Upap urban policy action plan 2004 06

Urban Policy Action Plan 2004-06

Draft16/4/04

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 URBAN STRATEGY CONTEXTUAL SETTING .......................................... 2

1.1 URBAN POLICY ACTION PLAN 2004-06 PREPARATORY PROCESS ................... 2 1.2 FIJI’S URBANISATION IN THE GLOBAL AND PACIFIC PERSPECTIVE ................. 3 1.3 URBAN STRATEGY VISION .............................................................................. 4 1.4 UPAP LINKAGES TO SDP STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND POLICIES .................... 5 1.5 STRUCTURE OF THE UPAP REPORT ................................................................ 5

2 URBAN SECTOR BACKGROUND ................................................................. 8

2.1 URBANISATION TRENDS .................................................................................. 8 2.2 THE URBAN ECONOMY AND URBAN POVERTY ............................................... 9 2.3 THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT .......................................................................... 10 2.4 URBAN LAND ................................................................................................ 11 2.5 URBAN HOUSING .......................................................................................... 12 2.6 INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES PROVISION ............................................... 14 2.7 CURRENT URBAN PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS ............. 15 2.8 CURRENT URBAN FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS ............................................ 16 2.9 CURRENT INSTITUTIONAL AND GOVERNANCE SETTING ................................ 17 2.10 CURRENT LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENT ........................ 19

3 UPAP THEMATIC DEVELOPMENTAL AREAS ....................................... 20 3.1 URBAN LAND MARKET DEVELOPMENT ........................................................ 20 3.2 HOUSING MARKET DEVELOPMENT ............................................................... 23 3.3 URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES DEVELOPMENT ............................ 28

4 CROSS-CUTTING POLICY ELEMENTS .................................................... 33 4.1 URBAN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ..................................................... 33 4.2 URBAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND URBAN POVERTY REDUCTION ....... 38 4.3 URBAN PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK .................................. 42 4.4 URBAN SERVICES FINANCING ....................................................................... 47 4.5 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK AND GOVERNANCE ........................................ 50 4.6 LEGAL AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ...................................................... 55 4.7 CAPACITY-BUILDING AND HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ................... 59

5 UPAP PRIORITIES, IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING ............ 64 5.1 OVERARCHING ISSUES AND UPAP DIRECTIONS ........................................... 64 5.2 UPAP IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY ............................................................ 66 5.3 UPAP ENABLING ENVIRONMENT ................................................................. 70 5.4 UPAP POLICY IMPLEMENTATION MONITORING ........................................... 70 5.5 SUPPORT FOR IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................... 70 5.6 IMMEDIATE NEXT STEPS ............................................................................... 71


Draft/16/4/04 2

1 Urban Strategy Contextual Setting

1.1 Urban Policy Action Plan 2004-06 Preparatory Process The preparation of this Urban Policy Action Plan 2004-06 (UPAP) has been a joint Government of Fiji/ADB initiative under ADB TA 3243-FIJ1 as mandated by the Housing and Urban Development section (5.9) of the Strategic Development Plan (SDP) 2003-05. It was supported by a team of local and international consultants recruited by ADB under the TA. The developmental approach for UPAP has taken the objectives and performance indicators of this and other relevant sections of the SDP as its points of departure, and translated these into concrete action steps to be undertaken during 2004-2006. This final draft UPAP document has been prepared for formal adoption by the Government by early May 2004. A follow-up ADB TA is programmed for 2004 or 2005 to help implement key action steps in the adopted UPAP. The expected impact of the adoption of the policy action plan is to enhance coherence, effectiveness and efficiency of sector performance (including local council urban governance) and thus ensure a better utilisation of scarce resources. Based on the work already done on urban policy in the SDP, the substantive UPAP preparatory work has been handled through a sequence of policy stakeholders’ workshops and smaller thematic working group meetings. The work has been supported by a secretariat based in the Ministry of Local Government, Housing, Squatter Settlement and the Environment (MLGHSSE) and a team of ADB consultants and resource persons. After an initial review of sector issues at the first stakeholders workshop held at the Tradewinds Convention Centre, Lami, in November 2003, and based on inputs received at this workshop, four thematic working groups were established to take the work further. These working groups focused on: (i) overall urbanisation, planning, infrastructure and environmental issues, (ii) urban land and housing issues, (iii) urban finance issues, and (iv) institutional, legal and capacity-building issues Each of these groups met 3-4 times in the process to prepare draft sections of the UPAP document. The consultants and the secretariat consolidated these inputs into a first integrated UPAP draft document, which has been reviewed by a second stakeholders workshop, held at the Holiday Inn Hotel, Suva, on 6 April 20042. The preparatory process has been further supported by several special presentation sessions by sector agencies, as well as through numerous bilateral meetings with stakeholders and site visits by the preparatory team. Participation in the preparatory process by selected LCs, government departments, private sector, NGOs and other civil society agencies has been geared to ensure broad stakeholders’ participation. It has also been structured so as to include those who have relevant operational experience, and this has contributed significantly to informing the working groups’ deliberations on the substantive issues to be covered in their terms of reference.

1 The TA also supports the preparation of the Greater Suva Region Urban Management Plan in a parallel effort. 2 The consultants have also prepared a separate volume of all issue papers and other background documentation used in the preparation of the urban policy action plan – this is available on request from the UPAP secretariat at DTCP/MLGHSSE


Draft/16/4/04 3

The preparatory work has been supervised on a day-to-day basis by MLGHSSE. The work has been guided by a Steering Committee (SC) chaired by the CEO, MLGHSSE, with senior level participation of NPO/Ministry of Finance and National Planning (MFNP), Ministry of Health (MoH), Fiji Local Government Association (FLGA) and the Association of Architects. The SC monitored work progress, resolved any major issues arising in the course of the work and reviewed and approved outputs. It has met four times during the preparatory process. Based on a progress report submitted by MLGHSSE, the Development Sub-Committee (DSC) endorsed the UPAP preparatory approach taken and broad directions of emerging policy directions in its meeting of 30 March 2004. The Cabinet endorsed the same in its meeting of 5 April 2004. After considering the suggestions made at the second stakeholders meeting and in the DSC and Cabinet reviews, the present revised draft UPAP document has been finalized for DSC/Cabinet approval.

1.2 Fiji’s Urbanisation in the Global and Pacific Perspective Fiji is an urbanising society, with approximately half of the country’s population presently living in urban areas, and approximately 60% of its GDP produced in urban areas. Globally, urbanisation has been shown to bring positive changes as well as challenges: On the one hand, as societies develop, an increasing share of the growing national wealth is produced in urban areas, with urban economic activities strengthening the viability of rural economic development by providing markets, agro-industrial production centres and trans-shipment points for rural produce. In that sense, urbanisation is the spatial translation of the beneficial changes in the production structure of a growing economy, with relative declining GDP shares of the primary (agricultural) production sectors and increasing shares of the secondary (industrial) and tertiary (services) sectors. On the other hand, urbanisation leads to increasing pressure on urban services provision, such as the local road network, water supply, garbage collection and disposal. Obtaining adequate housing and access to land and urban services is a major challenge for urban dwellers and their governments, as is their financing. Furthermore, while urban-based economic activities in themselves contribute in a major way to economic growth, unmanaged urbanisation often has adverse impacts on the environment and on poverty. In other words, with urbanisation, poverty and environmental degradation also urbanise. Mushrooming under-served informal low-income settlements on the periphery of urban centres are a visual expression of that in many countries, and Fiji is no exception. Fiji has been fortunate to date in that the pressures of urbanisation have not been as acute or rapid as in many other countries. At an urban population growth of about 2% per year, urban problems are not as dramatically unmanageable as in some of the mainland Asia countries, where such growth rates have generally exceeded 4% per year over many decades. Further, they are not as unmanageable compared to some other Pacific island countries where limited land supply, high population growth rates and limited economic growth opportunities pose major urban management problems (see Table 5.1 for urban populations in other Pacific island countries). However, Fiji, as a relatively small island economy with special features, such as traditional land holdings, recent independence, strong socio cultural norms and values, and a vulnerable eco-system, has some pertinent problems to address as its society urbanises. This calls for improved urban management and an effective and efficient urban development sector, which meets national, metropolitan and local needs. The


Draft/16/4/04 4

Government has recognised this in its Strategic Development Plan (SDP) 2003-2005, which mandated the development of an urban sector strategy. Table 1.1: Selective Pacific Island Country (PIC) Populations 2000

Pacific Island Country

(PIC)

Last census

Population as counted at last census

Urban population

(%)

Annual intercensal

urban growth rate

(%)

Annual intercensal

national growth rate

(%) Cook Islands 2001 14,990 63 -1.0 -2.2 Fiji Islands 1996 775,077 46 2.6 1.6 Kiribati 1995 77,658 37 2.2 2.5 Marshall Islands 1999 50,840 65 1.8 2.0 Niue 1997 2,088 35 1.2 -3.1 Palau 1995 17,225 71 2.9 2.2 Papua New Guinea 2000 5,190,786 15 4.1 4.4 Samoa 2001 176,848 35 2.0 1.0 Solomon Islands 1999 409,042 12 3.4 … Tonga 1996 97,784 32 0.8 0.6 Tuvalu 2002 9,526 47 1.7 0.5 Vanuatu 1999 193,219 21 4.3 3.0

Primary source: Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea. See www.spc.int.nc/demog/pop_data2000

1.3 Urban Strategy Vision The SDP aims to guide government decision-making and budget preparation over the 2003-2005 plan period and is entitled “Rebuilding Confidence for Stability and Growth for a Peaceful, Prosperous Fiji”. The vision that drives the SDP is based on peace and prosperity, while the mission and guiding principles focus on honesty and good governance. The SDP has established a set of strategic priorities, contributing to rebuilding confidence on the one hand and to economic growth on the other. The strategic priorities are mutually reinforcing. In socio-economic terms, the SDP aims at sustained economic growth of at least 5 % GDP growth per annum, while also reducing poverty by 5 % per annum in line with the UN millennium development goals. In spatial terms, it seeks to enhance spatial equity and calls for revitalising rural development, particularly in the outer islands. In socio-political terms the strategic priorities emphasize strengthening good governance and affirmative action. In this setting, the overriding vision for UPAP is that it must support the above strategic SDP considerations. The goal of the UPAP is to assist in achieving an efficient, effective and sustainable urban sector that can make an optimal contribution to the social, economic and environmental development of Fiji. The UPAP strategy for urban development will therefore ensure that the urban sector maximises its contribution to: • economic growth; • poverty reduction and • spatial equity With those objectives, the urban development strategy will provide support to increasing the viability of rural development, good governance and affirmative action. The above vision for UPAP recognises the constraints on government interventions within an open and market-based economy. Government’s role is not to supplant private sector and community action, but rather to provide an enabling environment within which private sector and community initiatives can flourish. Government has a major responsibility to establish such a framework in which the private sector can operate, considering the country’s unique but fragile eco-system and its strong socio-cultural tradition.


Draft/16/4/04 5

The vision for the urban strategy strongly recognises the urban economy as a major driver of the national economy, as well as the importance of economic and social rural-urban linkages. It pursues a strategic approach to underpin the further growth of the urban economy and the distribution of benefits through improved urban management and governance. These initiatives will be implemented in an incremental manner, building on the past experience in resolving urban problems in Fiji where human, technical and financial resources are limited.

1.4 UPAP linkages to SDP Strategic Priorities and Policies The SDP identified strategic priorities and policies on major cross-sectoral and sector issues, with broad performance indicators matched against each policy. These priorities and policies are to be used by line Ministries to develop their corporate plans and budget priorities. Those sector and cross-sectoral issues with major relevance to urban development are summarized in Table 1.2 below to illustrate the impact the Urban Policy Action Plan will have on the achievement of SDP objectives in a range of policy areas. For instance, in enhancing municipal services cost recovery and effectively implementing the user pay principle in urban services such as water supply, sewerage and solid waste collection and disposal, implementation of UPAP action items will contribute to improved macro-economic management. UPAP implementation actions further the strengthening of rural-urban linkages in support of rural development, and address the SDP poverty reduction, land management, micro-finance and environmental objectives in an urban setting. In enhancing the effectiveness of the institutional and legal framework governing urban development, UPAP implementation will serve the achievement of the policy objectives of the SDP area of reform of state institutions. The objectives and actions in the SDP section on Housing and Urban Development (which makes specific reference to the need for preparation of the UPAP as a key performance indicator in achieving policy objectives) were the core points of departure for UPAP preparation. All the above are amplified and translated into policy action items in the relevant specific action sections in Chapters 3 and 4 of the UPAP.

1.5 Structure of the UPAP Report The UPAP report is divided into five chapters, as follows: Chapter One provides the contextual setting for the preparation of the UPAP including the UPAP preparatory process and the relevance of the SDP as the starting point for facilitating the UPAP with key stakeholders. Chapter Two details the background of the urban sector including urbanisation trends and importance of the urban sector to national economic growth. Chapter Three examines three key thematic development areas that underpin the performance of the urban sector, namely, the urban land market, the housing market and the condition of urban infrastructure and service. Chapter Four focuses on the major cross cutting elements characterising the urban sector in Fiji including the urban environment, economic development and poverty reduction, urban planning and management, financing of urban services, and the institutional and regulatory frameworks. Implementation matrices are provided for each cutting element indicating policy objectives, actions, timeframe and key stakeholders. Chapter Five consolidates the major UPAP overarching issues and directions for their resolution including proposed actions. Based on these issues and the development areas and cross cutting issues themes in Chapters 3 and 4 respectively, four major UPAP implementation elements are identified as a means to


Draft/16/4/04 6

progress the UPAP. Policy implementation, monitoring arrangements and the ‘next steps’ are outlined.


Draft/16/4/04 7

Table 1.2: Key SDP policies relevant to UPAP Strategic priorities, sector, cross sectoral issues

Goal Major Relevant Policy Objective Relevant sections in UPAP

1 Macro Economic Management

Achieve medium term macro economic stability and favourable investment climate through fiscal and monetary policies

* promote economic growth through appropriate levels of taxation * minimize distortions * promote user pay principles * improve cost recovery measures * focus on core activities of government * continue with public enterprise reform * target expenditure to key areas that have positive impact on the economy or provide essential services * increase the proportion of capital expenditure in the budget

3.2, 3.3, 4.2,4.4, and 4.6

2 Rural and Outer Island development

Equal opportunities for all

* ensure the provision of affordable basic needs * ensure food and income security * strengthen the effectiveness of service provision

4.3, 4.4, and 4.5

3 Poverty Alleviation Poverty reduced by 5% annually

* ensure the provision of minimum and affordable basic needs all categories of the poor * formalize and strengthen the government and civil society partnership in alleviating poverty * create income earning opportunities for the poor * encourage traditional support mechanisms for the disadvantaged and provide adequate welfare support for the destitute * ensure the compilation and timely analysis of statistics on poverty

3.1, 3.2, and 4.2

4 Employment and the Labour Market

Fullest and most productive utilization of human resources

* improve job growth in the formal and informal sectors * improve productivity at the organizational, industry, sectoral and national levels

4.2 and 4.4

5 Land Resource Development and Management

Effective management of land resources to ensure sustainable development

* improve sound land management and development * ensure security of land * improve landowners access to credit * ensure sustainable utilization of land * ensure resettlement of tenants with expired leases * develop a market friendly land model under the framework of the Native Land Trust Act

3.1, 4.1, 4.3, and 4.5

6 Environment Sustainable use of natural resources

* minimize degradation of the natural resources and protect biodiversity * maintain a healthy and clean environment through the reduction and elimination of pollution and the proper management of wastes * raise awareness of the importance of sustainable development * initiate environmental audits in organizations operations

4.1 and 4.3

7 Small and Micro Enterprise

Creating livelihoods through small and micro enterprise development

* mainstream SMEs in national development * improve policies and regulations for SMEs * improve coordination of SME training/development activities * improve business support services/infrastructure

4.2 and 4.4

8 Housing and Urban Development

Affordable accommodation for all and sustainable development for urban centres

* facilitate the provision of decent affordable housing to all, especially to low income earners, through reduction of the cost of buying and building homes * significantly upgrade squatter settlements by redevelopment of squatter areas, and provision of basic amenities in current squatter settlements * strengthen government/NGO partnerships in the provision of housing and land for the urban poor * provide residential infrastructure facilities for new subdivisions * achieve sustainable development of urban centres * improve the public accountability of city and town councils * improve the performance and efficiency of city and town councils

3.2, 4.1, 4.3 and 4.7

9 Reform of State Institutions

Productive, transparent and accountable state institutions

* provide an institutional, operational and legislative framework for more accountability and transparency in policy making and in the management of public resources * increase public service efficiency and productivity by adopting the principles of good governance, including optimal transparency in decision making and accountability in provision of public services * ensure that public enterprises operate in a commercial manner and provide better quality through progressive corporatisation and eventual privatisation

3.1, 3.2, 4.1, 4.4, 4.5, and 4.6

10 Gender and Development

Develop, address and promote gender sensitive policies, issues and concerns

* mainstream gender perspectives, issues and concerns in the planning process

4.3 and 4.7

11 Water and Sewerage

Increasing access to safe drinking water and a sanitary waste disposal service

* provide access to reliable and adequate supplies of clean water for both urban and rural centres through expanding the rural water supply scheme and extension and upgrading of major urban and regional water schemes as outlined in respective master plans * provide access to sanitary and environmentally safe sewerage systems and treatment facilities * improve efficiency of water and sewerage services

3.3, 4.3 and 4.5


Draft/16/4/04 8

2 Urban Sector Background

2.1 Urbanisation Trends Fiji is already relatively urbanised. In 1986, the (underestimated3) urban population was enumerated at 277,000 persons or 38.7% of total population. By 1996, at 360,000 persons, the urban population share in the total was 46.4%. In 2002, Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) data estimated the urban population at 394,000 persons or about 48% of total population. At present the urban population share is estimated to be about half of the total, living in two cities, ten incorporated towns (each with surrounding peri-urban areas) and seven (small) unincorporated towns. One of the ten incorporated towns, Nasinu, was incorporated after the 1996 Census (and was included as a peri-urban area of Suva in the 1996 Census). While urbanisation is continuing, the rate of urban population growth has slowed significantly and is now estimated to be below 2% per annum (footnote 3). Population growth is higher in peri-urban areas than in incorporated town areas: in the 1986-96 period, peri-urban population growth averaged 3.7%, while incorporated town growth was only 1.5%. No town-specific data are available in the HIES 20024, but Divisional data and site specific information suggests that this trend is continuing, with growth differentials perhaps even becoming more marked. The main reason for the comparatively low urban (and national) population growth rates internationally is emigration from Fiji. If, for example, all emigrants would not have left, but would have moved to or stayed in urban areas, then the rates of growth of the urban population would have been: 1986-96, 4.8% instead of 2.6%; 1996–2002, 3.6% instead of 1.5%. The quantitative importance of this factor is further illustrated by the fact that the number of emigrants during 1986-96 was some 22.9% of the 1996 urban population and was about equal to the recorded growth in urban population during 1986-96. Net emigration from Fiji has continued to dominate the demographic landscape after 1996, with cumulative net emigration of some 57,600 persons during 1996–2002 (10,900 households equivalent). In comparison, the total number of urban households/housing units grew during the same period by almost 16,000 to 83,600 in 2002. In 1986, Greater Suva (defined as running from Nausori to Navua) held 63.1% of the urban population. By 1996, that percentage had dropped to 59.2% and Divisional HIES data for 2002 imply that its share has dropped further to some 57.4%. Thus, urban population growth rates in Suva and Greater Suva have been below those in other areas (except for Lautoka, which is the only other urban area whose share dropped during 1986-96). Most urban areas outside the central areas of Greater Suva have grown significantly faster. Towns with annual population growth rates during 1986-96 significantly above the average are (in descending order): Nadi (7.3%), Savusavu (5.6%), Sigatoka (5.2%), Nausori (4.5%), Navua (4.2%) and Ba (3.7%) had relatively high growth

3 as the urban/rural census tract classification from the 1976 census was used, rather than updating it, as was done just prior to the 1996 census. The 2002-2003 HIES in urban areas used the 1996 classification. Adjustments for this would lower the 1986-96 growth rate, possibly significantly, and raise the 1996 -2002 growth rate, but only marginally. All that can be said with certainty is that the urban population growth rate before 1996 was above 2% p.a. but that it has now dropped to below 2% p.a. 4 the HIES sample size was too small to permit reliable estimates at town level; the lowest level at which reliable inferences can be made is the Divisional level.


Draft/16/4/04 9

rates. The 2002 HIES Divisional data suggest declines in these growth rates thereafter, however, particularly for Nadi and Sigatoka. Only Lami and Lautoka, two towns with below average overall growth during 1986-96, had growth rates in peri-urban areas below those within the incorporated town itself. For the above noted high growth towns, growth rates were much higher in the peri-urban areas, e.g Nadi (11.2%), Savusavu (12.8%), Sigatoka (9.1%), Nausori (6.2%) and Ba (8.4%). Nasinu is now the second largest town in Fiji, with about 21% of the total urban population, about equal in size to Suva, although Suva remains the largest when peri-urban areas are included. As a result of Nasinu’s incorporation, incorporated towns now contain some 65% of the urban population, with peri-urban areas having 30% and un-incorporated town areas 5%. Urban population densities vary considerably but are low by international urban standards, and moderate by Pacific urban standards.

