition, the centreconducted several training modules ondecision making and management techniquesfor local leaders both from the local councilsand local NGOs. Several other governoratesin Egypt have demonstrated interest inreplicating the Ismailia experience in theirown cities and towns.

Through a local-authorities supportunit established in the Ministry of LocalDevelopment, policies, guidelines andcapacity building tools will be developed tosupport the process.

Urban performanceindicators

UNCHS (Habitat) is providinginstitutional support to the Municipality ofDubai, U.A.E., to streamline the delivery ofservices and to become more strategic,effective and efficient. As a result, theMunicipality has instituted performanceindicators for all its Departments toacknowledge and encourage excellence.

Dubai has taken the initiative to strivefor excellence in performance beyond itsmunicipal boundaries to the global arena byestablishing the Dubai International Awardfor Best Practices in Improving the LivingEnvironment”. In partnership with UNCHS(Habitat), the Municipality supports thedocumentation and dissemination of bestpractices. Every two years, 10 best practicesare selected for the award which is given tothose projects/programmes that have madea positive contribution to improving thequality of life in cities and communities.

In the case of Bahrain, the governmentthrough the Ministry of Housing,Municipalities and Environment with thetechnical support of Habitat’s Regional Officeand the Indicators Programme hasestablished the Bahrain Urban IndicatorsProgramme. The Programme has created a

formal network of focal points includingnational and local level institutions and civilsociety. Indicators were agreed upon andcapacity was built within the Ministry for thecollection and analysis of indicators.

Having internalised the process, theprogramme has extended its activities to buildcapacity within the Gulf Cooperation Councilmembers as well as within the Arab Statesregion. The programme furthermoreprovides support to newly formedgovernorates and local authorities andprepares citizen satisfaction survey forms tobe administered by the governorates. Thegoal of these activities is to improve localgovernance as well as improve managementof resources and provision of services.Indicators will be utilised to enhance thedevelopment of Bahrain and to promote itseconomic role in the region.

Mohamed El Sioufi is Senior HumanSettlements Adviser in UNCHS(Habitat)’s Regional Office forAfrica and the Arab States.

Note

1. These regional partners includethe Economic and SocialCommission for Western Asia(ESCWA), the Arab TownsOrganisation (ATO), the Arab UrbanDevelopment Institute (AUDI),Organisation for Islamic Capitalsand Cities (OICC), the Centre forEnvironment and Development forthe Arab Region and Europe(CEDARE), Economic Commissionfor Africa (ECA) and the League ofArab States (LAS), among others.

Sustainable Dar es Salaamby Lawrence Limbe and Martin Kitila

Dar es Salaam, Tanzania’s capital city, is the largest urban centre in the country, witha population of 2.3 million. The growth of the city has not followed any coordinated,

long-term strategic plan. As a consequence, the city experiences a shortage of housing,inadequate urban infrastructure and services and a deteriorating environment.

Past planning efforts, such as the 1979 Master Plan, have not been successful insystematically addressing these problems, either because the plans were too sectoral ortoo ambitious. Lack of resources, insufficient investment in infrastructure, and the CityCouncil’s inability to effectively plan, coordinate and manage the city’s operation andgrowth contributed to these problems.

In response to the challenges and constraints faced by the city, the Sustainable Dares Salaam (SDS) project was launched in 1992. The project is the first demonstrationcity project under the Sustainable Cities Programme (SCP), a joint UNCHS-UNEPprogramme that focuses on capacity building through consultations and collaborationthrough the Environmental Planning and Management (EPM) process.

Since its inception, Sustainable Dar es Salaam’s main achievement has been itssuccessful implementation of partnership and participatory approaches involving differentstakeholders in the city. Since November 1993, more than 30 working groups have beenmeeting and preparing action plans from which a number of demonstration projectshave evolved.

In 1997, the Government of Tanzania was requested by nine municipalities toreplicate the Dar experience in their towns, which led to the launching of the NationalProgramme for Promoting Environmentally Sustainable Development. SCP-Tanzania issupporting these municipalities to prepare their respective environmental profiles and toconduct consultations.

Lawrence Limbe and Martin Kitila are respectively Coordinator andEPM expert in Tanzania’s National Urban Authorities Support Unitwithin the Ministry of Regional Administration and Local Authorities.

ROAAS (iii)

16 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

Cameroon:On the Road to Sustainable Developmentby George Fogweh

After returning from Istanbul in 1996, theGovernment of Cameroon undertook

wide ranging measures aimed at implementingthe resolutions adopted at the City Summit.The focus was on how to take care of theextremely high rate of urban growth facedby the big cities of the country.

More critical was the fact that, inpractice, the actual growth of cities and townswas taking place outside the official legislativeand regulatory framework that was put inplace by the government. This was againaggravated by inappropriate urbanmanagement approaches, lack of planningtools, as well as the serious deterioration ofurban infrastructure services or the total lackof them. The government was also facingproblems brought about by the vast changesundertaken in the 1996 constitution todemocratize the country and its institutions,and also to find lasting solutions to theincreasing level of urban poverty.

To address this situation, theCameroon government undertook bold stepsin the political, institutional and policy sectors.At the institutional level, it made its socialpolicy more explicit by creating three distinctministerial departments: a Ministry ofWomen’s Affairs responsible for gender anddevelopment, a Ministry of Urban Affairs anda Ministry of Social Affairs.

On the policy front, several importantnational programmes were elaborated incollaboration with all stakeholders indevelopment. For instance, an UrbanDevelopment Declaration and a NationalProgramme on Good Governance that tookinto consideration the question ofdecentralization, the modernization of publicinstitutions, improvement of the functioningof the justice and judiciary system, andmeasures towards the active participation ofcivil society in decision-making wereelaborated. Other national programmesformulated were on Poverty Alleviation, theManagement and Protection of theEnvironment, a National programme onHealth, Fertility and Nutrition that was

strategies are urgently needed for thefunctioning of these institutions, so as to enablethem contribute fully in the implementationof the Habitat Agenda.

At the policy level, there is a gap andlack of a proper mechanism to finance andmanage the urbanization process. Women insome regions are prevented by tradition fromowning land or going to school. This hasnecessitated reforms in land, housing andeducation policies. The social and culturalprejudices that impede women in jobopportunities and from accessing funding tocreate micro enterprises must be eliminated.Collaboration between micro projects andmicro-credit management institutionsremains to be improved.

Policy measures to support the informaleconomy need to be revisited and informationrelating to the job market must be drasticallyimproved. The opportunities that can beachieved through decentralized co-operationstill plays a marginal role in the country. Thismust be regarded as a possible source ofcomplementary resources for developmentthat can be exploited by local councils. Thenon-formalization of the proposed law ondecentralization is a constraint to localcouncils’ development and the participationof citizens in decision making. The necessarytechnical and financial means must be soughtto implement the urban development andpoverty reduction strategies.

Stronger efforts must still be made tosensitise the population and public institutionson issues regarding the implementation of theHabitat Agenda. Not much has been achievedto put in place the local Habitat II plan ofaction and where policies have been adopted,they are yet to be implemented.

George Fogwe is Urban & RegionalPlanner in Cameroon’s Ministry ofHousing.

elaborated within the framework of the CityHealth Programme and a programme tocombat urban insecurity in the country.

Within the budgetary allocations ofsector ministries involved in human settlementdevelopment, provisions were made forinvestments towards improving the livingconditions of the population, with emphasison rural electrification, health, water,education and basic social infrastructureservices.

Cameroon enjoys very fruitfulcooperation with multi-lateral and bilateraldonor agencies. Almost all the nationalpolicies and programmes at national andinter-regional level are supported by theseagencies.

However, the government is stilllooking for means to overcome the housingdeficit of close to 70,000 units per year and isfacing serious demand by the population forservices. There are also critical institutionalproblems, notwithstanding the fact that thecountry has developed catalytic real estateinstitutions in the areas of housing production,

Women in some regionsare prevented by

tradition from owningland or going to school.This has necessitated

reforms in land, housingand education policies.

land management, housing finance andmunicipal public works financing that werecreated some 30 years ago. These stateinstitutions are however presently sufferingfrom dwindling public finances. New

ROAAS (iv)

17The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

From Relief to DevelopmentSome Lessons from the African Experienceby Eduardo López Moreno

War and natural disasters turn back thedevelopment clock, destroying years

of effort and labour and perpetuating poverty.They destroy investments, infrastructure andlivelihood, draining national budgets andinternational development funds.1

DisastersAlthough natural disasters in the

continent are less frequent than elsewhere,they affect a greater proportion of thepopulation, because of a larger number ofvulnerable communities. Yet disasters arerarely included within urban developmentstrategies due to the fact that national disastermanagement is associated with emergencyrelief and rural food security needs. Thismeans that valuable opportunities are lost tointegrate awareness of the growing threat ofdisaster caused by rapid urbanization. Theinevitable consequences of authoritiesallowing building on unsafe hill-sides, or inflood-prone areas, are ignored until disastersstrike. The victims are almost always thepoor. Large-scale disasters in Africa highlightthe terrible convergence of urban

vulnerability and preventable natural hazards.Mozambique is the most recent case, whereheavy rains and cyclones in February andMarch brought widespread devastation tothe Central and Southern part of the country.Over a million people were affected andhundreds of houses destroyed.2

ConflictsIn the last decade, more than 90 armed

conflicts took place in different parts of theworld; more than half of these conflicts arosein Africa and many of them had beenunderway for at least 15 years. While deathand disablement are a common feature ofwars and contemporary complex politicalemergencies, there has been a disturbing shiftin the scale of suffering in that 90 per cent ofcasualties are civilians.

