Sustainable Urbanisation

SustainableUrbanisationAchieving Agenda 21

August 2002

This paper is a joint venture between UN-HABITAT and the UK Government Department for International Development (DFID). It wasprepared by Carole Rakodi and Fiona Nunan of the International Development Department, School of Public Policy, University ofBirmingham, UK and Douglas McCallum, from McCallum Consultancy, Scotland. The project was co-ordinated by Jochen Eigen of UN-HABITAT and Susan Loughhead of the Infrastructure and Urban Development Department, DFID, with inputs from other staff members ofUN-HABITAT and DFID. The paper was prepared with financial support from DFID, but the views expressed do not necessarily reflect thepolicy of DFID or the United Nations.

The United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT) was formerly known as the United Nations Centre for HumanSettlements (UNCHS); at the beginning of 2002 it was raised to full Programme status.

This publication has been produced without formal editing.

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoeveron the part of the Secretariat at the United Nations or DFID concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or itsauthorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

Reference to names of firms and commercial products and processes does not imply their endorsement by the United Nations.

Excerpts from this publication may be reproduced without authorization, on condition that the source is indicated.

Copyright UN-HABITAT, 2002ISBN 92-1-131671-5HS/676/02E

UN-HABITAT publications can be obtained from UN-HABITAT Regional and Information Offices or directly from:UN-HABITATP.O. Box 30030Nairobi, KenyaFax: +(254-2) 624060E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.unhabitat.org

DFID publications can be obtained from:Information DepartmentDFID1 Palace StreetLondon, SW1E 5HEUKWebsite: http://www.dfid.gov.uk

SustainableUrbanisationAchieving Agenda 21

August 2002

Foreword

Summary ..................................................................................................................................................4

1. Sustainable Urbanisation – Achieving Sustainable Development ................................................6

2. Urbanisation

• The process of urbanisation ................................................................................................................8• An urbanising world ............................................................................................................................8• Patterns of urbanisation ......................................................................................................................9

3. The Challenges of Sustainable Urbanisation

• The challenge of economic sustainability and poverty reduction ........................................................10• The environment: impacts and challenges ........................................................................................12• Social dimensions: the challenges of injustice, inequality and exclusion ............................................13• The challenge of governance: political-institutional sustainability in urban settlements ......................15• Rural-urban interdependence: the challenge of achieving synergy ....................................................17

4 Promoting and Managing Sustainable Urbanisation

• Priorities and actions for economic sustainability in towns and cities ................................................18• Priorities and actions for urban environmental sustainability ..............................................................21• Social sustainability: towards social justice and inclusion ..................................................................23• Good governance for sustainable urbanisation ..................................................................................24

5. Working Together for Sustainable Urbanisation

• Action at the Local Level: Urban Government and Civil Society ..........................................................28• National Level: A Supportive and Enabling Role ..................................................................................29• International Support ..........................................................................................................................30

Key References and Resource Documents ..........................................................................................32

ContentsForeword

The Millennium Development Goals and the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg provide an op-portunity for the international community to focus more sharply on what we must do to achieve sustainable development.The fact that half the people of the world now live in towns and cities, and that this proportion will rise to two-thirds by themiddle of this century is a major challenge.

For development to be sustainable, the implications of our rapidly growing urban areas – where increasing numbers of res-idents are living in poverty – need to be clearly addressed. Target 11 of the Millennium Development Goals focuses on theneed to achieve a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers by 2020. UN-HABITAT, the UnitedNations Agency for human settlements has, together with all Habitat Agenda Partners (national governments, local authori-ties, civil society, international organisations and urban practitioners), adopted the concept of ‘sustainable urbanisation’ asa common framework for jointly addressing these issues. The UK Government Department for International Developmenthas joined with UN-HABITAT to promote this concept at Johannesburg and beyond.

This publication is addressed to stakeholders at all levels, setting out specific promises and challenges of achieving sus-tainable urbanisation. It elaborates on many of the issues raised at the first World Urban Forum that was held at UN-HABITAT’s headquarters in Nairobi in April-May 2002. At that forum, the full range of Habitat Agenda Partners came togetherto develop the concept of ‘sustainable urbanisation’ and discuss its implementation, as a joint message for the WorldSummit for Sustainable Development.