2.2 The Urban Economy and Urban Poverty Fiji’s economy is still predominantly resource based, with resource based sectors contributing about 70% of exports, 50% of employment nation-wide, and 30% of GDP in 2003. However, a process of inter-sectoral restructuring is ongoing, with medium-term relative declines in the share of the important sugar and garment sectors, and with tourism and related services emerging as a major growth sector, as well as other services. In part this is caused by Fiji specific factors, as they relate to the international competitive environment for sugar and garments, as well as to the country’s tourism potential relative to comparable tourism destinations. More fundamentally, a structural economic transformation is at work: as the economy grows, the relative importance of the manufacturing and services sectors (with relatively high levels of productivity) increase, whereas that of the primary sector (in which generally lower productivity gains can be achieved) declines. Urbanisation is the spatial translation of such a structural economic transformation. As noted in section 2.1 above, urbanisation is proceeding steadily, although the available data suggests that the rate of urban growth is decreasing. The primary contributing factor to this growth is agricultural push, fuelled by the expiry and non-renewal of Agriculture Landlord and Tenant Act (ALTA) leases on rural native land and the decline of the sugar sector. Urban economic pull factors are not yet very pronounced (pull factors as exist are primarily social, related to health care provision and educational opportunities). The urban economy predominantly provides industrial processing, services and market support functions for agriculture, fisheries and tourism (farm-to-market and other rural-urban linkages are important). There is limited non agro-based industry in urban areas, although some industrial and service activity is based on the urban consumer market. The urban economy has seen a growing importance of the informal sector (small-scale and unlicensed trading and manufacturing) during the last 5 years. The above noted continuing net emigration out of Fiji, probably consisting largely of well-qualified urban-based individuals and their dependents, during the last decades has mitigated urban population growth and the related demand for urban services and housing. However, it has also slowed down the growth of the economy, particularly the urban economy, to which these skilled emigrants would otherwise have contributed. The coups in 1987 and in May 2000 temporarily accelerated this


Draft/16/4/04 10

impact and provided a shock to both domestic and overseas investors’ confidence. Since 2000, with stability returning, investor confidence appears to be returning as well, as indicated by the strong growth of the (largely urban) construction sector in 2002 (8% in current value terms, as compared to overall growth of GDP at factor cost of 4.1%), with an even stronger growth estimated for 2003 (16%, as compared to overall growth of 5%). A conservatively estimated contribution of the urban economy to national GDP in 2003 puts this at approximately 60% at present, compared to an urban population share of about 50%. With urbanisation and the above socio-economic trends, poverty is urbanising too. A 1997 interpretation by the UNDP of the 1990-91 HIES data indicated that 27.6% of the urban households had incomes below the then poverty line of F$ 100 per urban household per week. An updated urban poverty line estimate is F$ 147 per urban household per week in 2002. According to the 2002-03 HIES urban income distribution data, 29.3% of urban households had incomes below this income level. Comparable 1996 census and 2002-03 HIES urban unemployment data show that urban unemployment has increased by 122% in absolute terms, and from 7.8 % of the urban labour force in 1996 to 14.4% in 2002. In the greater Suva area the number of recipients of the Family Assistance Scheme has increased by almost 50% from 1998 to 2002. Thus, a sizeable and growing segment of the urban population suffers from one or more of the manifold manifestations of poverty.

2.3 The Urban Environment Fiji possesses a delicate ecosystem - a function of its location, small size and isolation, which has resulted in a diverse ecosystem, richly endowed with natural resources. However, at the same time Fiji relies heavily on the exploitation of these same natural resources for its economic well-being (be it mineral extraction, timber production, water extraction or tourism). In the past, this has led to tensions between the need for exploitation of these resources to satisfy the requirements of economic development, and the protection of the environment. With urban growth, the environment of Fiji is increasingly under threat, and a significant contributor to this threat is increased urban activity. Contributory factors to the poor and deteriorating urban environment can be summarized as: • Unclear and conflicting ownership and use rights over critical national resources; • An inadequate and weak legislative and regulatory framework, absence of quality

standards and poor coordination between agencies responsible for protecting the environment in general and urban environment in particular;

• Inadequate resources within the key regulatory agency (MLGHSSE) to effectively regulate environmental management;

• Continuing urbanisation, and associated pressure on land and particularly the coastal zone;

• Inadequate environmental planning controls and enforcement of existing planning and land use controls;

• Inadequate funding for construction, operation and maintenance of urban environmental infrastructure and services;

• Poor monitoring and control of industrial discharges and emissions • Increasing air pollution from (i) increasing traffic congestion, (ii) poorly controlled

industrial and vehicular emissions, and (iii) unpaved roads; • Inadequate collection, treatment and disposal of domestic wastewater and of

municipal solid waste.


Draft/16/4/04 11

A threat to both urban and coastal environments is the extensive squatting on foreshore reserves and into mangrove areas, and in some cases the development of approved land reclamation schemes in these areas. This (i) destroys mangrove eco-systems and hence threatens the reef system, (ii) threatens the delicate foreshore environment, and, (iii) results in pollution of both groundwater and surface water. Major contributors to the pollution of land are: (i) randomly dumped (by individuals or commercial operations) solid waste within and around urban areas, and (ii) the lack of sanitary solid waste disposal facilities which means that final disposal methods further contributes to land pollution5. Furthermore, land polluting major industries such as sugar, timber processing, cement, brewery and a range of other agro-processing and manufacturing industries are invariably located in or near to municipal areas, and dispose of what is often toxic industrial waste to roadside drains, rivers, streams and open spaces. The inappropriate disposal of waste oil is also a problem. As a result of the direct discharge of (frequently untreated) wastewater to land and water bodies, surface and ground water pollution presents a significant environmental problem in many of the urban areas in Fiji. In particular, surface waters (both coastal and riverine) are moderately to severely polluted by domestic wastewater, industrial effluent (especially from sugar refining) and solid waste dumping. Ground water in most urban areas is contaminated due to seepage from septic tanks and pit latrines. Studies of water quality from shallow aquifers around urban areas in Fiji have found that human waste pollution of these aquifers have reduced their water quality below acceptable standards for human consumption. Air pollution is a significant and emerging issue in the major urban areas due to a combination of industrial emissions (e.g. from the cement factory at Lami), car exhaust fumes from areas of congestion (Suva, Nadi) and the continuing existence of unpaved roads in urban areas.

2.4 Urban Land Fiji has three types of land ownership, namely, native, crown and freehold land. Native land is classified as either native reserve or native (non-reserve) land. Nationally, approximately 90% of all land is native land (1,651,266 ha), 2% is crown land (31,195 ha) and 8% freehold land (147, 448 ha.). In urban areas in 2002, freehold land, crown and Native Land Trust Board (NLTB) leases accounted for 58.7% of land tenure arrangements, 41.3% of land holdings being traditional, vakavanua informal and extra-legal (illegal developments on crown and freehold lands). Land is an essential ingredient to maintaining a robust and healthy urban economy. It assists in underpinning the performance of the housing industry as well as providing the necessary support for the development of commercial, retail and industrial activities. The small formal private sector is currently constrained in its activities in the land and housing sector by: (i) long development application process delays, particularly for water and sewerage approvals, and (ii) the fact that complex native land management arrangements provides little incentive and security for the private sector to expand and grow.

5 The operation of the new landfill solid waste disposal site at Naboro intended to start by late 2004, and related strengthening of municipal solid waste collection in the Greater Suva area is likely to bring about significant improvements in this.


Draft/16/4/04 12

With native land mixed with state and freehold land in urban areas and the rapidly expanding peri-urban areas comprising predominately native land, the land market is heavily distorted by informal land tenure arrangements and institutional failure. The issue is not one of absolute land shortage, but an inability to get adequately serviced and affordable land onto the market in a timely and serviced manner. This trend has resulted in high cost land and housing development on the limited freehold land, and escalating informal and squatter developments on native and crown lands (see section 2.5 below). The growing demand for affordable land in the market is also reflected in the growing waiting lists of housing agencies (section 2.5). On native land, urban land supply is produced through: (i) highly formal systems where Government institutions, primarily NLTB, are the main actors via enforcement of rules and regulations, which set the entry level into the formal market, and (ii) traditional informal systems resulting from negotiations between the landowner, landowning unit and vakavanua tenant. In accordance with Section 4 of the Native Land Trust Act, 1940, the NLTB legally controls and administers native land on behalf of the native landowners. However, NLTB estimates (2003) that in the greater Suva urban area, 80% of native reserve lands, that is, areas set aside for the maintenance, sustenance and support of the communal land owning units, are now occupied by informal settlements (vakavanua settlers) alongside land owning units. This take-up of land without the involvement of the NLTB by informal (vakavanua) developments approved by landowners represents major unplanned commitments on large tracts of native land in urban areas. . On crown lands, squatters take advantage of the state being an absentee landowner, knowing that eviction is unlikely, while formalization of land tenure, and/or development of housing sites and services is currently proceeding on a piecemeal basis (see section 2.5). On freehold land, squatters occupy vacant sites, knowing that the legal process to evict them is costly, the LC and national government take no responsibility for residents squatting, and political pressure is often brought to bear on landowners to let squatters remain on site. Estimates from Census and HIES data suggest that presently approximately 70-80% of annual land development is produced informally. On native lands, tenants negotiate agreements with landowners, in consultation with other landowners of the land owning unit (mataqali). This normally involves part cash or reciprocal social and economic obligations from tenants to landowners.

2.5 Urban Housing Overall physical housing conditions in Fiji have improved in the aggregate in both rural and urban areas during the last inter-censal decade 1986-96. Housing densities, as measured by the number of persons per house, went down in both urban and rural areas during the inter-censal period, strongly dominated by the impact of cumulative net-emigration from Fiji during this period (as noted in section 2.1 above). The comparative 1986-96 data further suggest average gains on most indicators for urban housing adequacy, with increased access to electricity, water and sewerage services in urban areas. The one major exception is adequacy of tenure, which saw a marked deterioration during the period. Housing conditions in urban squatter areas and in urban native villages were below the urban average in 1996, predictably more for squatter areas than for native villages. The same applied to socially vulnerable groups such as women-headed households and disabled persons.


Draft/16/4/04 13

Urban HIES data for 2002-03 suggests that the above trends have continued during the last few years, with further aggregate improvements in the average number of persons per house in urban areas and access to urban services since 1996. However, the proportion of squatter households out of total urban households increased from 5.5% (about 3,700 households) in 1996 to 10.3% (8,600 households) in 2002. Urban households living in settlements numbered 22,200 in 2002 (or 26.6% of all urban households). The number of households living in urban villages in 2002 was 3,700 (4.5% of the urban total). Therefore, a total of 41.4% of the urban population lived in informally developed areas in that year. All these areas have in common that good quality housing is interspersed with bad quality housing, that access to infrastructure and services (particularly sewerage, roads and foot paths) is inadequate, and that security of land tenure is uncertain (at least for squatters and vakavanua tenants). As indicated by survey data on informal housing and squatter areas from a variety of sources, a sizeable proportion of households living in these areas are likely to be classified as households with incomes below the poverty line, as is suggested by the fact that average household incomes in squatter areas were 60% of the urban average according to the 2002-2003 urban HIES. Most of new urban housing built during the during the 1996-2002 period - some 2,700 units (net) per year on average - was developed by households themselves. Approximately about 80 % of this housing was in the informal sector, i.e. without planning and building permits or completion certificates. Developer-built multi-unit housing amounted to a minor proportion of additions to the urban housing stock, while public sector land and housing delivery came to an almost complete standstill during the period. The 2003 MLGHSSE inventory of 182 squatter areas indicates a total number of 13,700 squatter households nation-wide, or a very significant increase over the 2002-03 HIES figure6. Surveys in selected squatter and informal housing areas in 2002 also suggests that these areas are rapidly growing, and that housing conditions in these areas continue to be significantly worse than average. Despite the above-noted improvements in aggregate housing stock utilisation during the last 15 years, there is clearly pressure in the low income end of the urban housing market, as indicated by the above noted growth in informal areas, densification in informal settlements on native lands, in squatter areas, in HA/PRB flats and housing estates and growing waiting lists at the HA, PRB and HART. This pressure is further confirmed by responses to HA advertisements for plot sales. The above trends all suggest a growing inequity in the housing market, with supply slack vacancy at the top and excess demand pressure at the bottom. Visual impressions suggest that the low-income housing market pressure is most significant in the Greater Suva (particularly in Nasinu and its peri-urban areas) and Lautoka areas, given the absolute size of these urban areas. Similar pressure is likely to emerge in smaller towns growing relatively more rapidly, such as Nadi, for instance. Much of this demand is constrained by urban poverty levels and lack of affordable formal urban housing supply. Formal housing supply is only approximately 20% of total supply in the past few years, or about 540 units per year on average, and most of this has been beyond low-income households’ affordability levels.

6 However, this may, in part, be caused by definitional differences. The Census and HIES define a “squatter” household in terms of living conditions commonly associated with squatter areas, while recognising that some such households may not be squatters in a legal sense, i.e. a household illegally occupying land. MLGHSSE data include squatters on crown land and on native land, even though in the latter case these households have virtually always settled with the permission of the native land owner (vakavanua tenure).


Draft/16/4/04 14

Developable land in urban and peri-urban areas is presently largely restricted to native land and native reserve land (for the purpose of the discussion hereunder generically called native lands), as noted in section 2.4 above. There is virtually no undeveloped crown or freehold land available at prices, which will enable sustainable formal housing development for low-income groups. Therefore, the source of land supply for low-income housing will predominantly be native land. As a result of the urban low-income housing demand pressure and the limited ability of formal housing development processes to respond, informal (vakavanua) agreements between land occupants and native land owning units are increasingly common (as noted in section 2.4 above). Tenants build their own house and often live interspersed with landowners. Such informal developments generally suffer from low housing quality, land tenure insecurity, lack of access to formal housing finance, and inadequate urban services. This is in part because (i) local governments are reluctant to service such areas (where a sizeable part of the population does not have a formal land title and does not pay rates or utility charges), and (ii) because the NLTB, the custodian of native lands, only wants to be involved in ‘formal’ land development. Electricity and water supply is generally provided upon demand, with certification from the landowner, and subject to technical constraints, while the Public Works Department (PWD) often experiences problems in extending sewerage into these areas.

2.6 Infrastructure and Services Provision The provision of urban infrastructure and services and their management, operation and maintenance is primarily the combined responsibility of the national government (particularly PWD) and municipal local governments (see section 2.9 below for details). In addition, urban infrastructure is provided by developers (both government and non-government agencies), as part of the sub-division of land for housing and commercial development. The overall level of services and infrastructure within towns is generally adequate. Data available from local governments and PWD on the extent and coverage of infrastructure for the incorporated urban areas, and water supply information for some unincorporated towns that benefit from a mains water supply network, indicate that 98% of urban households are served by household water supply connections, 90% by adequate (water-sealed) sanitation facilities and 95% by electricity connections. By comparison, data from the 2002 urban HIES suggests that 96% of all urban households are served by household water supply connections, 79.3% by adequate (water-sealed) sanitation facilities and 90.4% by electricity connections. This indicates a lower level of service provision in the non-incorporated towns and peri-urban areas than within the incorporated urban areas. The ADB-supported Suva-Nausori Water Supply and Sewerage Project agreed in late 2003 will address some of these service deficiencies with respect to water supply and sewerage, as well as addressing some of the related information gaps. All incorporated towns (and some unincorporated settlements) are served by a solid waste collection system with collection frequencies varying between daily and semi-weekly. Disposal is to open dumps in all cases – although the new landfill facility nearing completion at Naboro will serve the greater Suva Area (and possibly other urban areas) upon commissioning in late 2004. Although detailed data on urban road and drainage networks is unavailable, road networks in the incorporated towns comprise predominantly paved (asphalted


Draft/16/4/04 15

concrete or bituminous surface-treated) carriageways, generally reasonably well maintained. In central areas these roads are invariably accompanied by paved pedestrian footpaths and benefit from street lighting. Urban drainage comprises a combination of unimproved natural channels and open concrete or rip-rap-(rubble masonry-) lined drains and underground concrete storm drains in commercial areas, generally also in reasonable conditions. Intra-urban and inter-urban public transport is entirely operated by the private sector and appears to provide a reasonably efficient and affordable service for that sector of the urban population that relies on public transport. Most towns are too small to suffer from major traffic management problems, although the Greater Suva area (where vehicle ownership is reportedly 665v/1000p) is now of a size where congestion is becoming an issue during peak hours in the commercial centre. Minor traffic congestion is also a feature of Nadi and Lautoka commercial centres. Cane trucks contribute to congestion and accelerate road damage in the towns that are sugar production centres in areas of sugar cane cultivation. Although levels of infrastructure and services can be said to be generally adequate in the incorporated towns, the same cannot generally be stated for the urbanized peri-urban areas outside town boundaries, or for some of the (unimproved) squatter areas within the towns. These areas are generally characterized by lower levels of service – particularly for sanitation, drainage and road access, - and frequently by poor environmental conditions. In addition, there is a mis-match between the levels of service provided to formal settlements within municipal boundaries and to informal settlements and Fijian native villages either enclosed within, or adjacent to towns – for which urban local bodies do not have responsibility. Expenditure on operation and maintenance (O&M) and capital works varies considerably between municipalities, and exact figures on O&M expenditures are difficult to disaggregate from other operating expenditures. In percentage terms, the capital works expenditure (averaging over 16 percent of budget) compares reasonably well with local government expenditures in other countries of similar socio-economic conditions, particularly in view of the relatively limited range of development responsibilities falling to local governments. However, these are percentages of a low base, and as the sector grows, the demand for development funds will increase dramatically. Furthermore, expenditures on O&M appear insufficient to adequately maintain infrastructure and services, and limited information on current assets makes calculation of the required levels of expenditure for preventive maintenance highly problematic. As noted above, the Suva-Nausori Water Supply and Sewerage Project will address some of the information gaps in this regard.

2.7 Current Urban Planning and Management Arrangements The Town Planning Act and the Subdivision of Land Act provide the legal framework for physical planning in the 12 incorporated urban areas of Fiji. Under the auspices of the MLGHSSE-DTCP, town planning schemes and land use plans form the main tools of urban planning. Thus, the development assessment of land use, buildings and subdivision by both local and national government tends to be the main activity of planning and development systems. The current planning systems have little or no urban management capability, as a preoccupation with day-to-day issues such as development assessment and land disputes means that strategic planning and policy issues rarely make it on to the agenda. Regulatory processes dominate, and largely


Draft/16/4/04 16

centralized, lengthy approval processes have negative impacts on the costs and affordability of urban development. As noted in section 2.3 above, the urban environment is under increasing threat from traffic pollution, industrial discharge, destruction of mangroves and filling of wetlands, increased and polluted runoff, and inadequate collection, treatment and disposal of domestic wastewater and solid waste. However, there is also a lack of strategic vision of where urban development should be in terms of environmental outcomes to be achieved. Given the dominance of native lands as the potential source of land supply for urban development (section 2.4 above), this is a major issue. The existing policy and institutional framework for the control and regulation of urban development is outdated and inadequate to meet the major challenges of urban growth management.

2.8 Current Urban Financing Arrangements As noted in section 2.6 above, current principles of practice are that national government provides and operates all local infrastructure and services in areas that are not incorporated. These services can be at lower rural- based standards, but need to be raised to urban standards prior to incorporation. After incorporation, the national government continues to provide and operate education, health, electricity, water and sewerage services, and it also is meant to continue to maintain national roads. The LCs provide all other services in incorporated areas. Exact data on national government service provision costs in urban areas is not available, for lack of analysis separating its urban and rural investments and associated costs (in the context of the implementation of the ADB-supported Suva-Nausori Water Supply and Sewerage Project, rural-urban coverage differentials for water supply and sewerage will be documented). Data that are available to date show that central government gross (and net) investment costs for water and sanitation are several times higher than all costs borne by the local councils together. When education and health are added, the extent of the difference is even higher. To date, there has been little cost recovery in the national government funded areas, although this is now beginning to be addressed for water and sewerage in the context of the Suva-Nausori Water Supply and Sewerage Project. The services provided by the local councils are paid for by user charges, fees or rates on property owners/leasers. In general, these services are not provided in peri-urban areas, but the residents of those areas do make use of some services provided in the incorporated towns, paying service charges as required (e.g. for garbage collection). Charitable bodies and the government’s un-leased land are exempt from general rates. No rates are raised on land in peri-urban areas or unincorporated towns. All councils have an accumulated level of arrears in payment of rates of about 70% of annual rate receivables. For the newest town council, Nasinu Town Council, the arrears rate is significantly higher. Major municipal investments are funded by loans from local banks, backed by the fixed or liquid assets of the municipality. Loans are repaid out of a special loan rate levy. Some local councils are concerned with borrowing, noting that the special rates required are unaffordable. Analysis of incorporated town accounts provides little backing for this and shows no correlation between the size of the town and the level of the rates. Of the towns with outstanding debt, only one, a town with specific


Draft/16/4/04 17

economic problems, has a problematic debt-coverage ratio. There is a positive correlation between the level of the rate and the proportion of the incorporated town’s population in the town’s total urban population. The implication is that extending towns’ boundaries would help to allow decreases in property rates.

2.9 Current Institutional and Governance Setting The institutional framework for urban development, urban management and governance is complex and has a number of grey areas. There are a variety of mandates and jurisdictions for different tiers of authority for urban development, with government involved in varying roles as planner, regulator and service coordinator and deliverer (see Table 2.1 below). At the national level, the National Planning Office within the MFNP is responsible for national sector planning. While Fiji has a comprehensive set of national objectives and a planning system to deal with national development, as set down in the Strategic Development Plan (SDP) 2003-2005, it does not yet have in place a comprehensive system for setting urban objectives and urban development priorities at the macro level.