Going beyond traditionalemergency intervention

In 1996, the Habitat II Conferencehighlighted the importance of disastermanagement. Early the same year, a DisasterManagement Programme (DMP) wasestablished with the express purpose of

helping vulnerable communities and humansettlements to cope more effectively withdisasters. It is clear that conceptual gapsneed to be addressed between relief and/ordevelopment and between the approach ofhumanitarian activities and those ofrecovery/development programmes,

ROAAS experience provesthat in many post-disastercountries conditions can becreated to startsimultaneously a process oflong-term reconstruction andeconomic recovery whiledeveloping emergencyactions.

The relief-development approachrecognizes that strategiesshould go beyond thetraditional emergencyintervention, based on thefollowing guiding principles:

a) Create apermanent linkbetween theemergency phaseand thetransitional phaseof development

It is becoming moreobvious that particular attention should bepaid to sustainability so that actions takenduring the emergency do not have long-termadverse consequences on institutions,programmes and the environment.

Despite disasters, many countries haveresources that can be tapped, such as theavailability of indigenous building materials,the existence of a technical know-how withskilled and semi-skilled workers, theeagerness of communities to participate andlocal authorities, and a private sector that isnot always seriously disrupted in affectedareas. It is possible to deliver outputs on timeduring an emergency phase bysimultaneously developing economicactivities and capacity building actions aimedat social and economic integration of theaffected populations.

b) Develop a Community-Based Approach.

The strategy is based on aparticipatory planning approach thatrequires a rapid assessment conducted in aparticipatory manner. UNCHS (Habitat) has

ROAAS (v)

Displaced persons at a former school in Luena, Angola. © UNHCR/C. Sattlberger

18 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

developed several documents andmethodological tools to systematize thisprocess, which involves building a consensusamong different participants involved in thereconstruction programme. The adoption ofthis strategy ensures an active participationof affected populations, community groupsand local authorities in the subsequentoperational phases.

c) Promote Ownership andSustainability

The approach is based on theknowledge that the more communities, localauthorities and central governmentsparticipate in the design of the strategy, themore they will feel ownership of the processand the more they will participate actively inthe implementing phase. This question ofownership is essential to the futuresustainability of the project.

d) Create StrategicPartnerships and Alliances.

In a post-disaster situation, needs areso vast that no one single action can solve theproblem. Solutions are interwoven in such amanner that activities cannot be implementedin an isolated way. In order to develop anintegrated approach to reconstruction limitedresources, must be coordinated to achievethe maximum possible effect. A strategicpartnership will contribute to develop a

Strategic Partnershipsin Somalia

The Berbera MunicipalInstitutional Assistance Project hasfacilitated establishment of strategicpartnerships between the municipalauthority, UN organizations, local andinternational NGOs as well as CBOs. Thepurpose of this partnership-arrangementis in the first instance to enablecoordination by the municipal authorityof all development activities, and alsoenable exchange of information andexperiences between the organizations.Thus, it is anticipated that the municipalauthority will build its urban developmentcoordination capacity.

Developing EconomicActivities in Liberia

The Liberia Programme for theReconstruction of Rural Housing is aimedat enabling economic regeneration,revitalization and development of micro-enterprises in construction and basicinfrastructure. The expected outputsinclude: increased number of micro-enterprises and CBOs able to producebuilding materials sustainably; increasednumber of micro-enterprises with theability to bid for small building contracts;increased local production of buildingmaterials such as tiles, sheets and blockmaking machines; non-conventionalcredit facilities and guidelines foraccessing them.

Strengthening LocalInstitutions in Angola

In Angola, all project activitiessupported by UNCHS (Habitat) areconnected to the strengthening of thelocal institutions, NGOs and the privatesector, and this has contributed to thepolicy of support and enablement by thenational government. Local authoritieshave gained valuable experience in theprojects through participation in the localcoordination committee. NGOs andsome building companies have profitedfrom sub-contracts obtained from theproject. Through the project, UNCHS(Habitat) developed a manual forrehabilitation of public works that willhelp local authorities to directlyundertake future rehabilitation works.

coherent framework.

e) Develop ProductiveEconomic Activities

The strategy should contribute to re-establish small scale production in theaffected regions, creating employmentopportunities for small-scale entrepreneurs

In the last decade, morethan 90 armed conflictstook place in differentparts of the world, morethan half of theseconflicts arose in Africaand many of them havebeen underway for atleast 15 years.

and the community itself and reinforcing thelocal building sector. Besides the social andeconomic integration of targeted populations,most of the capital spent on the project isthus distributed within the local community.

f) Re-build Local CapacitiesThis approach adopts the “learning

process” for all the actors involved in thepost-disaster work:l central authorities acquire a newperspective on how to formulate and followup projects mainly through “on-the-jobexperience”;l local authorities are introduced tosustainable rehabilitation and recoveryprocess, and effective project management;l national professionals at differentlevels improve their technical skills and knowhow;l communities are empoweredthrough their active participation in theproject and consequently a self-sustainingprocess is developed;l women receive training in incomegenerating activities in the constructionsector and are also assisted to set upassociations;l NGOs and small buildingcompanies have the opportunity to grow andgain experience through the sub-contract’sthey are offered.

The Continuum from Relief toDevelopment approach is based on the ideaof creating a permanent stimulus forimproving the performance of all actors anddeveloping self-reliance in the managementof the various activities of the rehabilitationproject. It is indeed an “enabling” strategy,relying on many inter-related interventions.

Eduardo López Moreno is SeniorHuman Settlements Adviser inUNCHS (Habitat)’s Regional Officefor Africa and the Arab States.

References

1 . Sanderson, David.Humanitarian Affairs, No.11, 2001.

2 . See note 1.

ROAAS (vi)

19The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

Housing the NationSouth Africa’s National Housing Strategyby David Kithakye

At the swearing in of the firstdemocratically elected government in

South Africa, President Mandela, announcedthat the new Government could deliver,during the first five years, one million houses.This was a big challenge not only because ofthe enormous size of housing backlog(estimated at 2 million in June 1995), and thedesperation and impatience of the homeless,but also because of the extremelycomplicated bureaucratic, administrative,financial and institutional framework inheritedfrom the previous government.

During the apartheid era, housing wasused as an instrument of segregation. Themajority of black South Africans lived in therural areas and in homelands with inadequateservices. In the urban areas, the black peoplelived in townships characterised by highdensities and inadequate services. Otherslived in hostels. Simply stated, the black SouthAfricans, were systematically inadequatelyhoused.

The immediate task of the newgovernment was to put in place a policyframework for all citizens, hence the slogan“Housing the Nation”. The approach, whichstarted with the White Paper process, wasto create an enabling environment — apartnership between various tiers ofgovernment not only to get the houses on theground, but also to give meaning to the notionof a people-centred development.

Overall approach toensuring housing delivery.

The historic Botshabelo HousingAccord of 27 October 1994 bound everysignificant segment of society concerned withhousing, both morally and politically, to asocial pact that committed signatories toconcerted unified action. Botshabelo markedthe end of intensive negotiations, andculminated in the acceptance of a frameworkof principles and points of departure to guidethe development of a single, uniform, fair andequitable national housing policy and strategythat would serve the needs of a country intransition, in which a new democratic orderwas speedily evolving.

The strategy set out seven definiteactions, some of which have already beenimplemented: These include:

l Stabilizing housing environment;l Consolidating and unifying housinginstitutions;l Encouraging savings for housing;l Establishing a subsidy scheme toprovide housing opportunities for millions;l Providing housing support tocommunities;l Mobilizing credit at scale;l Making land available for housing.

Six years have passed sinceBatshabelo. According to the Minister ofHousing, Mrs. Sankie Mthembi-Mahanyele,the government has performed well beyondexpectation in a very difficult and challengingenvironment.

The different tiers of government havebeen systematically involved. The Provinciallevel has, through the regular policy dialoguebetween the Minister and the ProvincialMembers of Executive Councils referred toas MINMEC, been fully engaged. TheParliamentary Portfolio Committee onHousing keeps the political dimension in focuswhile the current Municipal Services Bill callsfor Integrated Development Planning at localgovernment levels and ensures theirinvolvement and commitment to delivery ofservices and housing.

The most visible intervention of thegovernment in meeting the housing challengehas been the Housing Subsidy Scheme startedin 1994, following negotiations initiated bythe National Housing Forum. TheGovernment Capital Housing Subsidy isavailable to South African citizens who areover 21 years old, married or living with a

long-term partner and have dependants, whohave not owned a property before andwhose income is below Rands 3,500(US$450) per month.

Four main types of subsidies have beenapplied:

Individual Subsidies: The individualsubsidy programme gives qualifyingbeneficiaries access to a subsidy to acquireownership of existing property or propertynot located in a project approved by aprovincial housing development boards.

Project linked Subsidies: Projectlinked subsidies provide housingopportunities for individuals on an ownershipbasis within housing projects approved byprovincial development boards andconstructed by developers. The largestnumber of subsidies have gone to thisprogramme.

Consolidation subsidies: Persons who,before the inception of the Housing SubsidyScheme, received housing assistance from theState in the form of serviced sites can applyfor a further benefit from the state to improvetheir housing situation by building a structureon the site or upgrading an existing one.

Institutional subsidies: Institutionalsubsidies are available to institutions thatcreate affordable housing stock to enablepersons who qualify for individual ownershipsubsidies to live in subsidised residentialproperties with secure tenure.