Sustainable urbanisation requires lasting economic growth, resulting in reduced poverty and greater social inclusion, andtaking account of the relationships between rural and urban areas. It means providing the land and infrastructure neces-sary to keep pace with city growth and providing the poor with access to livelihoods and essential services while, at thesame time improving life in rural and smaller urban settlements. It also means ensuring that local authorities and their part-ners have the capacity to deal with the complex challenge of managing growing cities and towns. To achieve sustainableurbanisation and realise the potential benefits of the interdependence of rural and urban areas, it is imperative to addressthe potential conflicts between rapid urban growth and environmental sustainability.

It is vital that all organisations involved in international development co-operation act together to address the challenges ofsustainable urbanisation, in support of national governments, local governments and their partners. This document is animportant contribution to further developing the framework agreed at the World Urban Forum and providing a solid basis forco-ordinated action.

Clare Short Anna Kajumulo TibaijukaSecretary of State for International Development Executive DirectorUnited Kingdom UN-HABITAT

S u s t a i n a b l e U r b a n i s a t i o n • A c h i e v i n g A g e n d a 2 1

54

Today, half the world’s population lives in towns andcities. Of the additional people expected between2000 and 2015, nearly one billion will be added in

urban areas compared to only about 125 million in rural.Virtually all of this growth will take place in developingcountries. For sustainable urbanisation to be achieved,therefore, the scale of urbanisation must be recognised andurban development processes guided and managed in asustainable manner. Urbanisation is associated witheconomic growth and development, providing vitalopportunities for economic and social advancement andpoverty reduction if well managed. However, it can alsopose major threats to the achievement of sustainabledevelopment, in particular because of the environmentaland other adverse effects of intensive resourceconsumption and poor management.

Sustainable urbanisation is a dynamic, multi-dimensionalprocess covering environmental as well as social, economicand political-institutional sustainability. It embraces rela-tionships between all human settlements, from small urbancentres to metropolises, and between towns and cities andtheir surrounding rural areas. In this document, the mainchallenges to achieving sustainable urbanisation are identi-fied and recent experience of promising approaches toplanning and managing urban areas reviewed. Thesedemonstrate a range of ways in which urbanisation cancontribute to sustainable development.

Because the key responsibility for achieving sustainable ur-banisation lies with local governments and their partners atthe local level, the most critical action needed is to buildlocal capacity to better manage urban growth and change.Many initiatives to strengthen local capacity are alreadyunder way, at both national and international levels, and thepriority must be to make them more effective by increasingthe synergy between them and improving coordination be-tween the organisations involved.

The main challenges to the achievement of sustainable ur-banisation are:

• The potential conflicts between economic growth andenvironmental sustainability: ways must be found toachieve pro-poor economic development but also to re-duce the environmental impact of economic growth andurban production both on towns and cities themselves,and on the global environment.

• Urban economic development is often threatened bychanges in national and global economies. Even wheneconomic growth occurs, it does not necessarily benefitthe poor. Ways must be found of developing urbaneconomies that are diverse, resilient and also providelivelihood opportunities accessible to the poor.

• Urbanisation is associated with social and politicalchanges, which can undermine traditional social net-works and result in increased inequity and exclusion:

ways must be found of increasing equity and ensuringpolitical and social inclusion.

• Infrastructure is often severely deficient, adversely af-fecting the natural and built environments and exacer-bating poverty because of its effects on the health andliving environments of the poor: ways must be found ofextending infrastructure provision to keep pace withurban growth on a basis which is financially and envi-ronmentally sustainable, while ensuring access to anadequate level of services for the poor.

• The governance capabilities of the agencies respon-sible for achieving sustainable urbanisation are inade-quate: ways must be found of enhancing their capacityto deal with the challenges of managing growing townsand cities, in the context of their surrounding regions.

• Economic, environmental and governance tensionsmake it difficult to realise the benefits of interdepend-ence between rural and urban areas: ways must befound of developing and implementing economic poli-cies, resource use and waste management strategies,and governance arrangements that recognise and en-hance the complementary roles of urban and ruralareas in sustainable development.