Table 2.1: Current Institutional Framework for Urban Development Urban Development Function Local Level National Level Specialized Government

Agency Land registration Local Councils Ministry of Local Government Housing Squatter

Settlements and Environment; Ministry of Lands and Minerals; Registrar of Titles

Land use, planning schemes, EIA, subdivision

Local Councils Ministry of Local Government Housing Squatter Settlements and Environment, Ministry of Lands and Minerals; Ministry of Works and Energy; Rural Local Authority

Land development Ministry of Lands and Minerals (crown lands) Ministry of Local Government Housing Squatter Settlements and Environment;; Ministry of Works and Energy; Rural Local Authority

Native Land Trust Board; Housing Authority (freehold and native lands)

Public housing Housing Authority Public Rental Board, HART

Housing finance Housing Authority Public health and social welfare

Local Councils Ministry of Health Ministry of Fijian Affairs

Rural Local Authority Provincial Councils

Building Local Councils Ministry of Health Rural Local Authority Provincial Councils

Roads Local Councils Ministry of Works and Energy; Ministry of Regional Development

Water and sanitation Public Works Dept. Ministry of Health

Rural Local Authority

Drainage Local Councils Ministry of Agriculture National and local government are involved in the land use planning and development process. Key agencies are the city/town councils and DTCP within MLGHSSE as regulators of planning, land and subdivision decisions made at the local level. As noted in section 2.7 above, with the exception of Suva and Lautoka, DTCP is responsible for managing the approval of subdivision for all of Fiji. Government adopts a key role in facilitating land for urban development through the NLTB and plays a ‘hands on’ role in land development and housing through the HA, PRB and HART. MLGHSSE is also directly involved in a number of programmes for the upgrading and regularizing of squatter settlements on crown lands in selected urban areas. In the formal development of native lands, landowners are involved in all of the above agency decisions. The 12 incorporated towns are governed by local councils, comprising of elected representatives, supported by a council establishment of varying size headed up by the Town Clerk. The councils are responsible for providing a range of local municipal services such as garbage collection, waste disposal, local road construction and


Draft/16/4/04 18

maintenance, drainage, health, building, planning and engineering control. Water, sanitation and major roads are provided by the national government in the designated 12 local government areas via the PWD. Oversight of enforcement of the building code is within the mandate of the Ministry of Health, although it is proposed by Government to transfer this to the Department of Local Government, MLGHSSE (notwithstanding that the Department has no jurisdiction over rural local authorities and provincial councils). In the peri-urban areas, development is under the overlapping jurisdiction of a myriad of central government agencies. The effective management of government agencies that serve the peri-urban and rural areas is confused by the array of differing administrative boundaries (provinces, districts, regions to divisions) that are used for individual ministry planning and implementation. The key local agencies in the peri-urban areas are the rural local authorities under the auspices of the Ministry of Health. However, the rural local authorities exist in name only as they are essentially overseeing committees of some 16-18 members appointed by the Central Board of Health and administrated by the Ministry of Health. The rural local authorities essentially manage sanitary districts and can organize garbage collection (such as via agreements with the adjoining town or city council), maintain minor public works, and undertake environmental health programs and building inspections. Other key agencies in the peri-urban areas include DTCP for subdivision and land use approval, MRD for disbursing regional development monies for investment projects, Ministry of Fijian Affairs for native Fijian village development and PWD for the development of water supply, sewerage and roads. Despite the establishment of special planning bodies, such as the rural local authorities, coordination and integration amongst agencies is lacking. The Department of Local Government within the MLGHSSE plays no role in the peri-urban areas, as local government under its jurisdiction (as per LGA) is limited to the incorporated towns. Within the urban local government boundaries as well as in peri-urban areas, traditional Fijian villages exist. These Fijian villages are independent from local council jurisdiction - that is, they are excluded from their boundaries although contained within the wider local Government area - as well as excluded from national land use planning control administered by the DTCP within MLGSSE. They are administratively controlled by their chiefs and provincial councils established under the authority of the Ministry of Fijian Affairs. Like the rural local authorities, the provincial councils are composed of local chiefs, villagers and representatives of various national government agencies and effectively represent the administrative arm of central government, including undertaking the distribution of development funds from national government. If it is accepted that: (i) local municipal government is best placed to plan, provide and maintain the majority of urban services at the local community level: (ii) with any increased responsibility, roles and power to local government must come improved management capacity and ‘checks and balances’ for accountability; and (iii) there needs to be a sharing of responsibility and power from central government to local government, then there is a strong case for devolving powers and responsibilities for urban management from central to local government. Local regulatory and service functions such as provision of squatter housing currently undertaken by central government, for example, are best done by local government with necessary resource support. On the other hand, in the context of a relatively small island state


Draft/16/4/04 19

like Fiji, maintaining national government responsibility for water supply, sewerage, primary roads and electricity supply, is justified by arguments of economies of scale. Urban governance, the way in which decisions affecting urban areas are made by government, privates sector and civil society, is at the embryonic stage of development in Fiji. The concept of good urban governance involves the establishment of effective systems and processes for the mobilization and utilization of physical, economic, socio-cultural and human resources in urban areas in order to better manage, use and develop such resources in a sustainable manner so as to provide better urban outcomes for all. Modern and traditional governance systems exist side by side at all levels in Fiji, as reflected in native Fijian villages alongside regular communities under local council jurisdiction within local council areas. However, participatory governance, including the promotion of equity, efficiency, partnerships, transparency and accountability to the community and awareness of rights and opportunities, is at an initial stage of development and implementation by both government and wider civil society in the urban areas.

2.10 Current Legal Framework for Urban Development There are more than ten pieces of current legislation that relate or impact on land use planning and development in Fiji and the local councils have to deal with a total of 32 Acts in conducting their day-to-day business. However, while there are specific pieces of legislation and systems for subdivision of land and town planning (only marginally modified since their enactment during pre-independence) as noted below, there is no single piece of legislation that provides for overall planning and management of urban and rural development. With regard to the operations of local councils, the current legislation is outdated and inadequate to cover their roles and responsibilities. The MLGHSSE is responsible for the administration of three of the four key pieces of current legislation governing urban development, i.e. it is responsible for the Local Government Act, the Town Planning Act and the Subdivision of Land Act. However, although the local councils come under the ambit of the MLGHSSE, all their public health duties and responsibilities are governed by the Public Health Act, administered by the Ministry of Health. Under the Town Planning Act, local council functions include the review of development proposals and the review and enforcement of planning schemes. The Act allows DTCP to prepare a scheme, should the local municipal authority lack the capacity or resources to do so. With the exception of Suva and Lautoka, this is the rule in practice. Development proposals not conforming to an approved scheme (where this exits) require the approval of the Director of Town and Country Planning. The Land Subdivision Act regulates the sub-division of land and is supplemented by planning standards prepared by the DTCP (under the General Provisions in the Act), as well by by-laws of the local council. The DTCP currently assumes full responsibility for implementing the Subdivision Act in all existing town council jurisdictions, while the City Councils of Suva and Lautoka have primary responsibility in their respective areas. Apart from the plethora of outdated and inconsistent legislation, an operationally relevant issue is the interpretation and enforceability of the legislation. Conflicts of custom and usage that are incompatible with the legislation occur frequently.


Draft/16/4/04 20

3 UPAP Thematic Developmental Areas

3.1 Urban Land Market Development Goal: To ensure that an adequate supply of land is available to facilitate urban development, a robust land market and affordable housing Given the need to develop a stronger enabling environment including more effective institutions in the land development process, the keys to increasing the supply of serviced land that meets market needs are: • greater involvement of landowners; • development of strengthened partnerships between key stakeholders, and • revised policy settings by key institutions such as the NLTB, PWD and HA. With the supply of freehold and crown lands now being essentially exhausted in formal urban areas and native lands forming the basis of development in growing peri-urban areas, the role of the NLTB in ensuring an effective urban land supply is paramount. A major new focus of NLTB will be to assemble more flexible and pragmatic development packages with landowners, so as to meet their varying social and economic circumstances. The expansion of informal housing on native lands of which the NLTB is custodian, is a symptom that the NLTB is not meeting the full range of needs in the market. Options which the NLTB will pursue vigorously include: • assisting in joint ventures including involvement of local government producing

land with NLTB supported by central government; • taking a lead role in applying revised policy such as repackaging up front capital

for development and infrastructure costs, into pilot projects; • packaging of premium payments, fast track lease processing, access to finance

institutions and interested private developers, and • generally, provide a situation for landowners to have greater choice in the

development process where NLTB feels that landowners are quite capable of managing their own lands.

There is a clear need by all government institutions involved in the urban development sector to understand the social and economic needs of landowners, land owning units. and the market generally. Institutions including the NLTB must respond with greater commitment and flexibility for the formal land supply process to be more efficient than at present in meeting household needs, especially for lower income families. Landowners need advisory support and advice to guide them through the planning and development process, including financial assistance in packaging development proposals. The NLTB and other key players will take a more proactive approach in bringing land onto the market especially for low-income groups. If no action is taken, informal developments will continue to escalate in a haphazard and unplanned manner on both native and crown lands, causing major long-term problems for both the NLTB and landowners generally. Strengthening partnerships and assembling key stakeholders in the urban development process in more innovative ways than at present, is the key objective to be addressed in the short term. Whilst noting human resource capacity constraints, strengthening the land planning and facilitation role of NLTB in partnership with HA, PWD, PRB, MLGHSSE and local government, is vital to this outcome. A tool to achieve a better land supply is to operationalise a formal urban land development programme, comprising all key stakeholders so as to achieve the orderly and timely supply of land to meet agreed annual land targets. In this context, the NLTB has


Draft/16/4/04 21

already taken the initiative to prepare a Land Development Programme 2002-2009 and a Greater Suva Land Use Study (2003). Both these documents will be mainstreamed and operationalized as management tools with key stakeholders in a process that delivers agreed goals as a matter of priority.


Draft/16/4/04 22

Policy matrix 3.1 Urban Land Market Development Objectives Actions/activities Monitorable benchmarks Actors Timeline Formal Land Supply and the NLTB (i) To ensure the NLTB can deliver an effective and timely supply of native lands for urban development especially affordable lands (ii) To provide landowners with alternative development packages to formally develop their lands (iii) To strengthen and develop partnerships between NLTB and landowners, HA, private sector, local and central governments

(i) Develop strengthening program with NLTB which incorporates: * mainstreaming the NLTB’s formal urban land development program and Greater Suva land Use Study involving key stakeholders * ‘fast track’ proactive process for landowners * identification and application of development incentives for landowners * innovative NLTB pilot projects and partnerships including local government * packaging of affordable development projects including review of standards * formulation of community education and awareness program with landowners

(i) urban land development program in place by NLTB and delivering range of land (ii) new land development processes and options in place with landowners and local government (iii) new development and co-financing arrangements mainstreamed within 1 year (iv) community education and awareness program operational (v) NLTB, local and central government pilot project for low income lots implemented within 2 years and up scaled

NLTB, PWD, MLGHSSE, landowners, HA, PRB, MFA, Local Governments

Q 3-4, 2004 to Q3-4 2006

The Informal Urban Land Development Sector (i) To ensure awareness on the roles, responsibilities and obligations of stakeholders in the urban development process (ii) To promote security of tenure and provision of services and infrastructure in informal developments

(i) Agree and implement community education and awareness program and provision of coordinated advice including: * agreeing major affected stakeholders, including freehold land owners * identifying institutional and legal responsibilities and roles of stakeholders * identifying key informal sector issues and concerns from the perspectives of key stakeholders * establishing ‘one stop’ shop for informal sector development inquires and advice

(i) Focal point for informal sector development inquires and information operational (ii) Community education and awareness program in place and effective with stakeholders, both collectively and individually

NLTB, PWD, MLGHSSE, landowners, HA, PRB, HART, Fijian Affairs, Ministry of Health, Local Governments

Q 3-4, 2004 to Q3-4, 2006

Private Sector Land Development (i) To provide opportunities for increased formal private sector development (ii) To enhance the enabling environment in which formal private sector development takes place (ii) To strengthen partnerships between central government, private sector, local government and landowners

(i) Increase where possible the proportion of crown lands made available annually for private sector development including HART and PRB (ii) Undertake Government and private sector joint venture land development on crown and native lands (iii) develop key foreshore land parcels with private sector) in partnership with local Government (iv) review opportunities for private sector taking the lead in providing land/housing finance rather than government agencies (for example, HA)

(i) Crown lands identified and advertised for private sector - non government development within 3 years (ii) Specific site opportunities identified /agreed for private sector /Government development (iii) Key urban foreshore leases transferred to local Government/ private sector

NLTB, PWD, MLGHSSE, landowners, HA, PRB, Fijian Affairs, Ministry of Health, Local Governments, Min. of Lands

mid 2005 to mid- 2006

Planning Processes for Land Supply (i) To develop effective national, metropolitan and local government planning processes to ensure adequate land supply (ii) To establish mechanisms by which key stakeholders are formally involved in the land supply process

(i) establish national and Suva and Lautoka/Nadi ‘metropolitan’ planning group to guide and direct strategic planning for land supply in key urban centres (ii) develop formal urban land development program as key tool for facilitating land supply/urban development (iii) revise formal land supply processes including role of MLGHSSE in subdivision process, and role of LC in planning process (iv) revise legislation to follow policy changes (v) embrace good governance and participatory principles in revised planning process arrangements (vi) balance new rules and regulations on land planning and development with guidelines, information and awareness

(i) National and metropolitan planning group/s established and operational within 1 year (ii) urban land development program in place with metropolitan planning group within 1 year (iii) land supply processes revised and in place (iv) policy changes for land supply endorsed as basis for legislative amendments

NLTB, PWD, MLGHSSE, landowners, HA, PRB, Local Governments, Ministry of Finance

Q 3-4, 2004 to Q3-4 2005 Q 3-4, 2004 to Q 3-4 2005 end 2006 end 2006


Draft/16/4/04 23

3.2 Housing Market Development Goal: affordable housing for all Since the mid-1980s the government has gradually reduced direct intervention in public housing for low-income groups. The focus has increasingly been on creating an enabling environment for private housing development through the provision of serviced sites, support to the NGO HART in developing housing for destitute families, through squatter settlements upgrading and interventions in housing finance. The Housing Authority (HA) currently has an annual plot delivery target of 500 plots. The Public Rental Board envisages a delivery of about 100 new rental units in 2004, and HART and other NGOs may provide an additional 50-100 units per annum. Urban informal settlement upgrading carried out by the Department of Housing and Squatter Settlement (DoHSS)/MLGHSSE has covered about 250 households per annum during last few years. Under the UPAP, the basic philosophy of the government being the enabler for private initiatives in housing development will continue through the above elements of government support to urban housing. However, there is a clear need to enhance the effectiveness of these operations and to ensure that delivery is scaled up. This, however, has been significantly constrained by a variety of factors, including government budgetary limitations and other development priorities. A key conditional action issue in UPAP for enhanced low-income housing supply is the need to enhance the supply of housing land in the market, as discussed in detail in section 3.1 above. This will increasingly mean a focus on developing native land. The legal authority to alienate this land on a leasehold basis for development and/or permanent use is vested in NLTB, which, in doing so, is legally required to go through a process of consultation with the native landowners whose interests it represents. Disagreements by some landowners over the lease terms and conditions (and/or over sharing the proceeds between NLTB, the native chief(s) and the native land owner) have slowed down and sometimes stultified the alienation process. NLTB also suffers from capacity constraints to handle this process at a sufficiently large scale in the urban context. NLTB has recognised these issues and has recently started a regularisation approach in several informally developed vakavanua tenure areas, amounting to formalising land leasing arrangements, in combination with low standard/low cost infrastructure provision. This approach is still in an early stage, but initial outcomes are promising and need to be monitored closely. Planning standards for structures, plot sizes, roads, drains, water supply and sewerage as currently used by HA, DTCP, PWD, and local governments in combination have tended to drive up the cost of land development of residential plots (as discussed in detail in section 3.3 below). Households with incomes of F$ 600 or less per month (about 29 % of the urban population according to the 2002-03 HIES data) cannot afford a permanent house built through self-help at standards acceptable to these institutions – let alone a contractor-built house – and subsidizing the development of plots in a major way is not a realistic option. Therefore, unless standards are revised, current government efforts in housing land development would have the impact to exclude these households and drive them into informality. This would include proliferation of poor housing conditions, squatting on crown lands, often on river banks, coastal zones and other physically precarious locations, as well as informal settlement on native land, as noted above.


Draft/16/4/04 24

The poorest urban households will find it difficult to afford the HA lots even at reduced standards, and will continue to rely on informal settlement arrangements or on rental housing provided by the PRB or HART. The main issues in this segment of the market are the limited response capacity of the agencies, combined with the dilapidation of existing PRB flats. This is due to a lack of funds for PRB flat maintenance, as current rents are inadequate to even cover these costs. Private sector developer capacity operating at present is limited, because it is also adversely affected by the above land market constraints. The few active developers do not see the low-income housing market as their most attractive market segment. In the greater Suva area there has been only one significant private developer, delivering about 200 units per annum during the last few years, mostly for middle- and higher income clients, which numerically is a small market segment. An institutional constraint to urban upgrading is the limited involvement of local government, particularly in the larger cities and towns. Suva and Lautoka City Councils have the institutional and technical capacity to manage urban upgrading development, but have rarely done so (primarily for financial reasons). Other town councils (such as Nasinu) perceive this as an important approach but do not have the capacity to handle such schemes. The Social Justice Act, 2001 is the only piece of legislation specifying squatter settlement upgrading as a government obligation, but does not assign this to any one government agency. Central government through DHSS/MLGSSE has (more or less by default) taken this up and in doing so, combines the roles of regulator and provider, which is sub-optimal. In view of the above constraints, there has been very little opportunity to learn from the implementation of the few upgrading schemes that have been carried out, mostly in a leap and bounds manner, given the limited and fluctuating resource availability (the step-wise upgrading of Jittu Estate in Suva by DHSS/MLGSSE is a case in point). The experience to date, however, suggests that the issue of upgrading standards in conjunction with terms and conditions of leasing and their affordability, as well as financing arrangements, may require reconsideration. Policy approaches to address these issues comprise the following: a) reinforcing and consolidating the urban upgrading approach to reduce the extent of urban squatting in line with SDP requirements The government intends to expand the scope of the urban upgrading programmes in the context of its poverty alleviation programme to: • significantly increase the targeted number of households to be covered through a

catching up exercise during 2005-2006 (ensuring an annual 5 % reduction of squatter households as mandated in the SDP), and continuing this level of effort in the longer term, at least until 2006 census data will make it possible to re-assess the situation;

• make more structured use of the existing provision for modified standards for upgrading in the town planning regulations in the interest of cost-effectiveness and the need to economize on the utilisation of the programme budget;

• redefine roles and responsibilities in the upgrading programme, starting with local councils in the Greater Suva and Lautoka areas, which need to take the lead in the programme implementation, and with the Housing and Squatter Settlement Department in MLGHSSE (together with the NLTB) increasingly playing the role of programme facilitator, rather than of the ‘hands on’ provider. This change in roles will be beneficial, as the local councils will ultimately have to bear responsibility for O&M of the infrastructure and municipal services in upgraded


Draft/16/4/04 25

areas, and recover costs of those out of rates payable by the legalised occupants.

To do so effectively, the following short-term actions will be taken up: • a dialogue between the urban local governments concerned, DTCP/MLGHSSE,

DSSH/MLGHSSE and PWD to define technically appropriate (and possibly upgradeable) infrastructure development standards for informal area upgrading acceptable for all actors, and their associated costs;

• for DSSH/MLGHSSE to rethink the current upgrading cost-recovery and subsidy policy and mechanism together with the MFNP (and possibly FLGA), based on specific suggestions made in the context of UPAP preparation. This will be linked into the development of a broader local urban development challenge fund out of which qualified infrastructure upgrading investment expenditures may be jointly financed through a system of matching grants providing an appropriate level of incentives for the urban local governments to effectively participate in the programme (see section 4.4 below).

• for the urban local governments, DSSH/MLGHSSE and NLTB to agree specific structured co-operation compacts for programme implementation in each urban local government jurisdiction, in the context of the wider institutional changes suggested for local and central government, including NLTB.

b) new housing development – expanding supply of affordable housing lots Part of the resolution of informal area upgrading will require moving some houses, and thus the development of new lots in overspill areas (either within or close to the upgrading area), so that some schemes are likely to be a mixture of upgrading and new development. Supply of affordable housing lots for low-to-middle income groups will therefore need to expand hand in hand with upgrading. Starting from a very limited current level of operations of its land development programme, the government considers that the HA delivery target of 500 lots per annum for 2004-2006 is ambitious but achievable, particularly if this is carried out in close co-operation with NLTB (and private developers where these recognise the market potential of the HA target group). This will involve the development of a common approach towards development standards, including plot sizes and target groups, and cost-recovery policy. A formal partnership between HA and NLTB that delivers outcomes is of paramount importance. The recently published urban income distribution data of the HIES 2002-03 provides an opportunity for the HA and its partners to re-focus their efforts on the lower strata of urban society where the bulk of un-met housing demand is. Measures will be undertaken to ensure that the lots will be more affordable for the target group than at present by applying reduced lot size and on-site infrastructure standards. These will be defined between DSSH/MLGHSSE, HA and PWD with involvement of NLTB (to ensure that these development standards can also be applied in case of native land). Given current demand for plots, additional serviced land supply will also be required for prospective home builders who, in terms of income, do not fall within the target clientele range of the HA. For this range of clients, and given the developable land supply constraints, the government will promote partnerships between NLTB and recognised private developers, starting with a few pilot projects. Additionally, in cases where area sizes of land to be developed are substantial (e.g. areas where 500 lots or more can be developed in phases), joint ventures between the HA, NLTB and private developers may be formed, and an appropriate mixture of lot sizes, standards


Draft/16/4/04 26

and charged development costs per m2 will be adopted. Appropriate incentives for this purpose will be formulated. In line with the provisions of the SDP (section 5.9), the government has initiated a review of the efficiency and effectiveness of HA operations in the context of UPAP preparation7. The policy objective of the review was to ensure that the HA core mandate of providing appropriate serviced housing lot options for lower income groups is achieved at the right quantities, as cost effective as is possible, with minimal subsidy requirements, while at the same time maintaining the HAs’ financial viability. The above policy directions flow out of the outcomes of the review. Other important elements of the review outcomes focus on the need for the HA to review its mortgage lending and property brokerage operations to: • drastically reduce its large non-performing loan portfolio; • avoid counter-productive competition with commercial banks and real estate

brokerage firms, by refocusing this part of its operations only on its land development clients not served by the private sector, so as to ensure the delivery of a complete housing support package of services to these clients.

c) Role of (semi-public) rental housing as social safety net There will always be a category of urban households, who, for a variety of reasons, will temporarily or permanently require rental housing. The government recognises that unavoidably some of this will have to continue to be in the public domain, and will continue to support HART and PRB to ensure a minimum level of housing safety net. In part this will cater to the need to replace dilapidated units. In view of this, it is intended to step up the annual delivery target to 200 units. In addition, a variety of financial and institutional measures will be taken to enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of the safety net: • to separate the provision and management of rental housing from subsidizing it,

so that subsidies can be better targeted to families in need along criteria as employed by the Family Assistance Scheme. The result of this measure will be that the financial sustainability of the social rental housing delivery system will not be drained by the subsidies provided.