People’s Housing Process To address the housing needs of the

poor who are the majority and who in mostcases do not have regular incomes, and tomake them eligible for the subsidies, thegovernment has initiated the People’s HousingProcess focusing mainly on the efforts of poorcommunities to improve their livingconditions. The People’s Housing Process isbased on the fact that people have always

A squattersettlement in CapeTown.

© Rasna Warah

ROAAS (vii)

20 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

built their own houses by applying the vastwealth of traditional know-how. TheCapacitation Programme of the Governmentwhich is funded by UNDP, USAID and theGovernment, and executed by UNCHS(Habitat), aims at building the capacity of,and supporting, poor communities toimprove their living conditions. Through acollaborative effort the programme hasconcentrated on:l Advocacy and promotion throughworkshops, presentations and exchangeprogrammes to gain support from all levelsof government.l Development of technical skills:Through learning by doing and exchange ofexperience community members learn therelevant skills from identification of sites, todesign and construction. Women, in particular,have taken a lead in learning and applyingsuch skills.l Streamlining operationalprocedures in the delivery of land, financeand infrastructure: The poor havedemonstrated that they can contributesubstantially to the process of acquiring land,the development and cost of their housing.Through the uTshani Fund, managed by thePeople’s Dialogue, members of the SouthAfrican Homeless People’s Federation have,without government subsidy, developedbetter and cheaper housing.l Facilitation and promotion ofhousing support centres /initiatives: Thesupport centres have become the knowledgebases and learning points of the community.l Assistance to local organizations(NGOs and CBOs): The process recognizesthe role of organized community-basedstructures and non-governmentalorganizations as key movers in the process.

The resultsThe South African Minister of Housing

reported that more than a million houses(1,129,692) have been built since 1994. Theprocess of housing delivery has contributeddramatically towards improving the qualityof life of millions of South Africans. Duringyear 2000, some 397,019 electricity grind-connections were installed. The CommunityWater Supply Programme increased itsdelivery a hundred-fold from 62,249connections in 1995 to 6,495,205 byNovember 2000. Some 412,000 newtelephone lines were installed in 1999/2000.

David Kithakye is the Human SettlementsAdviser responsible for UNCHS(Habitat)’s activities in South Africa.

Nigeria: An Urban Explosionby Paul Okunlola

One of the most visible consequences of the rapid economic expansion in Nigeria,fuelled by the oil-boom of the 1970s, has been the transformation of agriculture-

based economies into a largely service-based ones, setting-off fundamental changes inthe places and conditions in which people live.

The streams of people flocking into Nigerian cities from the countryside have sincebecome a “flood”. While the country’s population grew from 30.4 million in 1951 to55.67 in 1963, and 88.5million in 1991, internal migration trends indicate a nation-wideurbanization rate, which, at 5.5 per cent in 1996, was roughly twice the national populationgrowth rate of 2.9 per cent. Records show that over the 30 years period from 1952, thepopulation of most of Nigeria’s urban centres increased five-fold. Thus, by1995, therewere seven cities with over one million people; 18 cities with over 500,000 people; 36cities with over 200,000 people; 78 towns with up to 100,000 people; and, over 5,050towns with more than 20,000 people.

Nationally, the proportion of urban dwellers in the country rose from 30 per centin 1985 to 39 per cent in 1994 and by 1996, it was estimated that up to 43.3 per cent ofNigerians had become city-dwellers. Going by current projections, it is believed that bythe end of the first quarter of the new century, up to 65 per cent — or two-thirds of thetotal population — will be living in cities. Lagos alone, with a current population of 10million people, will be home to up to 24 million residents.

Unfortunately, the consequences of this highly accelerated process has contributed tol a growing inadequacy and general deterioration in housing conditions;l increasingly inefficient and inadequate infrastructure facilities;l widespread environmental decay arising from the failure of municipal wastemanagement systems; and,l a progressive helplessness on the part of city managers to provide solutions tothe emerging problems.

But for the residents who face the impact of these problems daily, there are otherconsequences. For instance, households are now forced to live with the impact of socialproblems, such as increasing domestic violence, a soaring crime wave, growing insecurity,and, deteriorating community health arising from poor sanitation conditions.

There are additional economic costs to residents and businesses alike. Poorinfrastructure facilities in Nigerian cities mean households and transporters spend moremoney on self provided maintenance costs for services like electricity generators andwater boreholes.

Where alternative services need to be provided at a larger scale, for instance, withcorporate organizations, the costs are naturally passed on to the consumers, who inmost cases are already struggling to cope with the burdens of low incomes. Besides,other factors like transportation delays further contribute to increased production costsand lower “effective incomes” for city dwellers.

Among the most major challenges facing Nigeria in the new millennium is that oftransforming its ever-growing number of cities into functional entities that can cope with therising demands of contemporary urban life. Essentially, this will involve devising ways of:l raising urban infrastructure to functional levels, so that less money is spent by theusers on maintenance and production costs;l getting city residents to develop a sense of ownership in their cities throughinclusive or participatory democratic practices;l getting social services to function efficiently, so that residents can readily accessgood education that will adequately equip them for the greater challenges ahead, andbetter health care services that will enable them become even more productive; and,l harnessing the huge untapped potentials, which exist within the city in the provisionof infrastructure and services to the public.l fostering competition and improving efficiency to attract investments in this age ofglobalization.

Paul Okunlola is a reporter with the Guardian Newspapers in Lagos, Nigeria.

ROAAS (viii)

21The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

For instance, in Seattle, USA, anEnvironmental Priorities Project was initiatedand, as a first step, a technical advisorycommittee of over 30 environmental expertswas established to evaluate a wide range ofenvironmental risks facing the city. A policyadvisory committee consisting of 40environmental advocates, businessrepresentatives, tribal interests, academics,community leaders and local governmentmanagers then held a series of public meetingsto review the technical report’s findings andanswer several key questions, such as: Whatare the most urgent environmental challengesfacing Seattle? What can be done to addresspriority problems? What is the role of localgovernment? From this process, ten priorityareas emerged, ranging from reducing sourcesof environmental pollution in the transportsector, waste reduction and recycling, andimproving environmental management andco-ordination.

Similarly, in Ismailia, Egypt, a strategicdevelopment planning process culminated inan Environmental Strategies ReviewWorkshop where stakeholders and interestedparties discussed and agreed on issue-specificoptions. Recognizing the potential use of mapsin issue clarification and strategy planning, theSustainable Ismailia Project, a joint project ofUNCHS and UNEP, created a mappingsection as part of its technical team. Thedifficulty of comprehending complexenvironmental issues related to urbanexpansion and conflicting land use and waterresources management has been easedremarkably with the use of these maps. This,in turn, stimulated the Governor to mobilizeadditional mapping equipment and resourcesand also led to requests for governorate staffto be trained through the project’s work. Thispaves the way for institutionalizing an effectivemapping function within the governorate.

Global NetworkingThe “democratization” of

environmental planning and management hasled, quite naturally, to a global network joiningall those, in cities and internationalprogrammes, who wish to have moreaccessible and effective facilities forinformation exchange, mutual learning, andcollaboration in urban environmental planningand management. This global network,known as the Urban Environment Forum, linkscities and their partners in internationalsupport programmes in their commoncommitment to improve social and economicconditions in cities through better urbanenvironmental planning and management.

continued from pg.12

The Urban Environment Forum,established in 1996 during the IstanbulConference, is supported by UNCHS (Habitat)and the United Nations EnvironmentProgramme (UNEP). These organizations playa facilitating and catalytic role in mobilizing anever-widening range of cities and internationalsupport programmes in focusing theircollective energy and know-how on concreteimprovements in the living environment.

Hopefully, this global network will beone of the primary means through whichour collective knowledge will continue todeepen, and through which the successes ofcities will be made known — and replicated— in a larger number of cities and countries.

This article was adapted from materialprepared by the joint UNCHS/UNEPSustainable Cities Programme.

References1 . UNCHS (Habitat) and UNEP(1997). “Implementing the UrbanEnvironment Agenda: EnvironmentPlanning and Management SourceBook, Volume 1.”2 . Commission on HumanSettlements, Eighteenth Session(2001). “Coordination Matters:Cooperation Between the UnitedNations Centre for HumanSettlements (Habitat) and theUnited Nations EnvironmentProgramme.” (HS/C/18/10)

Improving the Urban Environment in ChengduIn 1990 Chengdu, with a metropolitan population of 10 million and located in the

poorer western region, was one of the most severely polluted cities in China. Surroundedon four sides by two rivers (Fu and Nan), industrial effluent, raw sewage and the intensiveuse of freshwater deteriorated the rivers’ waters and silted the rivers causing annual floodsduring the rainy season and dryness during the dry season. Slum and squatter settlementsproliferated on the banks of both rivers, exacerbating the social, economic and environmentalproblems of the city. In 1993, further to a petition by school children to the Mayor, Chengdustarted the Fu and Nan Rivers comprehensive revitalization plan.

The primary objective of the plan was to harness the river, prevent future flooding,restore the ecological balance and flow of the rivers and improve water quality. Toachieve this objective, however, several other objectives had to be pursued in tandem.These included:(i) finding alternative housing solutions for the 100,000 inhabitants of the slum andsquatter settlements bordering the rivers;(ii) relocating, retrofitting or closing down over 1000 enterprises and factories toreduce or eliminate industrial effluent and emissions;(iii) implementing a comprehensive waste water collection and treatment system;(iv) adopting the necessary policies that would enable all of the above to beimplemented in a transparent and accountable manner.