• as management of social rental housing is a specialised type of activity, requiring particular skills and institutional arrangements, the government will review ways and means to consolidate the use of scarce human and institutional resources in the PRB and HART to ensure their best utilisation.

d) improved institutional co-ordination in housing development With regard to urban informal settlements upgrading, the above changes in the institutional roles in upgrading development will provide for improved institutional co-ordination in programme development, policy formulation and implementation, including re-defining programme parameters. The National Squatter Council will play a more active policy co-ordination role (with DSSH/MLGHSSE as its secretariat), which will be broadened to cover not only squatter areas, but all urban upgrading of informal settlements. For similar reasons as for upgrading, it may be beneficial to institute a similar inter-agency co-ordination mechanism for new housing development. Consideration may therefore be given to broadening the National Squatter Council role further, establishing it as a National Housing Council. It may also form the starting point of the proposed Urban Management Board (see section 4.5 below).

7 A separate issues paper on this review has been prepared by the UPAP preparatory team, which is available in the background documentation volume


Draft/16/4/04 27

Policy implementation matrix 3.2 – Urban Housing Objectives/goals Actions/activities Monitorable benchmarks Actors Time

line Urban area upgrading i) enhance cost- effectiveness of urban informal area upgrading approach ii) reduce number of squatter households by 5% per annum

a) review and modify policy, planning, implementation and cost-recovery parameters/standards of squatter settlements upgrading approach b) agree to expand the eligibility of the upgrading programme to all informally settled urban areas and define specific criteria for such eligibility c) agree on new roles and responsibilities for programme implementation between urban local governments, DHSS/MLGHSSE, PWD and (for native land) NLTB, and NGOs. d) design and establish a national challenge fund for municipal development, which will finance upgrading infrastructure investment through matching grants from central and local government (with part cost-recovery from benefiting households) e) expand coverage of upgrading to 1,250 households per annum, using stepped up budgetary provisions, cost-sharing provisions in the challenge fund and enhanced upgrading approach in line with above

i) revised and expanded upgrading policy adopted ii) part of i) above iii) new roles and responsibilities agreed as part of i) above iv) challenge fund established and operational v) coverage target achieved

i) MLGHSSE, MFNP, PWD, NLTB, FLGA and NGOs ii) as above iii) LGHSSE, NLTB, PWD, participating LCs iv) MFNP, MLGHHSE, FLGA v) participating local governments, MLGHHSE

Q4 –2004 to Q4 2006 as above as above from FY 2005 from FY 2005

New urban housing i) expand supply of affordable new housing lots for low-income families ii) enhance cost- effectiveness of urban land development for new housing iii) ensure sustainable supply of low-income rental housing as part of social safety net

a) review and modify target group policy, planning, implementation, affordability and cost-recovery parameters/standards of HA and NLTB housing lot development programmes b) ensure effective implementation of present HA target of 500 lots per annum c) promote a formal partnership with common standards between HA and NLTB as the only public land development agencies for low-income housing development, and encourage joint ventures with recognised private land developers d) promote formal partnerships between HA, NLTB and private developers to manage large developments of 500 units or more e) expand HART/PRB supply of new rental units to 200 per annum, and gradually increase rent levels to ensure that they are adequate to cover depreciation and O&M costs

i) new and unified programme parameters adopted ii) target number of lots occupied in two successive years iii) a) standard operational procedures agreed as part of I) above; b) two pilot project on the way iv) one pilot project agreed and under implementation v) a) supply target achieved, b) rentals covering O&M and 50% of depreciation

MLGHHSE, HA, NLTB, PWD HA,NLTB MLGHHSE, HA, NLTB, PWD, private developers HA, NLTB, PWD, private developers LGHHSE, MFNP, PRB, HART

mid-2004 to mid 2006 by 2005 a) mid-2004, b) by 2005 by early 2005 a) end 2005; b) by 2006

Institutional co-ordination i) to ensure more effective utilisation of scarce institutional capacity ii) improve the targeting of housing and housing-related related subsidies

a) review and activate the role, functions and composition of the national squatter council, and broaden its mandate of policy implementation oversight and co-ordination to include all urban upgrading, and possibly also new urban housing development. b) establish a strong and active secretariat for the revamped council at DHSS/MLGHSSE c) review and consider options for institutional consolidation of development and management of government-supported rental housing through PRB and HART d) review institutional options for urban upgrading and rental housing cost to be provided at full costs of services, with housing-related subsidies for those who cannot pay to be channelled through a special window of the Family Assistance Scheme

i) a) revised scope and mandate of council agreed; b) revamped council started work ii) secretariat established with professional secretary iii) a) review completed, preferential institutional model identified; b) new institutional structure operational iv) a) review completed and new institutional arrangements agreed; b) new subsidy arrangements operational

MLGHSSE, MFNP, PWD, NLTB, FLGA MLGHSSE MLGHHSE, PRB, HART MLGHSSE, MFNP, Min of Welfare, FLGA

a) Q4 2004 – Q 4 2005; b) April 2005 a) early 2005 b) mid 2005 a) end 2004; b) mid 2005


Draft/16/4/04 28

3.3 Urban Infrastructure and Services Development Goal: durable and affordable infrastructure and services for all While the urban sector of Fiji is small, it is characterized by institutional complexity. Responsibility for infrastructure and service provision, operation and maintenance in urban areas is shared between local government and a number of national agencies. The UPAP approach is to support the rationalization of urban powers and responsibilities to achieve greater clarity in all aspects of urban services and infrastructure provision and operation and maintenance. Responsibilities, Standards and Assets a) Responsibilities: The UPAP adopts the principles of subsidiarity (i.e. placing powers and responsibilities at the lowest administrative level able to effectively exercise them) in determining appropriate powers and responsibilities of local governments. This is important because the key role and mandate of municipal local government is the provision and maintenance of adequate and affordable infrastructure and services to its constituents (customers), and effective accountability for service provision is best achieved at the local level. In practical terms this will amount to phased devolution of those services, for which LC responsibility is logical and cost-effective. As far as possible infrastructure development and O&M responsibilities should be retained by the same organization. This supports a sense of ownership of assets and is likely to result in improvements in standards of operation and maintenance. b) Standards: Standards are set by, and vary between, PWD, MLGHSSE and some local governments, which set their own standards. Furthermore, infrastructure standards for “rural” and “urban” sub-divisions differ. A municipality adopting a rural subdivision finds itself obliged to upgrade the infrastructure to urban standards, creating tension between the higher standards compatible with an urban setting and the affordability of such standards to the urban poor. In some cases national or local service standards have been lowered to accommodate affordability constraints of low–income householders. The UPAP calls for a consensus on, and adopting, a set unified appropriate and affordable standards. c) Asset Transfer: Local Governments adopting sub-divisions, particularly those in areas previously outside their boundaries, find that this process frequently takes years. During this period, maintenance is inadequately funded, resulting in the need for municipal governments to undertake reconstruction or major rehabilitation of infrastructure - in addition to upgrading it to match urban standards. The UPAP calls for co-ordination between all agencies concerned and an incremental approach to the transfer of these assets to municipalities. d) Peri-Urban Areas and Villages: The lack of access to readily developable land close to urban centres has a major impact of the cost of urban infrastructure and service provision, and thus the affordability of serviced housing to the poor. The costs of providing services to households or communities in upland and/or peri-urban areas is high, placing further pressures on affordability levels. The UPAP supports measures to encourage development at locations, which can be economically developed and serviced, i.e. which are relatively close to existing points of delivery of urban services.


Draft/16/4/04 29

Infrastructure and Services Planning, Management and Cost Recovery a) Infrastructure Planning: The interests of peri-urban dwellers in terms of service provision will be better served either by improved co-ordination among concerned agencies or by their incorporation into urban areas. The same is largely true for native Fijian villages within or contiguous with urban boundaries. The UPAP seeks to harmonize planning, development and service delivery between incorporated urban areas, peri-urban areas and contiguous native Fijian villages. b) Management Focus: The customer-orientation of local governments can be increased through a greater focus on service provision and on the better maintenance, operation and use of existing assets. However, asset registers which should form the basis for operation and maintenance programmes are generally either absent or incomplete. The UPAP supports the development of Municipal Management Information Systems (MMIS) including the adoption of a municipal asset management plan that can assist in ensuring more productive use of assets, and more efficient O&M. c) Municipal Capacity: Many municipal local governments have no technical engineering staff. Staff are also are frequently inadequately trained to carry out their jobs effectively. The UPAP supports strengthening the technical and managerial capacity of urban local governments and development of mechanisms for the sharing of technical resources between municipalities where full time posts cannot be supported. d) Sanitation: Although an estimated 60% of urban households have access to sanitation, only an estimated 35% are connected to a sewerage network. Twenty percent of urban dwellers to not even have access to a water-sealed toilet. The UPAP gives priority to the provision of appropriate and affordable sanitation through a strategic sanitation planning approach. e) Outsourcing: Outsourcing of services is a widely adopted mode of service delivery as a means of improving cost effectiveness and efficiency of municipal operations. The UPAP supports facilitating and encouraging further private sector participation in services operation, maintenance and management, learning form good practice, and the development of clear regulations (bylaws or standing orders) to govern the issue and award of tenders by local governments. The UPAP also supports measures to attract additional (private) capital to help satisfy local government expenditure plans. f) Cost Recovery: Cost recovery through direct (user charges) or indirect (local taxes) means to cover the full cost of service provision is necessary if local governments are to be able to maintain acceptable standards and levels of service. However, where necessary the urban poor need to be able to benefit from life-line pricing to ensure equitable access to services. Where this necessitates an element of subsidy or cross subsidy, it is vital that the subsidy is well targeted at those who really need it. The UPAP supports the progressive move towards full cost recovery for services through transparent direct or indirect charges, but maintaining well-targeted life-line pricing for the poor. Urban Roads and Transport a) Urban Roads and Transport Planning: Measures will be taken to increase the effectiveness of planning for urban roads and transport, which is currently handled in relative isolation from urban planning (see section 4.3 below). The UPAP supports integrating urban transport and road development planning into metropolitan planning in Greater Suva, and in greater Lautoka thereafter.


Draft/16/4/04 30

b) Road Maintenance: The increased volumes of heavy vehicles utilizing national and local roads is increasing the rate of road deterioration and placing increased demands on road maintenance resources. The UPAP supports the investigation of ways in which the costs of this additional maintenance can be passed to the users, and adequate resources for the additional road maintenance costs passed to local governments. c) Public Transport: Public transport systems (largely buses) currently provide for the majority of intra- and inter-urban travel needs. However with increasing car ownership and usage there is potential for the urban transport system to become increasingly car-dependent, thus placing strain on road networks and necessitating further road investment. The UPAP supports efforts to maintain and improve current bus usage, and encourages the greater use of sustainable transport modes such as cycling and walking, and to incorporate requirements for such modes into urban planning.


Draft/16/4/04 31

Policy implementation matrix 3.3 – Urban Services and Infrastructure Objectives/goals Actions/activities Monitorable benchmarks Actors Time

line Responsibilities, Standards and Assets Functional Responsibilities Rationalize the allocation of responsibilities between state and local governments for construction, operation and maintenance of urban infrastructure and services.

Government review of roles and responsibilities for infrastructure and service provision so as to devolve activities to the local government level where appropriate Agreement on roles, responsibilities and activities to be devolved. Amendment/drafting and enactment of legislation (Local Government Act, Town Planning Act, Subdivision of Land Act, Public health Act) as necessary to provide legal framework for devolved activities

Meetings held and common position reached. Agreement reached on specific changes Legislation drafted or amended Legislation enacted

MFNP, MLGHSSE, PWD, LCs, other stakeholders in infra and services

Q4 2004 – Q4 2005 Q4 2004 Q4 2005 Q4 2006

Standards Development and adoption of agreed standards for the provision of infrastructure and services appropriate for, and affordable to, the urban poor.

Meeting of all stakeholders to undertake detailed review of existing standards, implications of current standards on affordability, and potential for relaxation of standards for low-income developments. Agreement on a unified (and possibly incremental) set of standards and levels of service (particularly for roads and drainage), and amend regulations accordingly.

Meetings held and agreement reached. Standards and levels of service agreed and regulations amended accordingly

MLGHSSE, PWD, other concerned national-level agencies, LCs, and other stakeholders

Q4 2004 Q4 2004

Assets Transfer Timely adoption and transfer of assets of subdivisions to concerned local governments

Agree on guidelines for timely hand-over of new developments within or adjacent to towns to local governments. Prepare time-bound institution-specific action plan for the phased transfer of assets to local governments and the inclusion of peri-urban communities into urban jurisdictions Make amendments to existing legislation as necessary

Agreement on guidelines. Finalization of action plan. Legislative amendments made.

MLGHSSE, and other concerned national-level agencies, LCs, and other stakeholders

Q4 2004 Q4 2004 Q2 2005

Peri-urban areas and Villages Coordinated development of peri-urban and native Fijian village areas.

Review experience of Namalai village in Lautoka city and review work by Ratu Cokanauto Agree on mechanisms to ensure a systematic approach to services and infrastructure between municipalities, contiguous native villages and peri-urban areas. Prepare and enact legislation and regulation as necessary, and put mechanism into use.

Review completed Mechanism discussed and agreed. Legislation enacted as necessary and mechanisms in use

MLGHSSE, Department of Fijian Affairs, LCs and RLAs

Q3 2004 Q4 2004 Q2 2005

Infrastructure and Services Planning, Management and Cost Recovery Infrastructure Planning To encourage efficient spatial urban development through forward planning and strategic trunk service provision.

Enhanced spatial planning and development control Introduction of trunk infrastructure into preferred development areas

See matrix 4.3 MLGHSSE, and LCs

See matrix 4.3

Management Focus Improved focus on quality of services (incl. improved management, operation and maintenance).

Develop simple municipal management information system (MMIS) to be used by municipal governments MMIS operational and in use as a tool to improve municipal efficiency

MMIS designed MMIS operational

MLGHSSE, FLGA, and LCs

Q4 2004 Q4 2005

Municipal Capacity Improved skills of municipal technical staff and elected representatives.

Carry out local government institutional and human resource development assessment. Prepare institutional strengthening action plans to include innovative solutions such as staff sharing and capacity development programmes for both local government legislative and executive staff. Implement action plan

Institutional development and training needs assessment completed Action plan completed Action plan implemented

MLGHSSE, and LCs, training institutions

Q3 2004 Q4 2004 Q2 2005

Sanitation Appropriate and affordable sanitation for an improved urban environment and increased housing densities.

Develop methodology for strategic approach to sanitation planning Undertake strategic sanitation planning in all municipalities

Methodology developed and action plan agreed Planning completed in all municipalities.

MLGHSSE, PWD and LCs

Q3 2004 Q4 2006


Draft/16/4/04 32

Objectives/goals Actions/activities Monitorable benchmarks Actors Time line

Outsourcing Maximising cost-effectiveness through outsourcing of services.

Review existing and past municipal experience of outsourcing of services in Fiji. Prepare simple guideline and any associated legislation, regulation, bylaws and standing orders and guidelines for engagement, operation and oversight of contracts

Review completed, report prepared and circulated Guidelines completed and associated legislation and regulations enacted

FLGA, MLGHSSE

Q1 2005 Q4 2005

Cost Recovery Achieving full cost recovery for infrastructure and services while ensuring affordability of basic services to the urban poor.

Agree phased introduction of full cost recovery for municipal services (build on agreements reached for Suva-Nausouri Water Supply and Sewerage Project) while adjusting lifeline pricing blocks Full cost recovery for municipal services

Phased service pricing action plan agreed Pricing action plan implemented in full

PWD and LCs Q4 2004 Q4 2012

Urban Roads and Transport Urban Roads Planning Increasing the effectiveness of planning for urban roads and transport

Integrating urban transport and road development planning into metropolitan planning in Greater Suva

Integrated Greater Suva Urban Growth Management Plan approved

MLGHSSE, PWD, national agencies, NLTRB, LCs , other stakeholders

Q 2 2005 (see matrix 4.3)

Road Maintenance Sharing the cost of heavy traffic (esp. Heavy Cane Traffic) on urban roads.

Develop and agree strategy and guidelines for sharing costs for the maintenance of trunk roads within towns. Put agreed sharing mechanism into effect

Strategy agreed Mechanism in place

MLGHSSE, MoTA and LCs

Q3 2004 Q4 2005

Public Transport Encouraging Greater use of Public Transport

Study measures to support and encourage improvement of bus services by private operators, to encourage greater usage by private vehicle owners, and make recommendations. Put recommended measures into effect

Proposed measures agreed Measures introduced Increased bus usage.

MLGHSSE, MoTA and LCs

Q2 2004 Q4 2004 Q1 2005


Draft/16/4/04 33

4 Cross-cutting Policy Elements

4.1 Urban Environmental Management Goal: sustainable urban environment If adequate mitigation measures are not taken, urbanisation will continue to contribute to worsening environmental conditions. The UPAP approach places a high priority on dealing effectively with urban environmental problems before they accelerate out of control and seriously threaten the sustainability of urban development in Fiji. There is a need to place the environment high on the political agenda and increase public awareness of urban environmental issues and the role that the public can play in maintaining the quality of the urban environment. The quality of the urban environment is intended to be mainstreamed into the urban governance, management and development agenda through the UPAP. Responsibilities, Legislation and Awareness There is unclear jurisdiction over some of the resources over which DoE enjoys regulatory powers. In the water sector in particular, there is a clear need to establish ownership and rights of use over water resources in view of its critical importance in human activity in both the urban and rural sectors. The UPAP places high priority on government reaching agreement on its role as the authoritative custodian of fresh water resources, and developing a clear policy covering all aspects of water ownership and use and the role of other agencies and stakeholders – including indigenous land-owners and traditional users of water. The key piece of environmental legislation that will assist in strengthening the powers and ability of Government to manage and protect the environment, is the Sustainable Development Bill (SDB – possibly to be renamed as Environmental Management Bill). The UPAP supports the enactment of the SDB which will do much to strengthen the legislative and regulatory framework for the urban environment. The UPAP also supports the amendment, or development and enactment, of the necessary related supporting legislation to provide the tools necessary for the DoE and other concerned agencies (MoH, PWD, local governments) to effectively police the urban environment and support and facilitate improved pollution control. The DoE under the MLGHSSE will be the agency with key responsibility to enforce the provisions of the SDB. The UPAP supports the direction of additional resources to DoE to enable it to fulfil its role in evaluating and approving EIAs, monitoring point source and ambient pollution and assisting DTCP in the environmental aspects of urban planning. The UPAP also supports the rationalization of responsibilities between DoE, MoH (CBH), PWD, local governments for the management and enforcement of environmental and public health legislation and regulations within urban areas, and enhancing the role of local government in supporting urban environmental management. MoH will retain the responsibility for clinical and preventative public health care tasks, to the extent that this is beyond the LCs’ areas of responsibility. Environmental Planning and Extension of Environmental Services The UPAP supports the further development of the existing programme of environmental monitoring (by CBH) to provide a framework for the comprehensive, systematic and regular monitoring of the ambient environment for key pollution parameters or indicators. The UPAP also supports the clear assignment of


Draft/16/4/04 34

responsibilities for carrying out this activity, identification of the source of resources required to undertake this monitoring, information sharing to facilitate this, and is committed to local governments taking a more proactive role. Properly planned urban areas, and the enforcement of development planning controls should ensure that negative environmental impacts of urbanization are minimized and inevitable adverse impacts mitigated. The UPAP supports the adoption of environmental planning approaches which ensure that environmental considerations are given due emphasis as an integral part of the planning process. The UPAP also supports the enforcement of standards which; • ensure that environmental planning principles are applied in the approval of

government and private land development schemes, • control illegal squatting on foreshore areas and • ensure that major developments provide the necessary environmental

safeguards and mitigation measures (and submit acceptable EIAs and carry out necessary actions).

The infrastructure available to provide for the appropriate collection, treatment and disposal of domestic and industrial solid and liquid wastes in urban areas of Fiji is inadequate. The UPAP supports environmental service extension and improved cost recovery for sewerage and sewage treatment through the combined water and sewerage tariff. For SWM, the UPAP supports the development of appropriate institutional and cost recovery mechanisms to ensure the sustainability of the new landfill operation at Naboro. To ensure that expensive sewerage is extended only into those areas which require and can afford to pay for it, the UPAP supports the adoption of strategic sanitation planning approach which considers alternative appropriate environmentally-acceptable sanitation technologies to conventional sewerage and sewage treatment. The increased costs to the consumer of SWM operations resulting from development of the new landfill site at Naboro present new challenges in terms of enforcing anti-littering and anti-fly-tipping regulations and in looking at how volumes going for landfill can be minimized. The UPAP supports the amendment and enforcement of the litter act and the introduction of mechanisms to encourage waste reduction, recovery recycling and reuse. Discharge, Emission Standards and Environmental Monitoring The UPAP supports the adoption of: • appropriate discharge standards for wastes entering the public sewer and/or

drainage systems and the natural environment; • appropriate gaseous emission standards, and • ambient environmental standards consistent with local conditions and use of the

natural environment. Such standards may be based on the World Health Organisation (WHO) standards already generally in use, adapted as necessary to reflect local environmental requirements.


Draft/16/4/04 35

Policy implementation matrix 4.1 – Urban Environment Objectives/goals Actions/activities Monitorable

benchmarks Actors Time

line Responsibilities, Legislation and Awareness Responsibilities Mainstream the environment in urban development and rationalize the allocation of responsibilities between state and LCs for the urban environment.

Government review of roles and responsibilities for urban environmental management with key stakeholders with a view to raising profile of environmental issues and devolving some activities to the local government level where appropriate Agreement on roles, responsibilities and activities to be devolved. Support actions to generate increased public awareness of urban environmental issues and extend environmental awareness to a broader range of stakeholders.

Meetings held and common position reached. Agreement reached on specific changes Strategy and programme designed Programme implemented

MFNP, MLGHSSE (DoE), CBH, Local Governments, other stakeholders As above DoE, Local Governments, Schools

Q4 2004 to Q4 2005 Q4 2004 Q3 2004 Q12005

Jurisdiction over assets Clarify the ownership and rights of use over environmental resources - particularly over fresh water resources and develop sector policies

For environmental resources in general – and fresh water resources in particular – development of a clear policy covering all aspects of resource ownership, responsibility and use. The formation of a National Coordinating Committee for Water Support the development of associated legislative and regulatory tools.