Owing to the quantity of capital investment required and the number of people andcommunities affected, the Municipal Government of Chengdu adopted a strategy ofpartnership and participation. This resulted in a significant rise in environmental awarenessand the mobilization of central and provincial governments, domestic and foreign investorsand the general public. A gearing ratio of one part central government finance to two partslocal government finance to three parts private sector investment was established.

Over 30,000 households previously inhabiting the slums on both banks of the tworivers have been re-housed in new, fully equipped housing estates. The vacated land hasbeen used to create a continuous green space replete with parks, gardens, recreational andcultural facilities. The two rivers have been de-silted, widened and their ecological flowrestored, reducing flood vulnerability to a 200 year risk. A series of concomitant projectsdealt with solid waste, sewage collection and treatment, industrial effluent, road infrastructure,transport and communications, and parks and gardens.

Chengdu today is a clean and green modern city boasting a buoyant and muchmore diversified economy. The natural flow of the rivers has been largely restored andthe lessons learned in participatory planning and partnership are being transferred in anunique setup whereby staff involved in the project have been seconded to surroundingtowns and districts. Chengdu’s efforts were recognized in March 2000 when the citywon International Centre for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI)’s Local InitiativesAward in the category of fresh-water management.

Source: UNCHS (Habitat)’s Best Practices database.

22 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Enabling the Informal Sectorby Naison Mutizwa-Mangiza

being characterised by ease of entry, relianceon indigenous resources, family ownershipof enterprises, small-scale of operation, labourintensive and adapted technology, skillsacquired outside formal education/trainingsystems and unregulated and competitivemarkets has been replaced by a deeperunderstanding of the complexity of the sector,and this has significant implications for policy.It is now clear that entry into the informalsector is very often not easy, that someenterprises are dependent upon importedtechnology and inputs, that many enterprisesoften employ non-family labour, that someactivities (especially illegal and others suchas shoe-shine boy networks) may be on quitea large scale, that some enterprises (such astaxi operations) use capital-intensivetechnology, that skills employed are veryoften acquired in the formal education systemand in the formal industrial sector, and thatinformal sector markets may be controlledby monopolies.

Incomes earned also vary a great dealand are, in some countries, identical to, oreven higher than, formal sector incomes. In

addition, middle and upper income classesare increasingly entering the informal sector,either as a way of supplementing decliningformal sector incomes or of increasing profitmargins. The latter rationale also underliesthe linkages that frequently exist betweeninformal and formal enterprises, with theformer subsidising the latter through verylow-cost inputs produced by poorly paidworkers.

In light of this, and of the emergingphenomenon of “urbanization of poverty”,understanding the evolving nature of theinformal sector and facilitating its growth andtransformation becomes even moreimportant. This resurgence of interest in theinformal sector is part of UNCHS (Habitat)’smove to place greater emphasis on theeconomic dimensions of urbanization,including urban poverty, employment andunemployment, municipal and housingfinance, as well as urban-rural linkages.

It is clear that enabling frameworksneed to be put in place by city authorities inorder to provide enough space for theoperation of the informal sector: urban streetvendors and hawkers and small-scaleinformal industries.

The most direct ways in which citiesin the developing world have tried to supportthe informal sector have included: (a)amending restrictive urban regulations; (b)making land-use standards more realistic andmeaningful to the majority of the population;(c) providing adequate land for the locationof enterprises and markets; and (d)developing basic infrastructure specifically forthe benefit of informal enterprises. Habitatintends to revisit these policies, assessing,globally, achievements and limitations andidentifying directions for the future.

From the point of view of urbanplanning and management, infrastructureimprovement is particularly important. Theinstallation of electricity, for example, oftenspurs informal sector productivity to levelshitherto unattainable. At present, many urbanlocal authorities are paying a great deal ofattention to infrastructure support for theurban formal sector, as part of their responseto globalization forces, including through thecreation of export processing and free-enterprise zone. Perhaps equal attention andsupport should be paid to the urban informalsector.

Other broader, public economicpolicies employed to encourage developmentof the informal sector that need to berevisited and improved include: (i) improving

The informal sector has long held thepromise of propelling developing world

economies towards full-fledgedindustrialization through the development ofindigenous entrepreneurship and thetransformation of small-scale informalenterprises into modern and more formalones. Unfortunately, interest in the informalsector as an object of urban planning andpolicy seems to have waned in manycountries, especially in Africa. While somegovernments and local authorities haveadopted supportive policies and strategies,others have reverted to irrationalharassment, as if nothing at all has been learntduring the last thirty years about the positiveattributes of the urban informal sector.

In spite of the resurgence of repressivepolicies in some countries, the informal sectorcontinues to play a very significant role inpoverty reduction, providing the onlyopportunity to earn an income for millions ofpeople in many developing world cities andtowns. (See box.)

The earlier and simplerconceptualisation of the informal sector as

Urban Informal EmploymentRegion/Country/City % Male % Female % Total

AfricaConakry (Guinea) - - 71.65%Bujumbura (Burundi) 25.54% 22.07% 22.63%Arab StatesMuscat (Oman) - - 83.30%Sana’a (Yemen) 30.00% 16.50% 27.50%AsiaSurabaya (Indonesia) - - 70.50%Bangkok (Thailand) 15.30% 18.70% 17.00%Western EuropeAversa (Italy) - - 37.00 %Pamplona (Spain) 0.60% 3.40% 3.10%Latin America & the CaribbeanLeon (Nicaragua) 58.30% 71.40% 64.50%Havana (Cuba) - - 3.80%Central & Eastern EuropeBishkek (Kyrghkyzstan) 78.20% 70.00% 75.90%Sofia (Bulgaria) 5.60% 3.20% 4.50%Source: UNCHS (Habitat) Urban Indicators database. Data based on 1998 figures.

23The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

access to credit through effective micro-financing mechanisms; (ii) improving accessto appropriate, or better, technology; (iii)enhancement of technical and managementskills through training programmes designedfor specific types of informal operations; and(iv) improving access to markets, including atthe international level.

Unfortunately, many such policies arestill lacking in terms of serious politicalcommitment and are thus often disjointed andpatchy, in both time and space. As a rule,national governments and local authoritiesshould avoid employing universalistic policiesand strategies. Instead, they should aim atdeveloping a variety of policies and strategiesdesigned specifically for the many types ofenterprises that exist within the informalsector.

Naison Mutizwa-Mangiza is ProgrammePlanning and Coordination Officer in thePlanning and Coordination Office ofUNCHS (Habitat).

The above article is based on informationsubmitted for publication in UNCHS(Habitat)’s forthcoming State of theWorld Cities Report 2001.

References1 . Gilbert, A. and Gugler, J.(1992), Cities, Poverty andDevelopment: Urbanization in theThird World, second edition, OxfordUniversity Press, Oxford.2 . Hart, K. (1973), “Informalincome opportunities and urbanemployment in Ghana”, Journal ofModern African Studies, 11, pp.61-89.3 . ILO (1972), Employment,Incomes and Equality: A Strategyfor Increasing ProductiveEmployment in Kenya, ILO, Geneva.

Shanghai’s Economic and Technical Development Zones

The provision of a minimum package of well-maintained infrastructure consisting oftransport, telecommunications, water and power is essential for urban economic

growth and expansion of employment. Shanghai, China, is one of the cities that mostsignificantly illustrate emerging responses to globalization through urban infrastructureimprovement.

As part of the open policy, Shanghai established the Economic and TechnicalDevelopment Zones (ETDZ) of Minhang, Hongqiao and Caohejing in 1984. The majorobjectives were to attract foreign investment, to introduce advanced technology, modernequipment, and management skills, and to develop international economic andtechnological cooperation.

Minhang, located about 30 km south of the central city, is Shangai’s first industrialsatellite town. The settlement has excellent linkages with Hongqiao International Airportand can be reached by ships and can fully utilize all the harbour facilities in the centralcity. In the northwestern part of Minhang, an ETDZ has been set up in close proximity toexisting industrial sites. There is an underground sewage system and supply lines forwater, gas, and electricity. The zone also has other facilities such as wharves, waterworks,a sewage treatment plant, and natural gas storage.

Hongqiao, the second Economic and Technical Development Zone of Shanghai islocated in the western urban fringe of the city. Its suburban setting provides a pleasantenvironment, and the range of services will facilitate further urban development. Thevarious urban land-use types in the zone are as follows: land for buildings (46.6 percent),recreation and green space (29.7 percent), and roads (23.7 percent). The entire plannedareas is divided into three subareas with 34 building sites, designated for the constructionof high-rise office buildings (such as the Foreign Trade Centre), hotels, apartment blocks,foreign consulates and offices, banks, insurance companies, supermarkets, shoppingcentres, department stores, sports facilities, parks, schools, medical clinics, and careparks. These facilities are designed to make foreigners feel at home while conductingbusiness in the zone.

Another ETDZ was established at Caohejing to the southwest of Shanghai.Caohejing was the first high-tech development centre among the coastal ETDZs approvedby the State Council in June 1988. It is expected that foreign capital investments will makesignificant contributions to the zone’s development.

In addition, there are four new development zones, initiated in the early to mid-1990s, located in the Pudong New Area. These are the Lujiazui Finance and Trade Zone,located in the central area of Pudong; the Jingqiao Export Processing Zone, also locatedin the central part of Pudong New Area; the Waigaoqiao Free Trade Zone, located at theestuary of the Yangzi River, 20 km away from the city proper; and Zhangjiang High-TechPark, situated in the central part of Pudong New Area.

Source: Metropolitan Planning and Management in the Developing World:Shanghai and Guangzhou, China, (UNCHS, Nairobi).

© UNCHS/Rasna Warah

24 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

l Participation: all men and womenshould have a voice in decision-making, eitherdirectly or through legitimate intermediateinstitutions that represent their interest. Localdemocracy and decentralization are pre-requisites for participation;l Strategic vision: leaders and thepublic should have a broad and long-termperspective on good governance, humandevelopment and the development of theircity along with a sense of what is needed forsuch development;l Rule of law: legal frameworksshould be fair and enforced impartially,particularly the law on human rights;l Transparency: processes,institutions and information are directlyaccessible to all stakeholders, and enoughinformation is provided to understand andmonitor governance processes;l Responsiveness: institutions andprocesses try to serve all stakeholders;l Consensus orientation: differentinterests are mediated in order to reach abroad consensus on what is in the bestinterest of the group and, where possible onpolicies and procedures;l Equity building: all men and womenhave opportunities to improve or maintaintheir well being;l Effectiveness and efficiency:processes and institutions produce resultsthat meet needs while making the best use ofresources.l Accountability: decision-makers ingovernment, the private sector and civilsociety organizations are accountable to thepubic, as well as to institutional stakeholders.

A future challenge is to translate eachcomponent into practical tools and havebenchmarks for each component. Forinstance the quality of civic engagement inthe decision making process, theresponsiveness of local governments towardsits citizens and the respect for basic humanrights are some of the benchmarks for goodgovernance performance of cities.

Capacity Building for GoodUrban Governance

Inadequate human and organizationalcapacities and unfavourable institutionalenvironments can inhibit good urbangovernance. Capacity building for thepromotion of good urban governance shouldbe directed to improve the performance oflocal as well as national stakeholders for theelements listed above.

The key question is how to build thecapacity required for better urban governancein the most effective way. Capacity buildingis more than training. Training of individualsdoes not automatically result in the envisagedchange in the organizations to which theindividuals belong. Besides, improvedcapacities of cities more often than not requiremajor changes in the institutional context ofurban governance, e.g. local-centralgovernment relations and the legal frameworkfor urban development and partnerships withcivil society, community-based organizationsand the private sector. It is important to linkhuman resource development with the othertwo main dimensions of capacity building:organizational development and capacity fornetwork management.

Capacity building efforts are fraightwith challenges, some of which are listedbelow: l Capacity building is more thana passing phase. Capacity building is a meansto an end, and should not become an end initself. This implies that the objectives of acapacity building strategy need to be clearlyspecified before interventions can bedetermined.l Capacity building for good urbangovernance is a complex process whichdemands major efforts over extended periodsof time. Quick and tangible results are difficultto achieve so commitment and support of allthose involved in the capacity building processis of key importance in achieving results. Thishas implications for both the process ofdesigning a capacity building strategy as wellas the duration of such a strategy.l Capacity building should bedemand-based and rooted in well-definedcapacity requirements. Since translatingdevelopment goals into capacity requirementshas proven to be very difficult, there is a greatneed to develop methodologies andapproaches that can link the demand andsupply side of capacity building. Interventionsshould also be planned for organizational andinstitutional development.

GOVERNANCE

Building Capacity to ImproveUrban Governanceby Joris van Etten and Leon van den Dool

From Urban Management toUrban Governance

The term “governance” has become anintegral part of the “aid vocabulary” used

today. However, it is interpreted differentlyby different development practitioners. Urbangovernance differs from the broadergovernance agenda (which has tended toconcentrate on macro-levels), in that itfocuses on the meso-levels. It also differs fromthe urban management perspective ofoperation and maintenance of infrastructureand services, because urban governanceacknowledges that one should not ignore thecomplex social and political environments inwhich these services are being managed. Atthe city level, good governance is not onlyconcerned with good urban management butalso with interactions between allstakeholders in the city. Therefore political,contextual, constitutional and legaldimensions need to be considered.

The Habitat Agenda advocatestransparent, responsible, accountable, just,effective and efficient governance of towns,cities and metropolitan areas throughenabling local leadership and the promotionof democratic and participatory processes.It stresses that public authorities should usepublic resources in all public institutions tofurther these objectives. It further stressesthe need for participatory approaches inhuman settlements development andmanagement. Since the Habitat II Conferencein June 1996, several initiatives have beenundertaken by various programmes topromote the concept of good urbangovernance. Among these is UNCHS(Habitat)’s Global Campaign on UrbanGovernance. (See box on p.25.)

Elements of Good UrbanGovernance

The United Nations DevelopmentProgramme (UNDP) describes goodgovernance as a process that includes thefollowing elements:

25The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

l Many donor agencies arepromoting capacity building. However,it is expected the funding will fall shortof the resources required to respondadequately to capacity building requirements.This implies that national and localgovernments need to recognize the need forcapacity building as well as make localresources available. On the other hand, it alsoshould be stressed that not all capacitybuilding interventions, e.g. organizational orinstitutional changes, require majorinvestments in monetary terms.l Good urban governancerequires attitudinal change, which isdifficult to achieve in general. Firstly,attitudinal change is needed for localgovernment since their role is changing fromthe main actor to a special actor in a complexnetwork of stakeholders. Secondly, attitudinalchange is needed because many componentsof good governance refer to attitudes.l There is a lot of scope forincreasing the impact of capacity buildingefforts. Experience shows there are four mainconditions that need to be met to make asuccessful capacity building effort: (1) theremust be a strong conviction by managementand elected members that the results areworth the investment; (2) efforts should befocused on the issues that need to be tackledin a city or community; (3) the costs, durationand timing of the efforts should be in such away that it allows people to participate; (4)capacity building needs to be continued inorder to have impact in a constantly changingsituation.l Impact assessment is important.Better understanding of the full impact ofcapacity building efforts, be it successes,failures or limitations, and the factors behindthis, can assist in improving these efforts, andthus increasing their impact.

Joris van Etten and Leon van denDool, both working for the Institutefor Housing and UrbanDevelopment Studies (IHS) inRotterdam, the Netherlands, areinvolved in projects, research andtraining in the field of good urbangovernance.

Towards Norms of Good Urban Governance

UNCHS (Habitat)’s Urban Governance Campaign is engaging cities, partnersand the international community in a vigorous debate on what exactly

constitutes good urban governance. Habitat has initiated this debate by arguing for thefollowing definition of urban governance:

“Urban governance is the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public andprivate, plan and manage the common affairs of the city. It is a continuing process throughwhich conflicting or diverse interests may be accommodated and cooperative action can betaken. It includes formal institutions as well as informal arrangements and the social capitalof citizens.”

Based on international legal instruments, commitments at major UN Conferencesand operational experience in cities, the campaign proposes that good urban governanceis characterized by the following seven interdependent and mutually reinforcing norms.

·Sustainability in all dimensions of urban development·Subsidiarity of authority and resources at the closest appropriate level·Equity of access to decision-making processes and the basic necessities of urban life·Efficiency in the delivery of public services and in promoting local economicdevelopment

·Transparency and Accountability of decision-makers and all stakeholders·Civic Engagement and Citizenship·Security of individuals and their living environment

These norms are supported by a wide range of operational principles, which arebased on lessons of experience and reflect regional conditions. Their implementationmust be grounded in the local reality of urban planning and management.

The debate on norms of good urban governance is currently intensified throughnetworks of the Campaign’s global and regional steering group members, through nationalcampaign launches in all regions and through inter-agency consensus building within theUN family.

© UNCHS/Peter Wambu

26 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

Decreasing International Cooperation Since Habitat II

INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

covers the cost of maintaining existinginfrastructure. In this era of urban neglect,many cities suffer disproportionately fromreduced fiscal and financial resources despitetheir major contribution to nationaldevelopment. The combination ofaccelerating urbanization, long-neglectedinfrastructure and weak urban funding overmany years has resulted in increasing urbanpoverty with the urban poor nowrepresenting up to 50 per cent of the urbanpopulation in many developing countries.1

Including industrial countries, the totalnumber of urban poor currently stands atabout 1.1 billion.2

Drastic social conditions also affect theability of a city to attract domestic andinternational investments. In this regard, themobilization of international capital

investments has not succeeded in significantlyimproving access to basic services for thepoor, in particular in least developedcountries, due to inadequate capacities tosupervise privatization processes and thegenerally poor competitiveness of many citieswhen it comes to attracting investors. Oneof the most important factors in attractingprivate investment is for a city to function. Tothat end, in order to achieve sound andinclusive planning and management of cities,it is essential to ensure appropriate investmentin urban infrastructure and services, as wellas in capacity-building. In most leastdeveloped countries, however, in contrast tothe acknowledgement of the need for anintegrated approach to rural development,urban issues were not considered as a priorityand specific sector when strategicframeworks for poverty reduction wererecently established.

Dwindling Assistance to theUrban Poor

The lack of willingness to address theurban challenge both at national andinternational levels results in a continuousreduction of international developmentassistance to this sector, in terms of amountand percentage of total officialdevelopment assistance. For example,Sweden, one of the most supportivecountries with official developmentassistance representing 0.72 per cent ofits gross domestic product, reports thatonly 7.5 per cent of its total funds allocatedfor bilateral cooperation goes to the urbansector.

However, many countries reportincreased and new improved forms ofcooperation, in particular decentralizedcooperation. For example, in its report tothe special session for an overall reviewand appraisal of the implementation of theoutcome of the Habitat Conference, Francestates that more than 5,200 projectsamounting to about US$ 220 million werefunded by French local authorities in 114countries. This region-to-region and city-to-city cooperation should be encouragedand supported by Member States.