Meetings held and agreement reached. Committee formed and operational Legislative and regulatory tools designed Legislation enacted

MLGHSSE (DOE), MRD, MAFF, DPW, and other stakeholders. MRD DOE DOE

Q3 2004 Q2 2004 Q4 2004 Q2 2005

Legislative and Regulatory Framework Provision of an appropriate legislative framework through the enactment of the Sustainable Development Bill (SDB) and other related legislation (Pollution Control Bill, amendments to the Public Health Act and Town Planning Act)

Enact the SDB and either amend or develop and enact the necessary related supporting legislation. Revision of the Public Health Act to bind the state. Mainstream SDB into revised TPA. Rationalize responsibilities between DoE, MoH, PWD, and LCs for the management and enforcement of environmental and public health legislation and regulations within urban areas. Investigate innovative ways to fund environmental protection – pollution fines and charges, tradable pollution loads, licenses, levies (e.g. environmental levy on tourists). Establish adequate effective, equitable and transparent cost recovery for services and establish pollution charges balancing achieving beneficial outcomes with robustness of revenues.

SDB enacted and PHA modified. Revised TPA enacted Meetings held and agreement reached. Strategy and Action Plan prepared Strategy and Action Plan prepared Charges in place

MLGHSSE, GoF MLGHSSE MFNP, MLGHSSE (DOE), MRD, MAFF, DPW and other agencies DOE DOE, DPW and LCs

Q4 2004 Q3 2005 Q4 2004 Q4 2004 Q4,2004 Q1, 2005

Resourcing the DOE A resourced DoE empowered and enabled to fulfil its mandate. .

Ensure that the DoE and other concerned organizations are provided with the technical and financial resources necessary to fulfil their obligations under the SDB and related legislation Strategy and action plan for greater transparency by DoE in terms of what they do. Preparation of a corporate plan for DoE

Review completed and resources agreed Resources in place Strategy and Action Plan prepared Corporate plan in place and action plan executed

MFNP, MLGHSSE MFNP DOE DOE

Q4 2004 Q1, 2005 Q4 2004 Q4 2004

Devolving Responsibilities Increased LCs role in the enforcement of environmental planning and discharge standards (where practically devolved). .

Determine which of the enforcement and regulatory functions under the SDB and related urban environmental legislation can realistically be delegated to local governments Support the LCs in developing their capacity to undertake this work and effectively support environmental management within their jurisdictions

Review completed Strategy and Action Plan prepared LCs equipped

MFNP, MLGHSSE, FLGA DOE, CBH, FLGA DOE, LCs

Q4 2004 Q4, 2004


Draft/16/4/04 36

Objectives/goals Actions/activities Monitorable benchmarks

Actors Time line

CBH to assist local governments in environmental issues Agree things which local governments can do under existing legislation - LCs to adopt name and shame approaches to shame polluters into action

Strategy and Action Plan prepared Action plan executed Strategy and Action Plan prepared Action plan executed

CBH, FLGA CBH DOE, FLGA LCs

Q1 2005 Q3 2004 Q4 2004 Q1 2005

Environmental Planning and the Extension of Environmental Services Environmental Planning Improved effectiveness of environmental planning to ensure protection of environmentally sensitive resources.

The strengthening of environmental planning – integrated with the general town planning regulations (general provisions). Introduction of mechanisms to ensure the effective enforcement of environmental planning regulations (including compliance by Government) through new EIA regulations under SDB. Introduction mechanisms to offer alternatives for squatters to occupying foreshore lands - by providing alternative attractive and affordable locations to establish low cost housing in or close to the urban areas. EIA system to be rigorously adopted as part of good governance, mainstreamed into DTCP More proactive role by DoE and DTCP in assisting LCs in exercising environmental planning Specific cases of good and poor practice to be highlighted, analysed, reviewed and disseminated.

See matrixes 3.2 and 4.3

MLGHSSE, and local governments

See matrixes 3.2 and 4.3

Environmental Infrastructure Provision Improved environmental conditions through appropriate collection, treatment and disposal of domestic and industrial solid and liquid wastes in urban areas.

Service extension, enhanced sewerage treatment and improved cost recovery for sewerage and sewage treatment through the combined water and sewerage tariff. Including measures to ensure that householders within sewered areas connect to the system. PWD to prepare 5-year investment plan to include sewerage extensions A strategic sanitation planning approach should be adopted in unserved urban areas, which considers use of alternative appropriate affordable and environmentally-acceptable sanitation technologies. Cost recovery mechanisms for the new landfill site at Naboro to be developed to ensure sustainability of the service and reflect ability and willingness to pay.

Action plan prepared Action plan put into effect Investment plan prepared, put into effect Development of approach Approach adopted in future sanitation investments Develop cost recovery options, put cost recovery mechanisms into effect

PWD PWD PWD, MFNP PWD PWD, FLGA,DOE,MOH-CBH PWD, FLGA, DOE,MOH-CBH MLGHSSE MLGHSSE, LCs

Q4 2004 Q1 2005 Q1 2005 Q3 2005 Q4 2004 Q2 2005 Q2 2004 Q4 2004

Improved solid waste management Maximised beneficial impact of development of the new landfill at Naboro through (i) enforcing anti-littering and anti-fly-tipping regulations, and (ii reducing the volumes requiring land filling through waste minimisation - reduction, reuse recycling and recovery. .

Agree effective operation mechanisms for the Naboro landfill site – preferably through private public partnership – Govt through the user local governments, with private sector landfill manager. Update and strengthen enforcement of the litter ordinance to support operation of the Naboro landfill to ensure no increase in fly tipping as a result of increased landfill fees. Place emphasis on the opportunities presented

Operational mechanisms and fee rates agreed, put into effect Ordinance strengthened and enforcement mechanisms strengthened Improvements put into effect Strategy and action

MLGHSSE, and local governments MLGHSSE, and local governments MLGHSSE, and local governments Local Governments MLGHSSE and

Q2 2004 Q4 2004 Q4 2004 Q1 2005 Q4 2004


Draft/16/4/04 37


Actors Time line

for waste minimization through development and implementation of a “4 R’s” strategy for urban Fiji.

plan prepared Action plan implemented

LCs Q1 2005

Discharge and Emission Standards and Environmental Monitoring Development and Enforcement of Appropriate Discharge Standards Operational, appropriate standards for (i) discharge of wastewaters and other domestic, agricultural and industrial wastes to the environment or to public collection networks, and (ii) gaseous emissions.

Establishment of clear and simple guidelines for the discharge of effluents and wastewaters – both to public sewer systems and to the environment (e.g. rivers, streams, near-shore areas and the open sea), and standards of acceptable ambient levels for pollutants (based on adaptation of WHO standards to local conditions) and similar requirements for gaseous emissions. Standards and guidelines to be introduced under the legislation supporting the revised Public Health Act – i.e. through the Pollution Control Bill Establishment of ambient air and water quality standards

Standards and Guidelines prepared Standards and Guidelines in effect Standards prepared Standards in effect

MLGHSSE (DOE), CBH with assistance of USP DOE, CBH MLGHSSE (DOE), CBH with assistance of USP DOE, CBH

Q4 2004 Q2 2005 Q4 2004 Q5 2005

Environmental Monitoring Effective regular and systematic monitoring of the ambient environment for key pollution parameters or indicators.

Further development of the current system for the regular and systematic monitoring of key critical environmental parameters. Identify resources necessary to undertake this monitoring and make available Clarify roles and responsibilities of key monitoring agencies in the sector - with local governments taking a more proactive role.

Proposed strategy and programme agreed Requirements determined Resources made available Roles and responsibilities agreed and put into effect.

MLGHSSE (DOE), PWD, CBH, USP and local governments CBH, DOE, PWD, local govts. MFNP, DOE, CBH CBH, DOE, USP, PWD, Local Governments

Q4 2004 to Q4, 2005 Q4 2004 Q2 2005 Q1 2005


Draft/16/4/04 38

4.2 Urban Economic Development and Urban Poverty Reduction Goals: sustainable local economic development and eradication of urban poverty Stimulating economic growth is a major government task, as acknowledged in the SDP 2003-2005 and the 2004 budget proposals. Given the sectoral pattern of economic growth and urbanisation, this will increasingly imply stimulating growth of the urban economy, where the relative economic benefits of intervention on a per dollar basis are most significant. The government endeavours to do this primarily by creating an enabling environment to stimulate private sector investment through ensuring socio-political stability, through investment in major infrastructure and in municipal infrastructure and services, through a variety of fiscal incentives, and through ensuring reliable and transparent governance practices. In the short term, several measures have been taken in the 2004 budget: a) major urban infrastructure investment packages to be funded in 2004 comprise the water and sewerage investment packages in Suva-Nausori, the water supply package in Nadi-Lautoka area, the new Rewa bridge in Nausori, as well as the construction of the new School of Hospitality and Tourism Studies in Nadi. b) a range of tax incentives with an impact on the urban economy comprising: • accelerated depreciation for buildings to be extended for another two years, and

extending this tax facility to renewable energy equipment and water tanks; • duty free entry on raw materials for the shipbuilding industry; • VAT exemptions for yacht supplies and provisions; • 150% tax deduction for companies on the costs associated with listing on the

Stock Exchange. In recognition of the growing concern with poverty in the country, the Government launched a F$ 50 million plan to reduce poverty in October 2003, including a range of actions addressing urban poverty. These are primarily in the area of upgrading of squatter settlements and low-income housing, social welfare (with the bulk of the programme going to the Family Assistance Scheme) and SME/micro-finance support through the National Micro-finance Unit (NMFU) and the National Centre for Small and Micro Enterprises Development (NCSMED), which will be merged in 2004. Direct investment support for upgrading and low-income housing is quite limited, at $ 4.5 million in 2003 and $ 3 million in 2004. Approximately half of the total support will benefit the urban poor, primarily through the Family Assistance Scheme. Some of the above measures towards creating an enabling economic environment are urban-specific, or indeed location specific, with responsibility falling on national urban sector agencies and/or on urban local governments. The emerging poverty reduction programme builds on existing initiatives. It is constrained in its size by the government’s financial position, and insufficient as compared to the need for urban poverty reduction, given the extent of urban households in poverty (close to 30% of the urban population). The nature of urban poverty and options for its reduction are not yet sufficiently well understood8. It is recognised that there is a need for a more strategic policy approach towards the urban economy, in order to better exploit its potential and to reduce urban poverty. A review of the urban poverty situation and of the effectiveness of current measures taken to date by government to address urban

8 The UNDP 1997 poverty report and the 2003 ADB supported Participatory Assessment on Hardship (PAH) and Poverty have contributed to the current gradual changes in perception and improved understanding


Draft/16/4/04 39

poverty is therefore required as part of UPAP, as well as an expanded range of urban poverty reduction measures. The core poverty issue is under- and unemployment, and the key policy question therefore is what urban sector interventions may be helpful to reduce under- and unemployment in urban areas. As noted in section 2.2 above, the urban economy has become more informalised over the last few years, with a growing prevalence of informal production and trading. Such activities do not reach their full market potential as a result of regulatory constraints, due to lack of access to land and finance and due to limited market information. It is therefore important to review the existing regulatory framework with the objective of facilitating such small-scale economic activities of low-income households, as well as to strengthen the ongoing support mechanisms. In addition, the transparency of the market for small-scale entrepreneurs and low-income labour may be enhanced by information and communication activities at local level. The following additional measures are proposed to be taken, both by national government, as well as by local governments, in order to facilitate and stimulate urban economic growth, while simultaneously promoting (or at least not adversely affecting) equity. These measures comprise the following actions by national government: • review of possible additional tax incentives for specific or generalised categories

of enterprises, particularly for SMEs; • periodic review of the national urban poverty situation and the effectiveness of

urban poverty reduction measures; • more focused and specific support to micro-enterprises in targeted urban areas

through the unified NCSMED/NMFU (bringing capacity-building and micro-credit support together in one statutory body), through strengthening the intermediary micro-finance organisations (particularly in the Greater Suva area), through experimenting with different institutional approaches (apart from working through the Grameen Bank model, e.g. also through village banks, credit unions and co-operatives), and by linking up borrower groups with commercial banks;

• upgrading informal areas through legalisation of land tenure and infrastructure investment support (including micro-infrastructure) will be augmented by a parallel small-scale business registration and - support programme (in partnership with the concerned local government);

• local governments will be supported in taking appropriate measures to support, regularize and/or relocate pavement and street-side hawkers and traders, geared towards enhancing their market potential while maintaining adequate public health standards (mini-market development and licensing).

Local governments will also be empowered and encouraged to contribute to an enabling environment by undertaking some local enterprise promotional measures in their own right through: • follow up on the recommendations of the NCSMED legal and regulatory review

undertaken in 2003; • rationalizing development control responsibilities with regard to land zoned for

conditional development; • establishing mechanisms to facilitate SMEs in peri-urban areas, e.g. through the

establishment of district councils assuming regular local council support functions;

• instituting differential (special) property rates for newly regularised areas, special leases on local government owned properties, as well as differential business licence charges for SMEs;


Draft/16/4/04 40

• for the larger local governments: facilitation of the development of micro-enterprises through a one-stop-shop licensing cum market information office;

• enhancing mini-market development and hawkers/traders licensing process. As indicated in the above, urban poverty is both a national and a local government concern, although local councils do not necessarily see urban poverty reduction as part of their mandate. Therefore, the Local Government Act will be amended to reflect urban poverty reduction as a core part of the mandate of local government. In addition, guidelines will be developed to specify in detail the supporting actions that local councils may undertake in this area (including some of the actions listed above). Systems and procedures for poverty reduction support will be instituted in pilot local councils, and local council staff trained in implementing these. Beyond measures to enhance urban employment through support to SMEs, additional policy measures are considered in the urban land (section 3.1), housing (section 3.2) and infrastructure (section 3.3 above) areas of the Urban Policy Action Plan, which will contribute to reducing urban poverty. Measures in the urban land and housing areas will enhance urban land supply and security of land tenure (and the ability to use the land title as collateral for borrowing) and shelter conditions of the urban poor. Enhanced access to urban water supply and sanitation will help to address urban poverty from a public health perspective. The employment impact of labour-intensive public works (particularly small ones) also contributes to reducing urban poverty, and care will therefore be taken that this aspect is properly taken into account in public work tenders.


Draft/16/4/04 41

Policy implementation matrix 4.2 – Urban Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Objectives/goals Actions/activities Monitorable benchmarks Actors Time

line National strategy Develop strategic policy approach towards the urban economy, reinforce rural-urban linkages, and reduce urban poverty.

review of possible additional tax and other incentives for specific or generalised categories of local council investments enhancing rural-urban linkages, and for enterprises, particularly for SMEs. periodic review of the national urban poverty situation and the effectiveness of national and local urban poverty reduction measures.

Report on review outcome and proposed incentives measures for implementation Urban poverty review report and recommendations on improved urban poverty reduction measures

MNPF MNPF/MLGHSSE/ DSW/BoS/FLGA

end 2004 to end 2005 end 2004 -annually from then

SME development Develop and implement strategic and targeted interventions for SME support

a) more focused and specific support to micro-enterprises in targeted urban areas through: • strengthening the unified NCSMED/NMFU; • strengthening the intermediary micro-finance

organisations (particularly in the Greater Suva area); • experimenting with new institutional approaches • linking up borrower groups with commercial banks. b) linking upgrading of informal areas through legalisation of land tenure and infrastructure investment support with parallel small-scale business registration and - support programme (in partnership with the concerned local government).

i) medium-term plan being implemented satisfactorily ii) well-functioning intermediaries in all major urban areas iii) implementation of different models underway iv) contract with at least one commercial bank under implementation small scale business support programme included as part of urban area upgrading in at least 5 upgrading areas

NCSMED/NMFU MNPF/MCI NCSMED/NMFU NCSMED/NMFU NCSMED/NMFU Selected ULCs/MLGHSSE/ NCSMED/NMFU/ intermediary organisations

end 2005 end 2004 end 2004 mid 2004 end 2004

Local government empowerment and support i) make urban poverty reduction a core mandate of local government ii) Create a more positive local environment for Small and Micro Enterprise (SME) development

a) modify LGA provisions to provide for urban poverty reduction as a mandated local council task; b) establish a set of guidelines for urban poverty reduction action by local councils; c) institute systems and procedures for poverty reduction support in pilot local councils, and train local council staff in implementing these. a) follow up on the recommendations of the NCSMED legal and regulatory review; b) rationalize development control responsibilities with regard to land zoned for conditional development c) establish mechanisms to facilitate SMEs in peri-urban areas, e.g. through the establishment of district councils assuming regular local council support functions d) instituting differential (special) property rates for newly regularised areas, special SME leases on local government owned properties, as well as differential business licence charges for SMEs; e) for the larger local governments: facilitation of the development of micro-enterprises through a one-stop-shop licensing cum market information office. f) enhancing mini-market development and hawkers/traders licensing process.

a) modified LGA provisions enacted b) guidelines prepared and circulated to councils for implementation c) pilots on the way in at least two local councils a) Implemented legal and regulatory changes b) local councils assuming delegated responsibility in accordance with TPA general provisions c) district councils established in at least two peri-urban areas d) experiments with special rates, special leases and differential charges reviewed e) one-stop-shop in operation in one LC f) mini-market and revised licensing process operational in three ULCs

MLGHSSE/FLGA MLGHSSE/DSW LCs/FLGA/MLGHSSE MNPF/MLGHSSE/ MCI/FLGA/selected LCs DTCP MLGHSSE/FLGA MLGHSSE/FLGA/ selected LCs LCs concerned LCs concerned

mid 2005 mid 2005 end 2006 mid 2005 from mid 2004 end 2004 end 2004 mid 2005 end 2004


Draft/16/4/04 42

4.3 Urban Planning and Management Framework Goal: sustainable and efficient urban planning and management framework Urban development planning in Fiji must be a dynamic, informed, and participatory process of strategic and operational decision-making. Efficient management of development resources is of critical importance and concern. All available resources from both the public and private sectors must be mobilized if the needs of community residents are to be met on a sustainable basis. The existing institutional framework, policies, systems and procedures for urban development planning and management is largely inadequate to that purpose, as noted in various other sections above in the UPAP. A number of interrelated issues will need to be addressed, as follows: (i) Lack of mechanisms for integrating urban development and environmental planning at the national, regional and local levels. Clear mechanisms must be established for integrating urban development planning at the national, regional and local levels. The statutory framework provided by the Town Planning Act and the Subdivision of Lands Act is not sufficient, in and of itself, to meet the challenges of urban growth management in Fiji. There is an absence of a strategic vision of where urban development should be in terms of outcomes to be achieved at a variety of levels, and how best to achieve them. (ii) Limited effectiveness of the current urban planning process in facilitating the provision of serviced land for development. There is little effective integration of land provision with service and infrastructure planning and little strategic analysis of what land is needed, the number of lots, where these might be located by land tenure and who might best develop them. Pro-active and participatory urban land development planning needs to be instituted to ensure the sustained provision of an adequate supply of appropriate, affordable serviced land to meet the anticipated urban demand, particularly from poor households. (iii) Centralization of urban planning and land development administration. The centralization of urban planning functions and absence of systematic training and technical assistance to strengthen the capacities of local authorities to plan, organize and manage the urban growth greatly reduces the potential resource pool available to plan and administer development. There needs to be a devolution of power and responsibility from national to local government, with national government focusing on policy support and broader strategic planning while local government focuses on local regulation and strategic planning. (iv) Planning standards, rules and regulations for land use planning and infrastructure development are unaffordable. Current standards for land and infrastructure development have substantial negative impacts on the affordability of proposed investment programs to both government and beneficiary households and, consequently, on cost recovery for shelter and urban services. Such planning standards vary between local councils and central government. (v) Rapidly growing peri-urban areas are not part of the development of ‘town plans’ at the local level – the need for holistic approach. In order to lead and guide development, government planners must understand and respond to trends at the both the regional and local levels and at the urban, peri urban, and rural levels.


Draft/16/4/04 43

(vi) Inadequate utilization of land information technologies for urban planning and management. An integrated information GIS system and the development of user systems is paramount to key stakeholders taking a proactive role in urban land supply, including the functional areas of both urban management and land supply monitoring. UPAP supports the following actions: a) Strengthen the policy and institutional framework for Urban Planning and Management In order to strengthen the national policy and institutional framework for urban planning and management the Government will: • Prepare a strategic framework to guide urban development policy and

programming in Fiji, that specifies the outcomes to be achieved at a variety of levels – national, regional, metropolitan and local – including the processes by which this should be achieved and monitored.

• Realign MLGHSSE as the lead agency for guiding and coordinating urban development planning in Fiji (which includes devolving functions to local government). Details are in section 4.5.

• Devolve agreed powers and responsibilities for statutory and strategic planning from central government/MLGHSSE to local governments. As noted in section 4.5 below, decentralization of the role of national government in the current planning process will instil more responsibility in local councils, provided that local council staff are appropriately trained, and provided there is the support and strength of central government, legislation and policy.

(b) Improve systems, procedures and technologies for urban planning and management In order to improve these, the Government will: • Review and revise the urban plan making process mandated by the Town

Planning Act, especially related to the process and the need to provide operational strategic planning outcomes that guide action, - balanced with statutory outcomes. There is an opportunity to make plans that set objectives, outcomes, principles. These can be both statutory or non statutory (advisory) and can be prepared for urban growth, land use and , infrastructure and services at the national, regional, district or local or site specific level.

• Implement changes in the administration of the Land Subdivision Act to improve the speed and efficiency of the approval process and reduce the time required to initiate and complete urban development projects (see section 4.6). New ‘fast-track’ mechanisms will be designed to improve the coordination and efficiency of key responsible actors (DTCP, PWD, and LCs). To the maximum feasible extent, administration should be delegated to the local government level.

• Rules and regulation will be balanced with an increasing focus on community education and awareness on environmental planning, land development, - so the community can understand the rationale of current/new systems and processes.

• The environmental assessment functions of the Department of Environment in MLGHSSE will be mainstreamed into the wider development assessment processes, with support available for local Government, as noted in section 4.1 above.

• The MLGHSSE will develop a functional GIS system, integrated with the systems of other key institutions in order to take a proactive leadership role in urban and environmental planning and management, including land supply provision and its monitoring. A GIS and land environmental planning and assessment process is to


Draft/16/4/04 44

be established in MLGHSSE as part of any proposed revision of urban (and rural) planning and management legislation.

(c) Implement a pilot land development project in Greater Suva Region (Suva-Nausori-Navua) MLGHSSE will lead the immediate action preparation of a pilot Urban Land Development Program for Greater Suva to test out UPAP approaches for subsequent replication. Such work, integrated as a essential part of the Urban Growth Management Plan, would involve the planning, coordination and harmonization of the inter-institutional policies and programmatic approaches of key agencies (NLTB, DTCP, HA, PWD, the RLAs, and LCs) regarding: • the upgrading of infrastructure in peri-urban areas and their incorporation within

adjacent council areas; • squatter settlement upgrading; • the provision of affordable serviced residential land, particularly for low-income

households, and • the promulgation of appropriate and affordable standards for infrastructure

provision and land subdivision and development. The current ADB technical assistance will strengthen the local, regional and national institutional framework for planning and managing urban development in the Suva-Nausori-Navua Region. Key institutional outputs of the pilot effort in the Greater Suva Region will include: • Preparation of a strategic framework to guide urban development policy and

programming for the Region, that specifies the outcomes to be achieved at a variety of levels, – including the processes by which this should be achieved and monitored;

• Coordinated and harmonized inter-institutional policies and programmatic approaches (DTCP, HA, PWD, NLTB, and Ras, and LCs) to the setting of appropriate affordable standards for squatter settlement upgrading, peri-urban and urban land subdivision and development;

• Central government and local government partnerships to systematically prepare peri-urban areas and unincorporated towns for incorporation by investing in their infrastructure.


Draft/16/4/04 45

Policy implementation matrix 4.3 – Urban Planning and Management Objectives/goals Actions/activities Monitorable

benchmarks Actors Time line

Strengthen the Policy and Institutional Framework Formulate a National Urban Development Policy Framework Improve coordination of urban/regional development and planning Rationalize the allocation of planning responsibilities between state and local governments

MLGHSSE leads inter-institutional policy preparation work Government/ key stakeholders review of roles and responsibilities for urban planning/management with a view to identify core MLGHSSE functions activities to be devolved to the local government level, where appropriate Agreement on roles, responsibilities and activities to be devolved. Amend/draft and enact legislation (e.g. Local Government Act) as necessary to provide legal framework for MLGHSSE & devolved activities

Framework prepared Agreement reached on requirements Agreement reached on specific changes Legislation drafted or amended Legislation enacted

MoP&F, MLGHSSE, PWD, Local Governments, others MoP&F, MLGHSSE, PSC, FLGA, Cabinet, parliament

Q4 2004 – Q4 2005 Q 1-2 2005 Q 3-4 2005 Q4 2006

Strengthen planning systems, procedures and technologies Revised TCP Act planning process to provide strategic operational guidance Improved effectiveness of environmental planning to ensure protection of environmentally sensitive resources Revised procedures for decentralized “fast-track” administration of Land Subdivision Act Establish integrated MLGHSSE Geographic Information System (GIS)

MLGHSSE/Government/ key stakeholders review of TCPA urban planning process with a view to balancing statutory requirements with strategic operation outcomes and action guidance. The strengthening of environmental planning – integrated with the general town planning regulations (general provisions). EIA system to be rigorously adopted as part of good governance and of revised planning processes MLGHSSE/LG/ key stakeholders review of Land Subdivision Act administrative systems and procedures with a view to decentralized fast-track administration Agreement on required revisions and institutional roles, and responsibilities and activities . Amend/draft and enact legislation (particularly Town Planning Act and Land Subdivision Act.) as necessary to provide legal framework for planning and administration activities Review requirements and design system and prepare budget submission GIS hardware/software purchased & installed

Meetings held and common position reached Agreement reached on specific changes Agreement reached on specific changes Legislation drafted or amended Legislation enacted Meetings held and TA for system design provided; budget prepared System in functioning

MLGHSSE, PWD, LCs, other stakeholders MLGHSSE and Local Governments MLGHSSE, PWD, LCs, other stakeholders Cabinet Parliament MLGHSSE, MNPF. FLIS

Q1-2 2005 Q1-2 2005 Q1-2 2005 Q2 2005 Q4 2005 Q4 2005 Q4 2004 Q1-2 2005


Draft/16/4/04 46


Actors Time line

Implement a pilot land development project in Greater Suva Region (GS) Effective Urban and Regional Development Policy Framework for GS Operational appropriate and affordable standards for land provision ; infrastructure and services to the urban poor. Coordinated development of peri-urban and native Fijian village areas in GS Region Timely adoption and transfer of assets of subdivisions to concerned local governments

MLGHSSE/DTCP leads inter-institutional policy preparation work for urban and regional development, including the bio-physical, social and economic setting Identify residential and other land requirements and assess available land; Prepare time-bound institution-specific action plan for phased development Meeting of all stakeholders to undertake detailed review of existing standards, implications of current standards on affordability, and potential for relaxation of standards for low-income developments. Agreement on a unified (and possibly incremental) set of standards and levels of service, and amend regulations accordingly. Definition of constraints & opportunities; development of strategy & action plan; identification and prioritization of capital investments; identification of institutional responsibilities Agree on guidelines for timely hand-over of new developments within or adjacent to towns to local governments. Prepare time-bound institution-specific action plan for the phased transfer of assets to local governments and the inclusion of peri-urban communities into urban jurisdictions Make amendments to existing legislation as necessary

Framework prepared Meetings held and agreement reached. Standards and levels of service agreed Meetings held and agreement reached, regulations amended . Plan for systematic incorporation of peri urban areas Agreement on guidelines. Finalization of action plan. Legislative amendments made

MLGHSSE, PWD, other concerned national-level agencies, Lands, NLTB, LCs and other stakeholders MLGHSSE, and other concerned national-level agencies, LCs, and other stakeholders

Q2-3 2004 Q2 2004 Q2-3 2004 Q4 2004 Q4 2004 Q4 2004 Q4 2004 Q4 2005

Formulate GS Plan ; effective implementation framework, instruments and incentives to encourage efficient urban spatial growth

MLGHSSE/DTCP leads Inter-institutional work Enhance spatial planning and development control Introduce mechanisms to offer alternatives for squatters to occupying foreshore lands and other inadequate areas- by providing alternative affordable solutions located in or close to the urban areas Introduce trunk infrastructure and services into preferred development areas

Greater Suva Urban Growth Management Plan approved with key implementation steps identified

MLGHSSE, PWD, national agencies, NLTB, LCs, other stakeholders

Q2, 2005


Draft/16/4/04 47

4.4 Urban Services Financing Goal: sustainable, efficient and equitable urban services financing National government finances the bulk of local infrastructure investments in incorporated towns, e.g. water supply, sewerage, power supply, roads, health and education facilities. As a matter of principle, the current system of local government finance in Fiji enables incorporated towns to finance their other investment requirements with their own revenues, using borrowing as necessary. However, the combination of urbanisation and inability of the national and local agencies (primarily PWD and the local councils) responsible for urban infrastructure and services to keep pace with urban growth are particularly manifest in two types of rapidly growing under-served areas:

• squatter areas (currently housing about 16 % of the urban population nationally) and

• peri-urban areas (housing about 30% of the urban population). Provision of services to these areas is currently a national government responsibility, but this is only carried out in a piece-meal manner, causing significant social and environmental costs, and perpetuating the inability/unwillingness of local councils to provide such areas properly with municipal services financed out of municipal rates paid by the residents of the areas served. In addition, municipal infrastructure and services provision by local councils to their ratepayers are suffering from problems related to the efficiency and effectiveness of local councils’ operations. The social costs are felt by the excluded individuals (inadequate services and/or lack of tenure security), and most of all by the urban poor. They are also felt by the residents of the incorporated towns, who have to pay higher rates than would be required, if the above bottlenecks would be resolved and if local councils would discharge their functions efficiently and effectively. Therefore, unlocking the current deadlock in the above two service investment areas, as well enhancing municipal management and governance performance are required, and form the main rationale for introducing the instrument of a Challenge Fund for Municipal Development. This is envisaged as a Matching Fund facility acting as an incentive for local councils to carry out these investments (with cost-sharing from national government), and to enhance their (financial) performance, while at the same time clearly placing formal service delivery in these two areas squarely within the functional responsibilities of local councils (requiring amendments to the Local Government Act). This instrument is particularly attractive with regard to the above two infrastructure investment areas, for which, as a matter of principle, both national government and the local council have a shared service delivery responsibility towards the residents: councils cannot be considered solely responsible for the emergence of squatter areas in their jurisdiction, or for the growth of peri-urban areas adjacent to their town boundaries, as these phenomena are caused by national socio-economic factors; at the same time, residents in these areas, like any other citizens, have a right to enjoy proper municipal services in exchange for paying town rates. The Challenge Fund mechanism will also be applicable to:


Draft/16/4/04 48

• provide assistance to towns that can demonstrate that changed economic circumstances have led to social problems beyond their capacity to control;

• promote appropriate infrastructure standards and good governance; • further national government’s other objectives, such as, but not limited to,

poverty reduction and affirmative action. There is a large variation in planned investments in towns, a variation that bears little relationship to the size of the town or the level of the rates. It is proposed to solve this problem by encouraging (or requiring, as part of the Challenge Fund mechanism) local councils to prepare consistent and financially feasible medium term investment programmes through a participatory process, with appropriate technical support provided as necessary. Different other funding mechanisms, such as tax increment financing (TIF), joint ventures and municipal bonds will also be piloted with by selected local councils. Rate arrears levels of the councils are unacceptably high and it is imperative that councils strengthen their monitoring and enforcement role, as the procedures that are now available are sufficient. Councils must implement improvements in rate collection efforts, and must consider an up-to-date rate payment record as a condition for issuance of permits that they are the issuing authority for (and other incentive and punitive measures). Additionally, detailed reviews will be carried out of:

• the rating system to ensure that it is suited to towns of different sizes/situations;

• alternatives to rate exemptions, including rate variations by property type, use and location;

• the acceptability of charges to recover development costs from directly affected properties (valorisation);

• revenues, which should be rationalised; • cost reporting to ensure transparency and efficiency.


Draft/16/4/04 49

Policy Implementation matrix 4.4 – Urban Finance Policy Objectives Actions/ activities Monitorable

Benchmarks Actors Time line

Investment Needs and Internal Funding To make urban services responsive to resident needs and enable their rational planning and programming

Review present situation in towns, develop operational recommendations for participation and planning

Review actors & funding agreed Review started Review findings agreed

MLG FLGA MOFP Dev. Bank

2005 and 2006

To determine funding requirements for investment within incorporated towns

Evaluate investment and cash flow needs by town Forecast revenues with “affordable” rates Review results

Review actors & funding agreed Review started Review findings agreed

MLG FLGA LCs MOFP Dev. Bank

2005 to 2007

Financial leverage for underserved areas To enable urban service investments that are or were the responsibility of central government, e.g. in peri-urban areas or in squatter areas within town boundaries

Undertake systematic area by area review Establish Challenge Fund for Municipal Development

Review findings agreed Decision on establishment taken

MLGHSSE, MFNP

September 2004

To obtain funds for other urban service investments, particularly in areas of national importance

Review the scale of the problem Review means to share funding through Challenge Fund

As above MLGHSSE, MFNP

2004 and 2005

To develop operational modalities of a Challenge Fund, in particular the items which it could finance, its management and start-up amount

Prepare Fund rules, regulations, operational procedures and application procedures. Allocate finance Inform and train LCs

Rules and procedures agreed Start-up finance agreed Procedures set Councils informed

MLGHSSE, MFNP FLGA

2004 and 2005

To decrease the costs of social investments by decreasing charges paid to direct service providers

Discuss need for charges levied by FEA, Telcom etc Review timing of premium payment to NLTB Review agencies for which lower charges might provide national benefits

Review started Review findings publicised

MLGHSSE, MFNP, FEA Telcom NLTB

2004 and 2005

To gain experience with alternative financing sources, eg TIF, joint ventures, municipal bonds

Pilot projects undertaken by at least one local council and evaluated

Evaluation report LC concerned mid- 2005

To agree means to fund urban service investments in other peri-urban areas or the smaller unincorporated towns

Evaluate benefits of District Councils and/or other mechanisms as transitional approach to full incorporatisation with existing LCs

District Councils operationalised Korovua

MOH MLGHSSE

2004 and 2005

Rates and Valorisation To determine the rating system most applicable to types of town

Review findings of previous study Consider application by town size etc

Review team Proposals Agreement

MLGHSSE FLGA

2004 and 2005

To review exemptions and allow towns to vary rates by property type, use and location

Review practice and acceptability of existing exemptions


MLGHSSE FLGA

2004

To allow recovery of development costs from direct beneficiaries (Valorisation)

Review mechanisms used and acceptability elsewhere Design system applicable to Fiji


MLGHSSE FLGA

2005

To increase rate collections without raising rates

Various incentive and punitative measures adopted and evaluated

Evaluation report MLGHSSE FLGA

mid 2005

Cost Recovery and Accounting To determine cost recovery requirements for services provided

Define full and partial cost recovery Calculate needs by service


MLGHSSE FLGA

2004 to 2006

To determine the best means to obtain cost recovery, in particular for garbage collection, using rates or charges

Review collection result alternatives Review affordability alternatives


MLGHSSE FLGA

2004 to 2006

To ensure a cost effective municipal revenue system

Review existing revenue heads and compare to collection costs


MLGHSSE FLGA

2004 to 2006

To provide a transparent municipal accounting system

Review and rationalise existing cost accounting heads


MLGHSSE FLGA

2004 to 2006


Draft/16/4/04 50

4.5 Institutional Framework and Governance Goal: effective and efficient sector institutions timely meeting the needs of stakeholders As discussed in section 2.9, the current institutional and governance arrangements are complex, with the sector being over regulated and governed by a plethora of agencies with overlapping responsibilities and mandates. Generally, there is a lack of dynamism and cohesion characterizing the institutional framework for the urban sector. The recommended policy approach is to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the urban sector by developing a robust framework comprising the following: (i) Devolution of functions, responsibilities and resources to local municipal government whilst strengthening capacity to meet local needs. Transfer of improved autonomy, powers and responsibilities for urban development and management to local government will require a robust enabling environment with improved management capacity, accountability and transparency, coupled with monitoring indicators and benchmarks as a ‘check and balance’ of performance. Strengthening and development of skills for both staff and councillors across a range of areas - for example, urban finance, contracting, town planning processes, urban poverty alleviation and urban environmental management - will be paramount in the devolution process. For Fiji, as a small island economy with limited technical and human resources, there are good economy of scale arguments for key infrastructure services such as the provision of water supply, reticulated sanitation and development of the primary road network to remain with central government agencies The proposed devolution framework is shown in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1: Devolution Framework for Urban Development Key Function Primary Role of National Government Primary Role of Local Government Urban Management Stakeholder coordination and facilitation of

process, program development and implementation

Stakeholder and process participation, local project implementation

Strategic Plans and Policies such as for infrastructure, services, land development and squatter upgrading

Stakeholder coordination, policy direction, national planning guidelines, program development, budget support for local government and project development

Stakeholder and process participation, budget support, development of private and public sector partnerships, local project implementation

Provision of urban services and infrastructure

Provision of water supply, reticulated sewerage, primary road network, stakeholder coordination and facilitation such as waste management disposal; policy direction; budget support

Local road provision and upgrading, footpaths, local street lighting; O and M, local asset maintenance; waste management, collection and disposal with central government; cost recovery, user pays, private/public partnerships including waste management

Regulatory framework such as EIA, urban and rural planning

Facilitation of framework with stakeholders, guidelines, enforcement and monitoring

Local implementation such as development applications, condition enforcement and EIA monitoring

Fiscal/finance management Policy direction, guidelines, monitoring indicators, incentive and challenge funds, budget support for local government

Cost recovery, user pays, private/public partnerships, increased performance, setting of benchmarks

Good governance Policy direction; guidelines Strategic vision, participation, transparency, responsiveness, consensus orientation, equity, effectiveness and efficiency, accountability

Strategic vision, participation, transparency, responsiveness, consensus orientation, equity, effectiveness and efficiency, accountability

Support for Local Government Policy direction, guidelines, monitoring indicators, budget support, human resource training

Stakeholder and process participation, local implementation


Draft/16/4/04 51

(ii) Refocusing national and metropolitan responsibility for urban development within the MLGHSSE whilst divesting local implementation responsibilities to local government. The key roles of a refocused MLGHSSE as the lead agency will be agreed - for example, strategic planning and policy setting, regulation including EIA and development assessment for developments of national significance, a strengthened office of local government including development of squatter policy, national and metropolitan stakeholder coordination, environmental education and awareness, with the planning roles of the environment unit mainstreamed into the strategic and regulatory functions. The focus of a reinvigorated MLGHSSE will be on policy direction and guidance, coordination, facilitation, advice and monitoring, providing ‘checklists’ and monitoring indicators to local government, the private sector and relevant central government agencies rather than doing council planning and local development activities - for example, squatter upgrading - as at present. (iii) Improving sector-planning mechanisms so as to ensure there is a coordinated approach to resolving priority urban development issues and enhanced common understanding of urban sector issues. This policy direction is paramount. Foremost, there are no institutional arrangements for wider urban management at the national level in Fiji as well as in the Suva Nausori corridor which includes all key stakeholders in a formal process of visioning, priority setting and working towards agreed urban sector goals. It is intended to establish an Urban Management Board under the auspices of a revamped MLGHSSE to focus on roles such as sector cohesion and leadership via coordination, formulating and endorsing national policy, setting sector priorities, considering developments of national significance such as major tourism proposals, and identifying gaps in the national and metropolitan planning framework. The thrust of the board’s role would be clearly one a taking a strategic approach to resolving urban sector issues and concerns. The board will comprise of major urban stakeholders including community representatives and could be chaired by the Minister for LGHSSE. (iv) Strengthening the effectiveness of the NLTB so as to provide a timely supply of affordable urban land As noted in section 3.1, the NLTB and to a lesser extent the Ministry of Lands for crown lands is a pivotal actor given the focus for future land development in urban areas is on native lands. Informal developments continue to proliferate on native lands in the urban areas as a response to ‘coping strategies’ employed by landowners but without NLTB approval and endorsement. This will create major medium and long-term problems for the NLTB and all service and planning agencies, unless key sector agencies show leadership in dealing with the problems. It is intended to strengthen the land facilitation role of NLTB by mainstreaming the NLTB’s Land Development Program 2002-2009 and Greater Suva Land Use Study (2003) in a formal process with key stakeholders. This includes setting targets, identifying infrastructure constraints and opportunities and agreeing key market segments such as affordable land that must be urgently supplied. Consideration of the range of landowner needs will be more central to the current development process, with a range of development packages identified for landowners such as development capital and joint ventures including involvement of local government as key players. These will be translated into pilot projects to facilitate scaling up the supply of affordable land and housing. Given the current establishment of a commercial development arm in NLTB, the Vanua Corporation, these steps are essential to ensuring a timely supply of land whilst repositioning the pressing social and economic needs of landowners in the process.


Draft/16/4/04 52

(v) Institutional arrangements for peri urban areas Central to the issue of improved urban sector performance is the delineation of appropriate mechanisms by which peri-urban areas are included in a more strategic and equitable process for environmental planning, service delivery and funding of services. A key objective is to seek integrated and coordinated planning across both urban and peri-urban areas, so peri-urban areas will be systematically incorporated into adjoining local government areas. This will substantially enhance a more strategic approach to urban service delivery and planning generally, whilst potentially increasing the rate base of councils. Development of implementation plans for phased inclusion of peri-urban areas into adjoining urban areas, which identify investment and service priorities to enable the transition from peri-urban to full incorporation and functionality, will be undertaken by a revamped Department of Local Government working together with local councils, rural local authorities and PWD. This effort will be supported through the proposed Challenge Fund for Municipal Development (section 4.4). (vi) Promoting participatory urban governance in institutions, policies, systems and structures Urban governance is a cross cutting theme in the development of more effective institutional arrangements for urban development in Fiji. Good urban governance including support for the growth of local government should be considered a crucial part of the national economic development process. The challenge for urban governance is to translate the principles underlying good governance into pilot programs and day-to-day applications. Improved articulation, integration and involvement of current local community arrangements including traditional native Fijian villages, must lead to better urban outcomes. Participatory governance at all levels should be promoted via equity, efficiency, partnerships, transparency and accountability, awareness of rights and opportunities. Good governance principles need to be promoted nationally and applied locally as part of the reform of institutions for better urban planning and development. This includes establishment of performance indicators and guidelines for outsourcing, sharing of information and asset management that incorporate urban governance principles.