In his report to the General Assembly(paragraph 185 of document A/54/2000),

the Secretary-General of the United Nationsrecalls that “development assistance has beenin steady decline for several decades …, despiterecent increases by five countries”. Mr. KofiAnnan also notes that “while it is true thatprivate investment flows have increasedsignificantly, many poor countries are not yetfully equipped to attract such investment.”

In the last few years, many countrieshave experienced unprecedented economicgrowth, driven by cities and the newemployment opportunities which they offer.As a result, most demographic growthoccurs in urban areas. Largely for politicalreasons, however, public infrastructureinvestment continues to bypass cities in manycountries, and public expenditure barely

© UNDP/Choices

27The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

.

The need to set up strong advocacyinitiatives is at the core of the developmentof UNCHS (Habitat)’s Global Campaign forSecure Tenure and the Global Campaign onUrban Governance (adopted by theCommission on Human Settlements at itsseventeenth session). The strategic principleto strengthen coordination with all partners,including parliamentarians, nationalassociations of local authorities and theirglobal networks, non-governmentalorganizations and community-basedorganization networks, also forms part of theUNCHS (Habitat)’s advocacy strategy.

Evidence suggests that donors andexternal support agencies are becomingmore involved in playing the role of mediatorand facilitator of policy dialogue and reform.Interventions include ex ante involvement inbrokering partnerships and participation andassistance to ex post monitoring andevaluation. The provision of seed capital isalso a growing trend whereby the majorresponsibility for implementaion lies withlocal agencies, including civil societyorganizations. This advocacy role, with astrong emphasis on capacity building andaccess to information, reveals an increasingpreoccupation with process andparticipatory decision-making. One newdevelopment that has been observed since1996 has been the transfer of best practiceexperience. Transfers initiated by cityassociations and umbrella non-governmentalorganizations have shown that decentralizedcity-to-city and community-to-communitytransfers can benefit enormously from bestpractices.

The Potential of the UnitedNations system

Due to scarce financial resources,major bilateral and multilateral developmentagencies are progressively retreating fromcapital investment projects to concentrate onupstream capacity-building activities andknowledge management services. There is astrong rationale to reinforce all forms ofcoordination between international partnersto ensure that upstream support effectivelygenerates additional capital investmentprojects with a better social impact. Thecapacity-building of all partners for developingcoordinated and enabling strategicframeworks at national and all localgovernment levels is a key factor in themobilization of domestic and internationalinvestments for improving the livingconditions of the poor and fostering social

integration, gender awareness, localdemocracy and the observance andprotection of human rights.

In this regard, the Cities Allianceinitiative launched in 1999 by the UnitedNations Centre for Human Settlements(Habitat) and the World Bank is a goodexample of support to the upstream CityDevelopment Strategies, an operationalvehicle established to enhance localcoordination capacities, integratemultisectoral approaches, mobilize capitalinvestments in urban services, and addressmore effectively the needs of the urban poor.The Cities Alliance also fully illustrates therecent trends in international developmentcooperation to focus attention increasinglyon support to local-level action in the contextof urban participative governance.

As part of this approach, the formerSouth African President Nelson Mandelajoined national and local government leadersin launching an operational component ofthe Cities Alliance initiative: the CitiesWithout Slums action plan. The plan callsfor increasing investments aimed at theprovision of basic services to the urban poorthrough a worldwide effort to move frompilot projects to city-wide and nation-wideupgrading policies. At the global level, theAlliance attracts a broad-based constituencyof development partners and associationsof local authorities, by adopting acomprehensive urban strategy in line withthe Habitat Agenda. The Cities Alliance isone of the international developmentcooperation initiatives which has recentlydemonstrated the potential of the UnitedNations system for coordinated action inimproving international support to the goalsof the Habitat Agenda.

International opportunities formobilizing additional significant internationalresources for the worldwideimplementation of the Habitat Agenda on asectoral basis, i.e., for housing programmes,remain extremely limited. Prospects areclosely linked to overall progress in theimplementation of poverty reductionstrategies, including initiatives to reduce orcancel the debt of heavily indebted poorcountries. Increased attention should bepaid to improving the coordination ofinternational aid programmes for the sakeof ensuring a global impact on urban povertyreduction. There is still no mechanism toensure the integration of Habitat Agendaaction plans for international cooperationinto coordinated international initiatives,

such as the World Bank’s comprehensivedevelopment framework and the UnitedNations Development Assistance Framework,or into country strategy papers and nationalpoverty strategy papers prepared byGovernments in collaboration with theInternational Monetary Fund and the WorldBank. Five years after the Habitat IIConference, the efforts of UNCHS (Habitat)to disseminate guidelines and introduce humansettlement issues into these initiatives seem tohave had limited success.

The Habitat Agenda TaskManager System

In line with this direction and supportingrecommendation made by the Istanbul+5Preparatory Committee at its first session inMay 2000, the Economic and Social Councilrequested the Secretary-General to consideradopting a Habitat task manager system tofacilitate the coordinated implementation ofthe Habitat Agenda by the United Nationssystem, and to streamline reporting to theCommission on Human Settlements and theCouncil.

The Habitat task manager system willaddress the gap in the information andreporting framework, devising an information-sharing system for documenting and analysinginternational support and cooperation, lessonslearned and opportunities of collaboration. Itwill also establish information andcommunication protocols and workingmodalities to strengthen mechanisms andmeans of cooperation and collaboration. Afirst step would be to address information andreporting within the United Nations system.Once the system is developed and fine-tuned,it would expand to include other internationalpartners, in line with the partnership principleof the Habitat Agenda.

This article is adapted from an officialdocument presented to the EighteenthSession of the Commission on HumanSettlements, (12-16 February 2001)entitled, “Follow-up to the United NationsConference on Human Settlements(Habitat II): International Cooperation andthe Review of Mechanisms for Monitoringthe Implementation of the HabitatAgenda; Report of the Executive Director”(HS/C/18/4).

References

1 . Basic facts on urbanization,UNCHS, May 19992 . I b i d

28 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

Decentralization Does Not AlwaysLead to Democratic ParticipationLessons Learned in Indiaby Minar Pimple and Lysa John

VIEWPOINT

The articulation of urban governance inIndia dates back to the introduction of

the 74th Constitution Amendment Act of1992 (74th CAA) when the significance oflocal bodies in the administration of citieswas recognized for the first time. Importantmechanisms for decentralized urban planningand participation were also introduced.Notwithstanding that the agenda for urbangovernance was largely overshadowed byits preferred rural sibling, the 73rd

Constitutional Amendment Act, the 74th CAAis historic as it prescribed the requisites fordecentralization and participation across thecountry.

The implementation of this unequaledproviso, however, tells a different story.

Efficiency & Equity:Contradictions in LocalGovernance

As advocated by UNCHS (Habitat)’sGlobal Campaign on Urban Governance, thepromotion of local autonomy and thedevolution of powers to the level closest tothe people is desirable for good urbangovernance. The 74th CAA has stressed theneed for promoting such autonomy in thefunctional and financial contexts of cities. TheTwelfth Schedule of the Constitution lists theresponsibilities of the local governmentwhich include environmental planning andaddressing the needs of the poor.

However, this initiative seems to havebeen overridden by an increasing trendtowards the privatization of amenities andservices with the purported intention ofreducing the administrative and financial“load” on municipalities. The poor are at aparticular disadvantage in access to servicesin such an arrangement which shifts thecontrol of public resources outside thepurview of the local authority and the largercommunity. The entry of national andinternational corporations into the arena ofpublic services provision is oriented towards

full cost recovery with insufficientaccommodation for the needs and capacitiesof the poor. In cities like Mumbai, thedialogue on the privatization of basic services,such as solid waste management, does notstrategically include or involve the poor.

On the other hand, existing provisionsto discuss the resources and priorities of thelocal government have not been madeavailable to the larger public. The 74th CAAmakes the chief executive, the MunicipalCommissioner, responsible for publishing a“Subsidies Report” of the city which describesthe concessions granted for the distributionof basic services across the city. Severalgroups believe that the pattern of subsidiesdistribution exposes a fundamental inequityin the facilitation of costs provided to thosewho can afford to pay (the well-to-do,commercial establishments, etc.) as opposedto the poor whose settlements andenterprises are not recognized as entitled toreceive the services of local authorities.

Decentralization &Participatory Democracy:Who Decides to Decide?

The 74th CAA instituted “WardsCommittees” which effectively introduce theprocess of consultation and participatoryplanning at the smallest administrative unit ofthe city, namely the ward. For the very firsttime in the history of the Indian Constitution,communities are provided with a space fordirect intervention with administrative andelected representatives of the city in assessingand meeting their needs.

However, this provision has beenreceived with much resistance acrossadministrative and political ranks. The formerstated their fear that their political counterpartswould usurp the forum to promote theirpolitical and economic interests, as a reasonfor restraint. The political groups were equallyunwilling to initiate a move that may reducethe hierarchical nature of political control over

decision-making and fund distribution in thecity.

In effect, the issue of implementationw as prolonged till 1999 w henMaharashtra was “forced” to instituteW ards Committees by a Public InterestLitigation filed by Youth for VoluntaryAction (YUVA). Mumbai and a handful ofother cities have constituted W ardsCommittees. To date, none have institutedcivil society representatives as “statutorypartners” to their functioning.