Draft/16/4/04 53

Policy Implementation matrix 4.5 - Institutional Framework and Governance Objectives Actions/activities Monitorable benchmarks Key

Stakeholders Time line

The National Planning Process (i) strengthen the urban dimension of the national planning process

(i) set urban priorities and objectives as part of the SDS process (ii) set urban priorities and objectives in partnership with key urban stakeholders (iii) strongly involve the ‘lead’ agency responsible for coordinating urban development in this process

(i) urban priorities and objectives included in the next SDS, 2006-2008 (ii) transparent process for setting of urban objectives and priorities in place

MFNP, PWD, MLGHSSE, NLTB, LCs, HA, PRB, HART, Fijian Affairs

Q 3-4, 2004

Local Government (i) increased effectiveness of responsibilities, roles and powers of local government (ii) strengthened capacity and resources of local government

i) prepare roadmap to devolve functions, powers and responsibilities to local government which will assist in developing a better enabling environment for LCs to meet their needs (ii) detail new powers and responsibilities from devolution process and resources needed (iii) prepare monitoring indicators and benchmarks as a ‘check and balance’ of performance (iv) strengthen and develop skills for both staff and councillors across a range of areas (v) revise legislation to reflect new roles and responsibilities including governance principles

(i) implementation plan detailing preferred policy, legislative and institutional arrangements agreed by key stakeholders (ii) phased transfer of functions and roles from central government in place (iii) targeted training plan for local government being implemented

MLGHSSE, NLTB, LCs, MFNP, PSC, USP

Q 3-4, 2004 to Q3-4, 2006

Lead agency for Planning and Management of Urban Development refocused MLGHSSE as lead agency for planning and managing urban (and rural) development in Fiji

(i) MLGHSSE to identify core functions and activities needed to achieve its new mandate as a lead agency for urban development (ii) MLGHSSE and key stakeholders to agree new policy and regulatory framework to enable its to carry our new functions (iii) articulate administrative, procedural and legislative implications of the above including functional devolution to local councils (iv) identify options for preferred coordination arrangements at the metropolitan and national level such as an urban management board inclusive of key stakeholders (v) identify opportunities to allow the private sector a greater role in strategic planning and development assessment at the national and local level

i) roadmap and implementation plan agreed with key deliverables agreed (ii) business and corporate plan prepared outlining new roles, functions, key activities, Ministry structure, preferred urban management board, staff and resource implications etc agreed (iii) policy framework to reflect new Ministry roles and directions agreed (ivi) new planning and urban management legislation drafted iv) phased plan for devolution of ‘local’ roles and functions from MLGHSSE to local government agreed

MLGHSSE, PSC, MFNP, LCs, community

Q3-4, 2004 Q1-2, 2005 Q 4 2004 Q 3 2005 Q 2 2005

Urban Land Availability (i) NLTB to deliver effective, timely and affordable supply of native lands for urban development (ii) To provide landowners with alternative development packages to formally develop their lands (iii) Effective partnerships between NLTB and landowners, HA, private sector, LCs and national government

(i) Develop strengthening program with NLTB which incorporates: * mainstreaming the NLTB’s formal urban land development program and Greater Suva land Use Study involving key stakeholders * ‘fast track’ proactive process for landowners * identification and application of development incentives for landowners * innovative NLTB partnerships including local government * packaging of affordable development projects including review of standards * formulation of community education and awareness program with landowners

(i) urban land development program in place by NLTB and delivering range of land (ii) new land development processes and options in place with landowners and local government (iii) new development and co-financing arrangements mainstreamed within 1 year (iv) community education and awareness program operational (v) NLTB, local and central government pilot project for low income lots implemented within 2 years

NLTB, PWD, MLGHSSE, landowners, HA, PRB, MFA, LCs

Q 3-4, 2004

Institutional Arrangements for Peri-Urban Areas (i) systematic approach to incorporating peri urban areas into adjoining local government areas

(i) prepare a ‘road map’ and set of performance criteria regarding achievement of full functionality in the peri urban areas as part of the incorporation process – e.g. status of infrastructure needs and services, rate collection options, level of standards to be applied, etc (ii) prepare an implementation program for each peri urban areas to allow transition towards incorporation and full functionality of the peri urban area (iii) strengthen partnerships especially local government with rural local authorities during the transition phase (iv) identify any legislative change required

(i) ‘roadmap’ identifying criteria and benchmarks agreed (ii) phasing plan for each peri urban agreed, implemented and monitored (iii) key affected stakeholders involved in process (iv) incorporation of peri urban areas in Suva Nausori corridor complete within 3 years

Department of Local Government in MLGHSSE, local governments, rural local authorities, PWD, Fijian Affairs

Q2-4, 2004 Q1-2, 2005

Improved urban (i) pilot projects to integrate urban governance (i) Pilot projects completed MLGHSSE, Q1-2, 2005


Draft/16/4/04 54

governance (i) urban governance principles mainstreamed into the day to day applications in institutions, systems, structures and processes

principles into procedural systems and administrative processes including guidelines, information sharing, performance measures and other management tools (ii) where possible, traditional systems need to be integrated in modern decision making systems and respect their values (iii) legislation to include governance principles especially for poverty alleviation and for any revised urban management legislation

(ii) guidelines, indicators and information produced on urban governance (iii) urban governance principles applied in any restructuring of the MLGHSSE

NLTB, local government, HA, PRB, HART, Fijian Affairs, Lands and Minerals, Finance and Economic Planning, PWD, local government

Q1-2, 2006 ongoing


Draft/16/4/04 55

4.6 Legal and Regulatory Framework Goal: effective and efficient urban sector legal and regulatory framework Four areas of legal and regulatory concern have been identified as major issues to be addressed in UPAP. These are:

• Redefining the role of the MLGHSSE; • Devolution of functions from national to local government; • Consolidation; • Peri-Urban Areas

In that context the Subdivision of Land Act (SLA), Public Health Act (PHA), Local Government Act (LGA) and Town Planning Act (TPA) have been reviewed, and based on the UPAP review some major changes to these pieces of legislation will be enacted. Redefining the role of MLGHSSE The MLGHSSE has the overall responsibility to formulate and implement policies relating to urban planning and development including land use, environment planning and management, housing, local government, urban and rural subdivision, fire services and national heritage. However, although it has a wide jurisdiction in principle, this has not been systematically applied. As a result urban development has not been guided coherently. Therefore, the Government intends to realign the MLGHSSE as the lead agency for urban (and rural) development (section 4.5 above). In doing this, it will ensure that there is better co-ordination, resources are shared, funding can be sourced. Refocusing the role of the MLGHSSE will be supported by legislative changes to the TPA and LGA (which have already been identified). With regard to the LGA, there will be an expansion of Part 1 (or the addition of a new Part which will have an Administration Section), which will define the Office of the Director of Local Government, the powers and functions of the minister, the director and local councils. In addition, there will be a new Part to the LGA to enable the establishment of funds by the Minister MLGHSSE to achieve the objectives of the Act, such as a Challenge Fund for Municipal Development (section 4.4) or a Training Fund (section 4.7). Devolution As noted in section 4.5, the purpose behind devolution is to ensure that services to the public are best effected at the level that can provide them most effectively. In Fiji, local government can provide the most effective service in terms of town planning, development assessments, enforcement, and public health (with the exception of services such as water supply, sewerage, national roads and electricity supply, for which considerations of economy of scale are an overriding consideration to retain these services at national level). This will allow national government departments such as DTCP to focus on their key roles of policy formulation, oversight, and monitoring, and to provide support services. For this purpose the LGA, PHA, TPA and SLA will be amended to i.a. specify the objectives of planning in Fiji, functions and duties of the MLGHSSE, functions and duties of local governments (including non-classical ones, such as urban environmental management, squatter settlement upgrading and co-responsibility for urban poverty reduction), as well as to bring legal provisions governing the operations of all putting all local authorities under one piece of legislation (as discussed below).


Draft/16/4/04 56

More specifically, the LGA will have to be amended to ensure that local councils to address urban poverty by making it mandatory for them to undertake tasks and activities which impacts on all residents in their jurisdiction including the urban poor, irrespective of their tenure status. In addition, there will be a new clause in the LGA that will make urban poverty reduction a mainstream function of local councils. Consolidation Currently, there are three possible types of local government administration, i.e. town/city councils, district councils, rural local authorities. The proper administration of the functions of local authorities is hampered by ad-hocism and scattered responsibilities, including the fact that the RLAs are created under the PHA. One of the examples of problems caused by this concerns the case of development approvals that are sent to RLAs. Under the PHA, the RLAs have authority in rural areas but under the SLA, it is the DTCP that approves these developments. Another issue is that the wording of the PHA appears to give the CBH overreaching powers over local authorities. Because there are various ministries and various departments involved, applications by the public and hence service to the public is a long drawn out process, which hampers development. Therefore, legislative consolidation is intended so that all local authorities are placed in one piece of legislation (a revised LGA) with different types of local government having their own Parts or Provisions in it, which defines their roles, functions, powers and duties, as well as defining the role of the National Government in relation to them. The LGA will only make provision for the local councils plus rural local authorities and their attendant duties and functions, whereas the PHA will be revised to focus exclusively on public health matters. There is no prima facie case for having both an SLA and a TPA. It is therefore intended to merge these two pieces of legislation into one consolidated TPA, with details in regulations. Peri-urban areas Currently, there are two ways of addressing the issue of peri-urban areas and these are through boundary extension and through the establishment of district councils. (i) Extension/expansion Section 5 of the LGA allows the Minister to declare an area a town or, an alteration (an extension in effect) to a town boundary. Due to the fact that many residents in peri-urban areas are in the lowest income bracket, local governments will have to subsidize some of the works carried out, and some of the services. This can only be done if there is legislative authority for doing so and will mean an amendment to the Social Justice Act (SJA) and LGA i.e. that the SJA is expanded to make it mandatory for local governments to undertake some tasks in per-urban areas. A complementary amendment will be made in the LGA. (ii) District Council (DC) Instead of establishing district councils right away, there is a need to identify the criteria required for the declaration of a district council and the terms of reference of the Interim Committee. The Director, Local Government, MLGHSSE will determine whether the area should ultimately be absorbed by the adjacent local council. This will require an amendment to s.6 of the LGA for the interim committee to promote the systematic preparation and incorporation of the peri-urban area into the adjacent local authority. Peri-urban areas will normally be part of the adjacent local council unless there are exceptional circumstances, which dictate otherwise.


Draft/16/4/04 57

Policy implementation matrix 4.6 – Legal and Regulatory Framework Objectives/ goals

Actions/activities Monitorable benchmarks Actors Time line

Responsibilities, Legislation and Awareness Devolution and redefining role of MLGHSSE Redefining the role of the MLGHSSE vis a vis the LCs

(i) Amend/prepare new legislation covering MLGHSSE mandates to be the lead agency in urban and rural development, including devolution of agreed roles and responsibilities to LCs. (ii) Improving the Subdivision of Land Act to make it mandatory for LGs to approve subdivisions within their boundaries (to be incorporated in revised TPA). (iii) Mandatory preparation of town planning scheme by LGs. (iv) major revision of the TPA to include: * objectives of planning in Fiji * functions and duties of MLGHSSE * functions and duties of LGs * powers of DTCP in areas outside town planning areas * Procedures when there is no TPS in place * Stakeholder co-ordination mechanism * Application of good governance principles (v) Support the amalgamation of SLA and TPA (vi) Support the inclusion of LCs as an actor in Programme No. 27 in the Social Justice Act (with MLGHSSE as the umbrella body). (vii) Support amendments to PHA which fetter the functions of LCs i.e. a) functions and powers of ALL local authorities including RLAs to be taken out of the PHA and put under the LGA b) CBH to promulgate regulations on the duties of local authorities under the PHA - s13. PHA c) the responsibilities of local authorities and CBH to be clearly defined. - s.15 PHA

Extensive review of TPA to reflect new functions for planning in Fiji; Role, Functions and Powers of Director Local Govt. to be defined in the LGA through expansion of Part 1 or an addition of a new Part. Tightening of SLA especially s7; SLA included in new TPA. LGs to make their own by-laws wrt subdivision. Also "local authority" to be recognised in SLA. Amendment to s18 TPA Inclusion of relevant SLA provisions in TPA, Legislation enacted: Social Justice Act amended i.e. Schedule to be expanded (c.f. peri-urban areas) Amendment to PHA, LGA Part II of PHA to be amended. Either Part 1 of LGA amended or new part added to identify different types of local authorities, powers and duties. Also Part XII to be looked at

MLGHSSE, Cabinet CBH, FLGA MLGHSSE, Min of Lands, Registrar of Titles MLGHSSE, DTCP, FLGA MLGHSSE, DTCP MLGHSSE, FLGA, CBH, DTCP MLGHSSE, FLGA MLGHSSE, CBH

Q3, 2004 to Q4, 2005 end 2005 end 2004 to end 2005 Jan 2005 end 2005 end 2005 end 2005

Consolidation Provision of an appropriate legislative framework for consistency and improved administration

(i) Ensure that the definition of “local authority” is consistent in all the core legislation (LGA, TPA, PHA, SLA). (ii) All subdivision of land to be dealt with under one Act such as the TPA. This will involve repealing the SLA and including a provision for subdivision within the TPA. (c.f. devolution) (iii) The Interpretation Section of the LGA to be reviewed and terms such as urban, peri-urban, rural to be included. (iv) All local authorities to be covered by the LGA.

Definition agreed to and placed in the core Acts. More consultation between DTCP, FLGA, Director of Lands. If agreement reached, amalgamate both Acts. If no agreement reached, the SLA should be improved to clearly define roles of DTCP and LCs and all subdivision should be under the SLA. LCs to be empowered to make subdivision by-laws (c.f. devolution). Definitions agreed to and placed in LGA. Agreement to be reached and both the LGA and PHA to be amended. (c.f. devolution)

MLGHSSE, CBH, FLGA MLGHSSE, DTCP, Director Lands, FLGA MLGHSSE, FLGA MLGHSSE, CBH

end 2004 end 2004 end 2004 end 2004 end 2005

Peri-Urban Areas

Expansion LCs to undertake works carried out in peri-urban areas prior to incorporation. District Councils In peri-urban areas, Interim Committees to determine whether an area should form a town or be part of an

Amendment to LGA to allow LCs to address urban poverty (c.f. devolution). SJA will have to be amended to include LCs in Programme No. 27

MLGHSSE, FLGA and local governments MLGHSSE

end 2004 end 2005


Draft/16/4/04 58

Objectives/ goals

Actions/activities Monitorable benchmarks Actors Time line

existing one and should be empowered to levy rates.

Review and Amendment to s.6 of LGA to promote systematic incorporating into adjacent urban areas and to include criteria for the declaration of district council or town and powers of Interim Committees.

Challenge Fund Creation of fund by the Minister to assist LCs to achieve their objectives

Creation of specific fund by the Minister MLGHSSE to assist LCs to achieve their objectives such as Challenge Fund or training fund.

Amendment to LGA by addition of a Part that deals with the setting up and administration of such a fund. (c.f. s.38 LGA).

MLGHSSE, FLGA and LCs

end 2005


Draft/16/4/04 59

4.7 Capacity-building and Human Resources Development Goal: enhanced capacity to effectively manage urban development The urban sector suffers from serious capacity constraints to ensure effective, efficient and equitable urban development. As Fiji’s society urbanises, so do its problems. As noted in section 2.1, Fiji has witnessed a steady but relatively slow urban population growth as compared to other developing countries. This has been strongly dominated by the continuing net emigration out of Fiji (probably consisting largely of well-qualified urban-based individuals and their dependents) during the last decades. This net emigration has on the one hand mitigated urban population growth (and related demand for urban services and housing), but has also aggravated the capacity constraints faced by the country, including in the urban sector. In consequence, the institutional set-up established to manage and oversee urban development (national agencies and local councils alike) has adjusted more slowly to these changes in problem orientation and the magnitude of the task, as reflected in the relative lack of dynamism in the sector’s institutional and legal framework. The present institutional and legal framework can be characterized as largely outdated, static and in need of adjustment. The sector is over-regulated and governed by a plethora of ill-equipped agencies with overlapping responsibilities. Suggested directions for institutional change are in section 4.5. Such institutional and procedural reforms (backed up by the necessary legislative and regulatory changes as discussed in section 4.6) are intended to better utilize and manage scarce human resources in the urban sector, and will, in themselves, have the impact of enhancing capacity for urban sector management. These measures will be complemented with the below actions to enhance the quality of the human resources being brought to bear in urban sector development. Devolution – strengthening local councils’ capacity to improve their performance and manage an expanded mandate Devolution of functions to local government and increases in responsibility requires increased resources as well as increased local government capacity, noting capacity constraints already severely limit development potential in local (and central) government. Institutional capacity limitations relate to:

• Technical resources/skills • Finance management skills • Skills in management and organizational systems (e.g. O and M, asset register,

accounting, procurement, etc) • Planning, building and engineering support skills including environmental waste

management. A consistent position classification system to be used by local councils nation-wide does not exist. Apart from the basic administrative staffing structure, local councils define staffing requirements in an ad-hoc manner. The same applies to education and skills requirements to fill these positions. The basic administrative staffing complement is no longer adequate to local councils’ present tasks. This will be all the more so the case, if additional tasks are devolved to local councils. Local government training needs have been assessed in some detail by FLGA with UNDP assistance in 1998. Under the auspices of the Pacific Local Government Capacity-building Project (Commonwealth Local Government Forum), a local government training inventory


Draft/16/4/04 60

has been carried out in 2002. These inventories provided indications of the demand for and supply of relevant (potential) local government training (most importantly the core structural capacities at the School of Public Health and Primary Care, Fiji School of Medicine (SPHHPC/FSM) and at the University of the South Pacific -USP). However, there has not yet been any attempt to consolidate this into a structured and ongoing local government training programme (tailored to classified position skills requirements) with institutional ownership and funding. In consequence, local government training has been conducted on an ad-hoc basis, organised under the auspices of MLGHSSE and FLGA, and covering a variety of subjects, including town planning, corporate plan development, basic accounting, management for council and rural local authorities’ staff, as well as induction training for newly elected councillors. Such efforts will be consolidated, in the short run through a sequence of multi-topic workshops organised by MLGHSSE in each of the councils, and through a more structural approach to training in the medium term. Development of a national capacity building and training programme for local government will be undertaken, in support of the council’s discharge of their current functions and to facilitate the devolution of further powers and responsibilities from central government to local councils. The following steps will be taken:

• development of a local government position classification, by carrying out a job classification and qualifications survey;

• based on this, the 1998 local councils’ training needs survey will be updated, evaluated and expanded;

• review of in-country educational and training institutions’ capacity to provide relevant training, including currently available source materials and training modules (data from the 2002 local government training inventory to be updated and augmented);

• training needs will be matched with institutional supply options, and based on this, a core programme of training courses, frequency, costs and duration will be decided upon (in part as a certified programme by linking it to the qualifications of classified local government positions9);

• sustainable sources of funds to finance the programme will be identified through dedicating a proportion of local rates and national local taxes to be set aside annually in a local government training fund, supplemented by tuition fees payable directly by the trainee’s employer/local council10;

• institutional options to house a sustainable programme of local government training will be identified (building on current institutional capacities) and a preferred model will be agreed. Ideally, given the permanency of local government as a key tier in the structure of government in Fiji, the development of a Fiji ‘Local Government Training Institute’ or similar facility should be an overriding objective.

Care will be taken that the training programme explicitly provides for adequate training to enable elected councillors and mayors to properly discharge their functions, building on the existing induction programme for new councillors as has been organised by FLGA from time to time. As appropriate (depending on the substance to be covered), rural local authorities’ staff will also participate in the above programmes. The national local government training programme will be augmented by a programme of exchange of good local government practices (nationally, Pacific-wide and further abroad). This requires capacity for the identification, documentation and dissemination of such good practices. While such a programme will be useful in its own right, maximum efforts will be made to ensure that this is well linked to the national training programme.

9 The Australian Local Government Qualification Framework may be used as methodological reference 10 A sector-specific application of the present general training levy


Draft/16/4/04 61

A parallel action to better utilise scarce local council resources will be undertaken through the identification of areas in which sharing of specialised technical resources by local councils could be undertaken, possibly linked into the local government position classification. Careful consideration will be given to the possible role of the FLGA in the above and other capacity-building measures. This also applies to the role of MLGHSSE (particularly with regard to certifying the local council position classification and the overall training programme). In addition, specific capacity-enhancement programmes for FLGA will be developed in the interest of a cohesive approach, using experiences of the development of local government associations in other countries. Strengthening MLGHSSE in its role as oversight agency for planning and management of urban development MLGHSSE has the mandate to set policies for urban development and develop programmes in association with other ministries, and to monitor policy and programme implementation. In doing so, it faces quantitative and qualitative capacity constraints, as well as lack of clarity of mandate vis-à-vis other ministries (particularly in the environmental area). In addition, as noted in section 4.5 above, the above lead policy role is diluted through its discharging/implementing several local operational functions, which are functionally inappropriate (in urban regulatory planning and squatter settlement upgrading particularly). These are executed by MLGHSSE by default and are a drain on the Ministry’s scarce human resources. An institutional audit will be carried out by MLGHSSE to assess in detail existing roles, functions, responsibilities, staff resources and budgets and how these can contribute or otherwise to (i) refocusing MLGHSSE as the lead agency for planning and management of urban development in Fiji and (ii) facilitating devolution in the context of sharing responsibility with local government. MLGHSSE will be enabled to concentrate on its core roles and functions as national planner and regulator for urban and rural planning including urban management in Fiji. The focus will be on policy direction and guidance, facilitation, advice and monitoring. For example, a revamped MLGHSSE will provide policy direction and advice, environmental oversight, and compliance ‘checklists’ to local government, rather than doing local planning. Based on the above, the key functions, roles and activities of a refocused MLGHSSE will be agreed to, including, for example, strategic planning and policy setting, regulation including EIA, monitoring, and development assessment for developments of national significance, a strengthened office of local government support and supervision, environmental education and awareness (the planning roles of the environment unit to be mainstreamed into the strategic and regulatory functions). Human resource requirements resulting from such refocusing will be assessed in terms of:

• current staff strength; • quantitative and qualitative requirements (using a similar positions

classification/qualification exercise as discussed above for local councils); • the timeframe for capacity-building building and skill transfer for both MLGHSSE and

local government. Appropriate staff training programmes to meet these requirements will be designed in close co-operation with educational institutions, particularly USP. As for local government training, a dedicated (and adequate) provision for staff training will be secured in the MLGHSSE budget.


Draft/16/4/04 62

Enhancing cohesiveness in urban land development and management by strengthening capacities of central government agencies involved (NLTB, HA and PWD) As noted in section 3.1, a major constraint on urban land development is formed by the very limited human resources available in each of the above agencies to develop affordable urban land development programmes and implement them. Several pilot partnership projects between the agencies (and with local councils) are on currently on the drawing board for 2004. These will be applied at much larger scale (and possibly intensified) through the development and implementation of a common approach of urban land sub-divisions, later to be handed over to local councils for operation and maintenance. Potential for replication at the national level is one objective of these projects. A specific human resource problem is the limited availability of the required range of professional land development capabilities in these agencies: urban/land use, social and financial planning, engineering capabilities are not well integrated or absent. Irrespective of the specific institutional arrangement that will emerge from the co-operation efforts, human resource sharing and pooling by the three agencies will be undertaken, as well as limited staff enhancement in each of the three agencies (particularly to include community development workers to handle discussions with native landowning units). Pilot projects undertaken jointly by the agencies will have a capacity-building impact, and this will be strengthened by specific tailor-made training of project teams from the three agencies on integrated land development approaches at USP or other locally accessible institutions.


Draft/16/4/04 63

Policy implementation matrix 4.7 – Capacity-Building and Human Resources Development Objectives/goals Actions/activities Monitorable benchmarks Actors Time

line Capacity building for local government Sustainably strengthening of local councils capacity to improve their performance and manage an expanded mandate

i) Regular MLGHHSE-sponsored multi-topic capacity-building workshops in each council ii) Development of a sustainable national capacity building and training programme for local government through: • development of a local government position

classification, by carrying out a job classification and qualifications survey;

• review of the local councils’ training needs survey;

• review of in-country educational and training institutions’ capacity;

• develop core programme of training courses, frequency, costs and duration;

• development of formula for endowment of local government training fund; institutional options to house a sustainable programme to be agreed.

iii) Development of programme of exchange of good local government practice iv) Instituting programme of human resource sharing by local councils v) Development of strengthening programme for FLGA

Workshops conducted in all local councils • position classification

completed and agreed; • training needs and capacity

survey completed; • core local government

training programme agreed; • institutional and financing

arrangements agreed; • training programme

operational programme established programme established programme agreed and operational

MLGHSSE MLGHSSE/ FLGA/selected local councils MLGHSSE/ FLGA/selected local councils MLGHSSE/ FLGA/selected local councils FLGA and MLGHSSE

2005-end 2006 end 2004 April 2005 mid 2005 mid 2005 end 2005 mid 2005 mid 2005 mid 2005

Strengthening MLGHSSE oversight role Strengthening MLGHSSE in exercising its national policy development and implementation oversight role

• carry out institutional audit • agree core functions of revamped MLGHSSE • identify additional human resource requirements • design, agree and fund appropriate staff training

programme • implement training programme

• audit completed, report

available • revised organogram of

MLGHSSE approved • staff vacancies and training

needs identified • training programme

approved and funded • v) training programme

operational

Consultants/MLGHSSE/PSC PSC/MLGHSSE PSC/MLGHSSE MLGHSSE and MFNP MLGHSSE

Q 3-4 2004 end 2004 end 2004 April 2005 Mid 2005

Support to NLTB, HA and PWD in urban land development Strengthen agencies’ capacity in urban land development

• development of pilot projects with joint

responsibilities • agree human resource sharing and pooling • design and agree programme of staff

enhancement and training

• two pilot projects undertaken • MoU on staff sharing signed • Programme operational

NLTB/HA/PWD NLTB/HA/PWD NLTB/HA/PWD

mid 2004 Sept 2004 End 2004


Draft/16/4/04 64

5 UPAP Priorities, Implementation and Monitoring

5.1 Overarching Issues and UPAP Directions The development areas identified in Chapters 3 and cross-cutting themes identified in Chapter 4 highlight the complexities and interrelationships within the urban sector. They also highlight the challenges and opportunities confronting stakeholders as they attempt to tackle the issues and concerns identified during the UPAP process. It has emerged during the UPAP preparation that there is a range of key planning and development issues and concerns that are considered by stakeholders are being relevant to improving the quality of urban (and rural) life and the efficiency and effectiveness of the urban sector generally. The issues and concerns identified cut across complex institutional, regulatory and policy frameworks, all within the prevailing socio-cultural setting. Based on the above, five overarching urban sector issues have been identified of paramount importance. Resolution of these overarching issues is fundamental to improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the urban sector in Fiji. These overarching issues are identified below, with directions for resolution and the proposed actions highlighted. Issue 1: Haphazard urban growth with increasing levels of informality resulting in sub-optimal contribution to national economic growth and continued urbanisation of poverty. Directions for resolution:

• recognition of urbanisation as a beneficial spatial translation of socio-economic transformation, and thus as an important element of a national economic development strategy.

• recognition of the importance of rural-urban linkages (urban centres as distribution centres for rural produce, farm-to-market roads).

• recognition of the need to improve urban management and governance (particularly at local level) to ensure a better managed urbanisation process, including more formal coordination processes.

• refocus key urban development institutions on the major issues at hand to be resolved.

• apply gradual devolution of responsibilities to LCs, where appropriate and effective. Proposed actions:

• increased devolution of responsibilities to LCs, including for urban poverty reduction, squatter settlement upgrading and local economic development.

• increased support for micro-finance development. • refocusing and realignment of the roles and functions of the MLGHSSE to allow urban

development issues to be adequately addressed. Establish coordination mechanisms involving key stakeholders - for example, LCs, HA, NLTB and PWD) to tackle national and metropolitan urban management issues and concerns.

• appropriate legal amendments, including revised LGA, TPA/SLA and PHA. Issue 2: Limited LC capability to address their urban management mandates which is required to foster urban economic growth and alleviate urban poverty. Directions for resolution:

• endow LCs with required financial and human resources and training to be able to better implement their mandated tasks.

• recognise the need to reallocate fiscal powers between the central and LCs.


Draft/16/4/04 65

Proposed actions:

• establish a Challenge Fund for Municipal Development as a matching grant facility to provide incentives and resources for LCs to improve their performance whilst meeting needs; supporting legal amendments (LGA).

• establish a local council position classification and a structural training programme to enhance LC human resource capacity.

• provide indicators and benchmarks to LCs by which they can monitor and measure performance, including financial performance.

Issue 3: Inadequate provision of acceptable and affordable formal new housing lot sub-divisions push poor people into informality and squatting. Current Government efforts such as programs by the HA are not affordable for the urban population below the poverty line, while Government’s options to subsidize are limited. Directions for resolution:

• significantly increased delivery of serviced housing lots affordable to urban households with monthly incomes of F$ 600 per month or less; better targeting of housing subsidies to the urban poor.

• more effective institutional response, including action from the NLTB (with more active involvement of landowning units).

• recognise the need to review and revise planning and infrastructure standards. • develop a national squatter upgrading and low income plot supply program to ensure

needs are met and limited resources coordinated and mobilised. Ensure affordable housing lots are available to meet new demand.

Proposed actions:

• establish joint venture co-operation mechanisms of sector agencies (such as HA and PWD) with NLTB (as most new and affordable developable land will be native land) and with local councils concerned to enhance critical mass of effort.

• establish agreed scaled down housing lot and infrastructure standards affordable for the above group (target serviced lot costs: F $ 7,000 or less). Translate into pilot projects for replication.

• scale down and gradually eliminate direct subsidy tied to housing development, and simultaneously open a family housing support window in the FAS.

Issue 4: Rapidly growing squatter (approximately 16 % of urban households in 2003 according to MLGHSSE survey) and other informal settlement areas having lack of security of tenure and interspersed with bad and good housing conditions. According to 2003-03 HIES data, these areas contain a large proportion of the urban poor and are underserved by municipal infrastructure and services. Current MLGHSSE effort in squatter area upgrading covers only half of annual growth in informally developed urban areas. Directions for resolution:

• in addition to enhancing affordable low-income housing plot supply as noted above which allows amongst other matters, squatter to relocate to new sites without major problems, significantly enhance the quality and quantity of the squatter area upgrading programme.

• recognise the need to review planning and infrastructure standards. • develop a national squatter upgrading and low income plot supply program to ensure

needs are met and limited resources coordinated and mobilised.


Draft/16/4/04 66

Proposed actions: • revise squatter area upgrading policy, at reduced upgrading standards, with

development costs to be recovered from beneficiaries through lease premiums to be used for further squatter area upgrading.

• abolition of subsidies tied to upgrading, while simultaneously enhancing upgrading subsidy through the above housing window of FAS.

• devolve responsibility for squatter area regularisation upgrading implementation to LCs (with policy and oversight responsibility to remain at MLGHSSE), with stepped up central government funding up to F $ 5 million per annum to be made available to LCs as matching grants through the above mentioned Municipal Development Challenge Fund; appropriate legal (Local Government Act) adjustments. Translate into pilot projects for replication.

Issue 5: Approximately 30% of the urban population lives in underserved peri-urban areas. As long as municipal infrastructure and services standards do not meet PWD standards, these areas will not be incorporated and residents will thus not pay municipal rates towards such services. Directions for resolution:

• development strategies for peri-urban areas must be adopted with adjacent LCs in the lead, supported by PWD and other key agencies.

• there must be a phased transition to full incorporation. Proposed actions:

• declare specific peri-urban areas as temporary district councils under the LGA with proviso of incorporation in adjacent LC within two years, or upon agreement of upgrading of infrastructure (whichever is longer).

• infrastructure upgrading to be undertaken by concerned LC with PWD support and at agreed upgradeable standards, to be financed out of the Municipal Development Challenge Fund and rates payable by residents in district council areas created; appropriate legal (LGA) adjustments.

5.2 UPAP Implementation Strategy In the context of the overarching issues above combined with the development areas and cross cutting themes identified in Chapters 3 and 4 respectively, four key strategic implementation components have been identified as the necessary building blocks to progress the implementation of the UPAP. These strategic components effectively represent a clustering and consolidation of overarching issues identified above and the policy actions and directions as outlined in Chapters 3 and 4. Smooth implementation of UPAP depends on their commencement within the next 6 months. These four strategic components are described below: 1) Strategic Urban Land Development Program – design of a national implementation strategy and program targeted to expand:

• squatter settlement upgrading; • formal provision of serviced residential lots; and • infrastructure services in peri-urban areas.

MLGHSSE will lead the immediate action preparation of a pilot program in the Greater Suva Region, to test out approaches for replication at the national level. Such work, supported by the ongoing ADB technical assistance, will involve the planning, coordination and harmonization of the inter-institutional policies and programmatic approaches of key agencies (NLTB, DTCP, HA, PWD, the RAs, and LCs).


Draft/16/4/04 67

2) Devolution and Realignment of MLGHSSE - The effective participation and leadership of MLGHSSE and its key departments in the planning process will be essential to the success of the UPAP. In that regard, MLGHSSE will be refocused and realigned to provide urban (and rural) development policy direction and guidance, coordination, facilitation and monitoring to local governments, the private sector and relevant central government agencies. The emphasis is on MLGHSSE being a national regulator and policy setter rather than doing local planning and local development activities as is present. This includes identification and devolution of appropriate roles, functions, responsibilities and powers to local government. 3) Challenge Fund for Municipal Development – a matching fund facility for local councils to draw on for specific capital works, financed with government on shared basis with local councils. Preference will be given for investments for squatter settlement upgrading and peri-urban infrastructure provision, with local councils having to submit funding proposals for such works to the Fund based on agreed criteria and guidelines. In addition to providing a mechanism for financing services investment, the Challenge Fund will provide a means to leverage change in municipal management and governance performance, inclining affordable infrastructure norms and standards. 4) Capacity Building of Local Government - the design and implementation of a training program for local government that addresses the capacity building needs identified in the UPAP to make local government more effective partners in urban development. This capacity building will be twinned with a local training institution and where possible embedded on a permanent basis. The key activities and outcomes of these four major implementation components are summarized in Table 5.1 below. Major legislative changes will be required to support and underpin achievement of the above strategic components, as noted in the previous chapters, and particularly section 4.6. Provision for such change has been included in each of the above components, given the necessary legislative changes are seen as a means to achieve the new policy and procedural directions associated with achieving the outcomes for each strategic component. The overall framework for UPAP implementation is shown in Figure 5.1 below. The framework shows the five overarching issues and indicates the four UPAP implementation components needed to collectively address these issues. The diagram also shows how implementing the components is related to the overall goal and objectives of UPAP.


Draft/16/4/04 68

Table 5.1: UPAP Strategic Implementation Components UPAP Component Name

UPAP Component Objectives

Main Activities of UPAP Strategic Component Major Component Outcome

Actors Main Benchmarks and Timing

1. Strategic Urban Land Development Program

* development and implementation of national program of squatter housing upgrading and affordable lot supply program in place * innovative partnerships and packaging of land development projects in place to meet the full range of stakeholder needs including lower income residents

* identify key land development players, mandates, key production targets, market segments and financing arrangements * identify lot supply and demand by key LC’s * review norms and standards as they apply to land development with emphasis on practical standards achieving affordability * review land development process and impediments * embed new institutional arrangements * devise national strategy for upgrading squatter settlements and providing affordable land including pilot project profiles by key cities, partnership arrangements, local government involvement, etc * implementation of program at national level

Up-scaled land development programme meeting needs of stakeholders needs of stakeholders including land owners and low-income residents

DHSS/MLGHSSE, HA, NLTB,PWD and LCs concerned

i) programme formulated by Q3 2004

ii) two pilot partnership projects in Greater Suva completed by end 2004 iii) all projects in multi-year development programme identified by mid 2005 iv) rolling programme operational by end 2005

2. Devolution and Institutional Realignment of MLGHSSE

* to refocus national and metropolitan responsibility for urban (and rural) development to MLGHSSE * to identify tasks, functions, roles and responsibilities for devolution from MLGHSSE to local government * to build capacity in MLGHSSE to achieve the new institutional and associated regulatory directions and changes

* undertake institutional audit * agree core functions, roles and responsibilities of refocused MLGHSE * agree core functions, roles and responsibilities to be devolved to LCs * develop strategic framework – spatial directions for urban and peri urban areas * develop policy and regulatory framework to reflect new directions, roles and responsibilities * establish new cross sector ordinations mechanisms such as urban management board and identify its roles, responsibilities, mandate, etc * prepare new operating/action plan for MLGHSSE including devolution timeframe, actions, new processes, human and technical implications including training * implement new operating/action plan for MLGHSSE including phased transfer of devolution roles and functions to local; government * undertake revision of LG Act and revise TP Act to reflect above new planning, urban development and management arrangements for both local and central government

A renamed, refocused, and re-energized MLGHSSE coordinating and managing urban development

MLGHSSE FLGA, PSC

i) I) audit completed by end 2004

ii) ii) MLGHSSE/LC functions agreed by end 2004

i) iii) revised LGA by mid-2005

ii) iv) urban management board operational by end-2005

iii) v) actions included in corporate plans of MLGHSSE: annually and progressively from October 2004

iv) vi) Policy framework for new MLGHsSE complete Q1 2005

v) (v) revised TPA enacted by end 2005

3. Challenge Fund for Municipal Development

* to establish a matching fund facility for local and central government * more efficient and effective service delivery especially for squatter settlements upgrading and infrastructure in peri urban areas * leveraging enhanced municipal management and governance performance

* development of detailed framework for operation of change fund including legal and financial implications and timeframe for any external financing. * detail draft rules, criteria, regulations and procedures including agreeing targets for urban infrastructure and squatter areas * test operational modalities with key stakeholders including FLGA * prepare guidelines and other documentation to reflect the above * establish Fund secretariat, board and guidelines * assist in year 1 2005 implementation including LC technical assistance and application assessment

Improved and Improved and targeted urban service delivery and enhanced local council performance

MLGHSSE, MFNP, FLGA, selected LCs

i) Fund operational rules, regulations and guidelines completed by end 2004 ii) Fund provision enshrined in revised LGA by mid-2005 iii) operational start of Fund by Q3 2005

4. Capacity Building of Local Government

* strengthened local government so it can (i) meet expanded mandate including any roles and responsibilities devolved from central government (ii) improve municipal performance (iii) develop and implement participatory approaches to urban governance

* development of national capacity building programme, including development of LC position classification, training needs survey, explore in country twining opportunities such as USP, define core training courses and costs and co financing options, prepare specific FLGA training component * identify good LC practice and means of exchange * identify options for human resource sharing by LCs * identify use of training program components by other stakeholders such as MLGHSSE, NLTB, HA * implement local government capacity building program with emphasis on long term sustainability

Enhanced capacity and performance of local councils

MLGHSSE, FLGA, selected LCs

i) national capacity-building programme formulated and agreed by mid 2005 ii) funding and institutional arrangement for sustainable programme in place and operational by end-2005


Draft/16/4/04 69

Figure 5.1 Urban Policy Action Plan (UPAP) Framework

Overarching Issues

Haphazard urban growth

contribution to sub optimal economic

growth and urbanisation of

poverty

Limited local government capacity to

address urban development mandate and

issues

Inadequate supply of

unaffordable new housing plots push people into

informality and squatting

Rapidly growing

squatter and informal

settlements with no secure land tenure, services

and poor housing

Under serviced peri urban areas which contain

30% of the urban population and no formal integration

strategy for incorporation

UPAP Strategic Components

Strategic

Urban Land Development

Program

Devolution

and Realignment

of MLGHSSE

Challenge Fund for

Municipal Development

Capacity

Building of Local

Government

UPAP Objectives

Expanded capacity of local and central

government in meeting mandates and stakeholders

needs

Improved urban infrastructure and services including

affordable land supply

Responsive institutional,

regulatory and policy frameworks for management of urban development

UPAP Goal

To assist in achieving an efficient, effective and sustainable urban sector that can make an optimal contribution to the social, economic and environmental development of Fiji


Draft/16/4/04 70

5.3 UPAP Enabling Environment Stakeholders have identified a number of guiding principles during consultation as being necessary to shape the enabling environment in which UPAP implementation must be achieved. These principles apply across the thematic development areas and cross cutting themes identified in Chapter 3 and 4, and achievement of the overarching issues and key strategic project components identified above. Implementation of the UPAP is likely to have a greater chance of success if the agreed component activities, tasks and associated procedural processes and procedures occur in an enabling environment that is characterized by the following guiding principles:

• greater efficient use of limited human resources • increased coordination and working together • development of new partnerships among key stakeholders • sharing of experience so good practices can be replicated • fostering of local champions and leadership • emphasis on due process as well as outcomes • shared responsibility between central and local government • political commitment and support, and • good governance

An enabling environment reflecting the above is critical to UPAP implementation so as to ensure as far as possible an efficient and effective urban sector and importantly, sustainability of UPAP outcomes.

5.4 UPAP Policy Implementation Monitoring Institutional responsibility for policy implementation monitoring is with MLGHSSE along with MFNP (considering the linkages to SDP). It is envisaged that an UPAP implementation-monitoring secretariat will be established in MLGHSSE, building on the work of the UPAP preparation secretariat. The secretariat will monitor policy implementation in terms of progress in implementing the action points in the various policy implementation matrices in this document. The secretariat will report on a six-monthly basis to an UPAP stakeholders forum, i.e. the current UPAP preparation Steering Committee, augmented by senior PWD and NLTB representatives, and possibly comprising additional representatives (preferably the chairpersons) of the thematic preparatory working groups. This committee could form the nucleus of an urban management board and fulfil an interim role until a formal Urban Management Board is established under the auspices of a revamped MLGHSSE. The outcome of the steering committee’s deliberations will be communicated to Cabinet, with recommendations to resolve bottlenecks in implementation, if any. MLGHSSE will ensure that the secretariat is adequately resourced to be able to perform its functions in a meaningful way, if necessary by drawing on external technical assistance resources. An externally supported mid-term review of UPAP implementation may be commissioned by the Steering Committee towards the end of 2005, and may result in a revised UPAP for a further three year period (possibly to initiate a sequence of “rolling” urban policy action plans).

5.5 Support for Implementation The rate at which UPAP (and specifically the four above main components) can be implemented will depend on i) the opportunity that MLGHSSE and other stakeholders have to


Draft/16/4/04 71

develop their capacities, and on ii) the resources available to carry out the tasks and activities. In the UPAP, there are numerous actions that can be carried out without any need for enhancing existing capacities or external support. These include many of the policy implementation actions at the timelines indicated in the various policy implementation matrices in Chapters 3 and 4. However, there are also a number of areas in which external support for implementation will be required to ensure timely UPAP implementation, including the four strategic UPAP implementation components identified above. If the four strategic components are endorsed by Cabinet, an overall implementation work plan must be developed to ensure the key priority matters and their institutional, regulatory and administrative cross linkages are systematically addressed. Table 5.2 indicates the areas where external support will be required, with an indication of the extent of support requirement and the timing thereof. External support falls into 2 broad areas, namely, short-term immediate support such as for development of the Challenge Fund for Municipal Development and longer term phased intermittent support for devolution and MLGHSSE strengthening. Support for implementation of these and other strategic components should be mobilized as soon possible to ensure UPAP continuity. The government is pursuing these assistance requirements with interested external support agencies.

Table 5.2 External Support Requirements for UPAP Strategy Implementation Support area and description

UPAP section reference

Indicative support requirements Key Stakeholders to be supported

timing required

1) Strategic Urban Land Development Program

3.1, 3.2, 4.2, 4.3, 5.1, and 5.2

long-term intermittent international/local consultants assistance

MLGHSSE, HA, NLTB, LCs, PRB, PWD, landowners both native and freehold

Initially through ongoing TA for Greater Suva Structure Plan review

2) Devolution and Institutional Realignment of MLGHSSE

4.3, 4.5, 5.1, and 5.2

long-term intermittent international/local consultants assistance

MLGHSSE, Public Service Commission, LC

Immediate – end 2005

3) Challenge Fund for Municipal Development

4.4, 5.1 and 5.2 short-term international consultants assistance

MLGHSSE,, LCs, MFNP, FLGA

Immediate and phased to 1st quarter 2005

4) Capacity Building of Local Government

4.7, 5.1 and 5.2 long-term intermittent local consultants assistance (from educational/training institutions) per year

LC, MLGHSSE,, FLGA


5) Overall UPAP implementation support

5.1, 5.2 long-term advisor to the implementation secretariat at MLGHSSE – possibly in conjunction with support to areas 1-4

MLGHSSE,, LC, MFNP, PWD, HA< LCs, Cabinet


5.6 Immediate Next Steps To progress on the UPAP agenda and to ensure that its timely implementation (and priorities as outlined) will continue to be dealt with in a systematic manner, the key immediate next steps are:

• Submit a final draft UPAP to the Development Sub Committee and Cabinet seeking endorsement, including agreement to the implementation priorities and their institutional, regulatory and legislative implications (by April/May 2004).

• Concurrent with the above and with support from MFNP, MLGHSSE to discuss with external support agencies possible assistance for the four-priority UPAP implementation components (by May/June 2004), and their formal commencement as soon possible.

• UPAP Secretariat in MLGHSSE, supported by external assistance, to develop a detailed UPAP implementation work plan, and seek SC endorsement (by June 2004).

• UPAP Secretariat in MLGHSSE to advise thematic groups and key stakeholder representatives on progress of the outcomes above (by June 2004).

Upap urban policy action plan 2004 06

Documents

Transcript of Upap urban policy action plan 2004 06