Decentralizing the Vision ofCities

How then do we ensure that ouroptimism for responsive and progressivecities is not dampened by the reality of powerpolitics and apathy? The most obvious lessonin the exercise of institutionalizing democraticparticipation has been that it takes more thanlegislative goodwill to pry open spaces fordecision making from the stronghold ofestablished centres of power. We realize thatstrong vested interests are involved inpreserving the existing hierarchies of controlin the city. Moreover, civil society actorsappear poorly equipped to play their part inan arena and on terms from which they havebeen traditionally excluded.

As simple as it may sound, theoutstanding factor for exclusion continues tobe a lack of awareness of the 74th CAA itself,much less the spirit of good governance thatit embodies. In stark contrast to the nationalspotlight on the 73rd CAA, there appears tobe widespread ignorance of the 74th CAAamong elected representatives, particularlythose from smaller cities, women councillorsor representatives of the poorer sections ofthe city, civil society organizations and thelarger public.

Most importantly, there is a singularlack of initiative to build a “vision” thatrepresents the needs and aspirations of allsections of the city. Such a vision is critical ifthe agenda of urban governance is to beinterpreted in a dynamic and effective manner.The lack of vision has reduced creative intentinto bureaucratic fantasy. In other words,our aspiration for an inclusive city could wellremain the exclusive discourse of a few.

Minar Pimple and Lysa John arerespectively Executive Director andProject Co-ordinator of Governance atYouth for Voluntary Action (YUVA), a non-governmental organization based inMumbai, India.

29The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

villages where everyone is provided for, howeverm odestly,” said Mrs. Tibaijuka. “With over abillion poor people without adequate shelter andbasic service, this is the time for the Commissionon Human Settlements and the internationalcommunity to commit resources to managinghuman settlements.”

Amongst the key issues that wereconsidered by the Commission at this sessionwere the urgent need to strengthen andrevitalize the Centre so that it can be aneffective UN focal point for theimplementation of the Habitat Agenda.

The Commission was presented withthe work programme of UNCHS (Habitat)and the proposed budget for 2002 –2003.Dialogues were held to present reports onHabitat’s Campaign for Secure Tenure andUrban Governance. Other issues discussedincluded the need for greater internationalcooperation and the role of local authorities.Also discussed were lessons learned from bestpractices and the need for partnerships inachieving adequate shelter for all andsustainable human settlements development.

The need for partnerships wasreinforced by Mr. Klaus Toepfer, theDirector General of the United Nations Officeat Nairobi and the Executive Director of theUnited Nations Environment Programme. Ashe stated in his opening speech “there can beno global environmental sustainability withoutthe sustainability of human settlements.”

Donors showed their confidence inUNCHS (Habitat) by increasing their pledgesfor the general purpose funds of the UnitedNations Habitat and Human SettlementsFoundation.

Three main donors substantiallyincreased their contributions to the corefunding of the Centre for 2001. TheGovernment of the United Kingdom topsthe list, with its pledge of one million poundssterling (US$1,445,000). Second came theGovernment of Sweden, which pledged SEK7 million (US$728,100). These two countrieshave increased their contribution by up to 50per cent. The Government of Norway hasalso pledged 5 million NOK (US $561,800)to the core budget. This is the first time the

Norwegian Government has contributednon-earmarked funds to the Centre’sFoundation Budget.

Developing countries also showedconsiderable support and pledged more thanever before. The commitments range fromUS $100,000 from the Government of Indiato the most recent contribution of US$15,000 from the Government ofMadagascar, a least-developed country.

“Our forecast for contributions to theFoundation Budget stands at $ 4.8 million withabout $3.2 million already having beencommitted. In the past we have rarely been givensuch commitments so early in the year,” saidMrs. Anna Tibaijuka. “I am grateful to all ourdonors, large or small, in the confidence theyhave shown in the Centre. I am committed tocontinuing the ongoing process of therevitalisation of Habitat and to making Habitata centre of excellence in the field of humansettlements development.”

For further information, please contact:Sharad Shankardass or Zahra A.Hassan, Media & Press Relations Unit,UNCHS (Habitat)Tel: 624153; 623151, Fax: 624060;E-mail: habitat.press@unchs.org,Website: www.unchs.org

HABITAT NEWS

Commission on Human SettlementsIncreases Contributions to Habitat Foundation

WORLD HABITAT DAY

World Habitat Day will be held onMonday, 1 October 2001.

The theme this year is“Cities Without Slums”.

The official inauguration of the Day willtake place in Fukuoka, Japan.

WORLD HABITAT AWARDS

Call for Entries 2001

Projects are sought in both developed anddeveloping countries, which offersustainable futures to residents and whichprovide practical and imaginative solutionsto current housing problems. All innovativehousing solutions are welcome, large orsmall, urban or rural. Prizes of £10,000 plusindividually designed and crafted silvertrophies are given to the two winners.Preliminary submissions should reach theaddress below before 1st July 2001.

Further details are availablefrom Building and Social HousingFoundation.Email: BSHF@compuserve.comWeb: http://www.bshf.org

The 18th Session of the United NationsCommission on Human Settlements was

inaugurated on 12 February 2001 in Nairobiby H.E. the President of the Republic of Kenya,The Hon. Daniel Toroitich Arap Moi. Over500 delegates including Ministersresponsible for Human Settlements, Mayors,Parliamentarians, representatives of localauthorities, non-governmental organizationsand other civil society organizationsassembled in Nairobi to attend the 18thSession.

The Commission on HumanSettlements acts as the governing body ofUNCHS (Habitat) and comprises of 58member states. This UN body acts as thecustodian of the Habitat Agenda, a practicalroad map to an urbanizing world that wasadopted by 171 governments at Habitat II inIstanbul in 1996.

The 18th Commission elected H.E.Sid-Ali Ketrandji, PermanentRepresentative of the Republic of Algeria toHabitat, as the Chairman of the 18th Session.

A message from the Secretary-General,Mr. Kofi Annan, was read to the delegatesby Mrs. Anna Tibaijuka, the ExecutiveDirector of the United Nations Centre forHuman Settlements (Habitat). The Secretary-General pointed out that a range ofcommitments were made by world leadersat the Millennium Summit in New York lastyear. Many of these development goals willcontribute to progress in the area of humansettlements. However, a specific pledge wasmade to improve, by the year 2020, the livesof at least 100 million slum dwellers. Hecalled upon the Commission and the UnitedNations Centre for Human Settlements(Habitat) to play a leading role in helping theinternational community to meet thesechallenges.

In her opening address, Mrs. AnnaTibaijuka stressed the urgent need tomanage the problems of urbanization andcalled upon the Commission to help establisha culture of solidarity and inclusiveness in ourcities and human settlements. “Cities will notbecome livable places until we learn to practicethe forms of traditional solidarity found in

30 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

regions, recent progress has been severelyhampered by the increase in natural andhuman made disasters, particularly regionalwars and conflicts. In terms of emergingpriorities, the report points out that there isweakening of international commitment in thefield of human settlements development.Amongst its many conclusions, the reportpoints out that there is an urgent need forgreater decentralization and strengthening oflocal authorities and calls for an increasedcommitment of resources to help overcomethe problems of the urban poor.

In the preparatory process leading upto Istanbul+5, the General Assembly passeda resolution on the forthcoming discussionsamong the various Habitat Agenda partners,including local authorities and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). It wasdecided that these partners would participatein a new entity — a Thematic Committee— which is to meet five times during theSpecial Session. Its designated purpose is to“tell the important story” of the developmentof human settlements through presentationsof case studies and dialogues. It is hoped that,by the end of the session, participants willhave acquired practical knowledge andformed a basis from which they can networkand initiate projects.

A problem arose in the first few days ofthe session concerning the rules under whichthe Preparatory Committee was to function,particularly as to the participation of localauthorities and NGOs. Special sessions of theGeneral Assembly function under differentrules than those applied at various worldconferences. When the drafting committeedecided to bar NGOs and representatives oflocal authorities from its sessions, NGOrepresentatives protested strongly. In theinterests of maintaining a positive atmosphereconducive to a good working relationshipwith its “valued partners”, a compromisearrangement was agreed upon whereby theNGO representatives were allowed to sit in

all the sessions of the drafting committee asobservers. Habitat Agenda partners were alsoallowed to make their presentations at ‘publicsessions’ as determined by the committee.

At a press conference on the afternoonof the final day, Mrs. Tibaijuka, H.E. GermánGarcía Durán, chair of the PreparatoryCommittee, and representatives ofgovernments, local authorities and NGOs allexpressed solidarity with the goals of theHabitat Agenda. They also expressedappreciation for the good work of the variousdelegations to prepare for the Special Sessionof the General Assembly. At the pressconference, Mrs. Anna Tibaijuka said,“Despite the intensive negotiations andpositioning over the week, as we come to theend, there is a clear demonstration ofconvergence. We are happy we have been ableto complete the process with all parties onboard. I am pleased that the spirit of Istanbul isalive and well.”

For more information, please contact:Axumite Gebre-EgziabherCoordinator, Istanbul+5UNCHS (Habitat)P.O. Box 30030Nairobi, KenyaE-mail:Axumite.Gebre-Egziabher@unchs.orgTel.: (254-2) 623831Fax: (254-2) 624264OrWandia SeaforthNetworking/Information OfficerUrban SecretariatUNCHS (Habitat)P.O. Box 30030Nairobi, KenyaE-mail: wandia.seaforth@unchs.orgTel.: (254-2) 623342Fax: (254-2) 624264

Second and Final PrepCom forIstanbul+5 Concludes SuccessfullyDespite Initial Set-back

COUNTDOWN TO ISTANBUL+5

The Second Substantive Session of thePreparatory Committee for Istanbul+5

successfully completed its work on Friday 23February 2001. Its primary duty was to setthe agenda for the five-year reviewconference known as Istanbul +5, the SpecialSession of the General Assembly that will takeplace in New York from 6-8 June 2001. TheSpecial Session will evaluate progress madeand obstacles encountered and formulatenew initiatives to further the implementationof the Habitat Agenda. Key tasks thePreparatory Committee completed includedthe preparation of a draft “declaration oncities and other human settlements in the newmillennium” and consideration of a draftreport submitted by UNCHS (Habitat)’sExecutive Director, Mrs. Anna Tibaijuka, onthe overall review and appraisal of theimplementation of the Habitat Agenda.

Negotiations on the text of the draftdeclaration proceeded well, althoughdelegates found it necessary to work late intothe night more than once, and the draftingcommittee was split into two groups in orderto expedite the process. The text adopted atthe session calls upon representatives ofGovernments to renew and reconfirm theircommitments to the Habitat Agenda adoptedat Istanbul in 1996, with its twin goals of“adequate shelter for all” and “sustainablehuman settlements development”. The textthat was adopted by the Plenary on 23February 2001 will be taken up by the SpecialSession of the General Assembly in June.

The draft report on the overall reviewand appraisal of the implementation of theHabitat Agenda was based on nationalreports from over 80 countries which wereconsolidated and presented at five regionalpreparatory meetings. There are manyemerging themes in this report. For example,the evidence is clear that globalization hasled to an increase in urban poverty and hasexacerbated the problems of humansettlements in many countries. In developing

31The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

UNCHS (Habitat)

Cities in aGlobalizing WorldGlobal Report onHuman Settlements2001

Published by Earthscan for the UnitedNations Centre for Human Settlements(Habitat), 2001Pb £20.00 1 85383 806 3 June 2001Hb £55.00 1 85383 805 5350 pages

Reviewed by Rasna Warah

The central challenge of the 21st centurywill be how to make both urbanization

and globalization work for all the world’speople, instead of leaving billions behind.Cities in a Globalizing World: Global Report onHuman Settlements 2001 is a comprehensiveassessment of the world’s cities in the contextof globalization. The Report argues thatglobalization and urbanization have asymbiotic relationship: the characteristics ofcities help shape – and promote –globalization. In fact, global forces are centredin cities. Cities provide the infrastructure andlabour on which globalization depends, aswell as the innovative ideas that result fromintense urban activities.

On the other hand, the impact ofglobalization is most acutely felt in cities. Theglobal economy has changed the structure ofemployment and altered the demographicmake-up of cities. Globalization has alsoplaced cities in a highly competitiveframework of inter-city linkages andnetworks.

Divided CitiesHowever, Cities in a Globalizing World

cautions that technology-driven options forgrowth and development – which spurglobalization – have led to more lines ofstratification between people, places andgroups.

In other words, the costs and benefitsof globalization are unevenly distributedbetween and within cities. Homeless people

are living in cardboard boxes on sidewalks ofgleaming corporate skyscrapers whosebudgets exceed those of many countries.Enclaves of “super-connected” people, firmsand institutions — with their increasingbroadband connections to the world via theInternet, mobile phones and satellite dishes— exist cheek-by-jowl with large numbersof people who have never even made a phonecall. The social and economic cores andperipheries of the global information age andthe global economy are not only continentsapart but can now also be foundgeographically adjacent to each other inindividual cities.

Cities Localize DemocraticProcesses

The Report argues that cities localizedemocratic processes in ways global andnational institutions can not. Globalization hascreated an apparent paradox where polity— the condition of civil order — issimultaneously becoming more global andmore local.

For instance, globalization hasnurtured, rather than destroyed, theorganizational capacity of the poor. TheReport shows that while the urban poor mayhave little influence over global economicforces, they are taking an increasingly activerole as agents of their own development. Insome cases, the formidable strength oforganized movements of the urban poor hasmanaged to influence national andinternational policies.

New Ways of ManagingCities

Cities in a Globalizing Worldacknowledges that existing approaches donot effectively address urgent problems ofaccess to adequate housing, infrastructureand basic services and recognizes that manycurrent developments are not only harmfulto the poor but are also detrimental to thelong-term sustainability of cities. It, therefore,calls for new ways of managing and governingcities.The Report identifies four new elementsof urban governance that have emerged inthe last decade. These are:a) decentralization (devolution ofpower and resources from central to localgovernments);

BOOK REVIEWb) civil society participation in policy-making (e.g. city consultations with urbanstakeholders);c) multi-level governance andpartnerships (public, private and civil societyinstitutions joining forces to resolve urbanproblems); andd) process-driven and territoriallybased decision-making and policies (thedevelopment of regional blocs and area-based initiatives).

One of the key messages of the Reportis that social justice and environmentalsustainability in cities can only be advanced ifcities are viewed not as “engines of growth”,but as “agents of change”. This requires newpolitical strategies for urban livability and newforms of governance. The change wouldinvolve reconstituting relationships betweenthe public and private sectors and civil societythrough the formation of broad-basedcooperative partnerships. The challenge isto ensure that the fruits of globalization areshared more equally.

Notwithstanding the so-called“hollowing of the state”, the Reportunderscores the importance of centralgovernments in ensuring sustainability andequity in cities. Central governments holdcrucial powers, not only in terms of settingdevelopment goals and agendas, but also instrategic planning. While nationalgovernments must facilitate the functioningof global markets and forces, they must alsotake responsibility for social cohesion, equityand conflict resolution in cities. In the longrun, concludes the Report, governments havethe ultimate responsibility of managing thebenefits and mitigating the risks ofglobalization.

Cities in a Globalizing World, the third ina series produced by UNCHS (Habitat), isan authoritative assessment of the two mostsignificant forces shaping the world today. Itis essential reading for all those interested inensuring that urbanization and globalizationare positive forces of development in the 21st

century.

To order, write to:

Earthscan Publications120 Pentonville Road, London N1 9JN, UK,Tel: +44 (0) 207 278 0433Fax: +44 (0) 207 278 1142E-mail: earthinfo@earthscan.co.ukWeb Site: http://www.earthscan.co.uk

32 2001 Vol. 7 No. 1

Habitat Debate

UNCHS (Habitat) OFFICES

HEADQUARTERSUNCHS (Habitat)P.O. Box 30030Nairobi, KenyaTel: (254-2) 621234/623210/623988/623153Fax: (254-2) 624266/624267/624264/623080/624060E-mail: habitat@unchs.orgWorld Wide Web:http://www.unchs.org/

REGIONAL OFFICES

Africa and the Arab StatesUNCHS (Habitat) Regional OfficeP.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, KenyaTelephone: (254-2) 621234, 623221Facsimile: (254-2) 623904, 623328(Regional Office)624266/7 (Central Office)E-mail: roaas@unchs.orgWorld Wide Web:http://www.unchs.org/roaas

Asia and the PacificUNCHS (Habitat) Regional OfficeACROS Fukuoka Building, 8th Floor1-1-1 Tenjin, Chuo-kuFukuoka 810, JapanTel: (81-92) 724-7121Fax: (81-92) 724-7124E-mail: habitat.fukuoka@unchs.orgWorld Wide Web:http://www.fukuoka.unchs.org

Latin America and theCaribbean

UNCHS (Habitat) Regional OfficeEdificio TeleportoAv. Presidente Vargas, 3131/130420210-030 - Rio de Janeiro, BrazilTel: (55-21) 515-1700Fax: (55-21) 515 1701E-mail: portal@habitat-lac.orgWorld Wide Web:http://www.habitat-lac.org

INFORMATION AND LIAISON OFFICES

New York OfficeUNCHS (Habitat)Room DC2-0943Two UN PlazaNew York, N.Y. 10017, U.S.A.Tel: (1-212) 963 4200Fax: (1-212) 963 8721E-mail: habitatny@un.org

Western EuropeUNCHS (Habitat) Geneva OfficeThe International Environment House13 chemin des AnémonesCH-1219 ChâtelaineGeneva, SwitzerlandTel: +41 22 917 8646Fax: (41-22) 917 8046E-mail: lludvigsen@unog.ch

Brussels OfficeUNCHS (Habitat)14 rue Montoyer1000-Brussels Belgium E-mail: parkes@skynet.be

Eastern and Central EuropeUNCHS (Habitat) OfficeH-1124 BudapestNémetvölgyi út 41.2.Ép.1.1., HungaryTel: (36-1)-202-2490Fax: (36-1) 356-0602 orTel/Fax: (36-1) 316-4604E-mail: horcher@unhabitat.datanet.hu

IndiaUNCHS (Habitat)Chennai Office, ThalamuthuNatarjan BuildingEgmore, Chennai 600 008, IndiaTel: (91-44) 8530802Fax: (91-44) 8572673E-mail: unchssp@md2.vsnl.net.in

ChinaUNCHS (Habitat)Beijing OfficeNo.9 Sanlihe RoadBeijing 100835People’s Republic of ChinaTel: (86-10) 6839 4750Fax: (86-10) 6839 4749E-mail: unchspek@public.bta.net.cnWorld Wide Web:http://www.cin.gov.cn/habitat

Russian FederationHabitat Executive Bureau8 Stroitelei St., 2 Building117987 GSP-1, MoscowRussian FederationTel: (7-095) 930-62-64Fax: (7-095) 930-03-79Telex: 411013 STROJ SUE-mail: habmoscow@mtu-net.ru