Priorities for effective responses to these challenges in-clude:• Developing an urban environment conducive to the ef-

ficient operation of enterprises of all sizes with re-silience and adaptability in the face of growing globalcompetition, by concentrating on essential infrastruc-ture, appropriate regulation, and encouraging the de-velopment of economic linkages between urban andrural producers;

• Developing the capabilities (education, skills, health) ofthe urban labour force, so that residents, especiallypoor men and women and young people, can achievesecure livelihoods and economic enterprises can recruitsuitable workforces;

• Improving the provision of basic utilities (water, sanita-tion, energy, waste management) to employers and res-idents, especially the poor, by drawing on and learningfrom recent experiences of public sector reform and theengagement of non-governmental actors, includinghouseholds, communities, and small and large privateoperators;

• Reducing the environmental impact of waste genera-tion by increasing recycling and re-use, improved solidwaste management and sanitation arrangements, andmeasures to tackle pollution from industry and vehi-cles;

• Recognising the value of reserving areas of undevel-oped land in peri-urban and, where appropriate, inurban areas for agricultural, ecological and recreationalpurposes and strengthening development regulationand support systems to identify, safeguard and produc-tively use such areas;

• Strengthening local governments by ensuring that they

have the appropriate powers, resources and capabili-ties to take responsibility for a range of planning, infra-structure installation, service delivery and regulatoryfunctions;

• Strengthening participation in and the responsivenessand accountability of local governments by empoweringelected representatives, civil society organisations andresidents to exercise their political rights and responsi-bilities, and by developing mechanisms which cancomplement formal democratic arrangements

• Increasing social justice and inclusion by measures toincrease the security of poor people, through their ac-cess to varied livelihood opportunities, secure tenureand basic affordable services and through multi-faceted initiatives to reduce crime and violence.

The priorities identified and actions taken by the agenciesresponsible for the governance and management of urbancentres will vary, since local circumstances and the re-sources available differ. In addition, the wide range of initia-tives which are needed to achieve sustainable urbanisationrequire co-ordinated action - no single urban actor can un-dertake all the necessary tasks. While the primary respon-sibility must lie at the local and city-regional levels, withmunicipalities and their local partners (residents, civil so-ciety organisations and private sector operators), guidance,support, co-ordination and a degree of supervision are re-quired from higher levels of government. In turn, the lack ofcapacity at both central and local government levels, espe-cially in poorer countries, and the need to learn from inter-national experience of efforts to achieve sustainableurbanisation, call for international development agenciesand networks to provide support and facilitate the sharingof knowledge. Since many programmes and mechanismsto do this already exist, the priority is to improve their re-sponsiveness, coverage and co-ordination in order to in-crease their collective effectiveness.

Summary

Bernd Decker

© T

opha

m/U

NEP

© T

opha

m/U

NEP

6

1 Elander and Lidskog(2000), p. 40

2 UNCHS, 1996a, IIIB

as the numbersliving in urban areascontinue to increase,the achievement ofglobal sustainabledevelopment willdepend on managingthe processes ofurban developmentin a sustainablemanner

1. Sustainable Urbanisation - Achieving sustainable development

In the last few years, the proportion of the world’s peopleliving in urban areas has edged past the half-way mark,and many of those not living in towns and cities are

increasingly dependent upon urban centres for theireconomic, social, and political progress. Inevitably, as thenumbers living in urban areas continue to increase, theachievement of global sustainable development will dependon managing the processes of urban development in asustainable manner. Well managed urban growth anddevelopment can contribute not just to economicadvancement but also to reduced poverty and improvedquality of life for all citizens, including the poor. However, italso poses serious challenges to the sustainabledevelopment agenda - if badly managed, the urbanisationprocess pollutes the environment, undermines the naturalresource base, and may be associated with increased scaleand depth of poverty. The economic and demographicgrowth of urban centres has, therefore, to take place withinan environmental, social and political framework conduciveto the more equitable distribution of resources, both withinthe present generation and between present and futuregenerations. Without sustainable urbanisation,sustainable development cannot be achieved.

Sustainable urbanisation is a dynamic, multi-dimen-sional process. It embraces relationships between all

human settlements, from small towns to metropolises, aswell as between urban centres and their surrounding ruralareas. Most crucially, it includes not only environmental butalso social, economic and political-institutional sustain-ability.

Although sustainable urbanisation is a relatively newconcept, similar ideas have been the subject of internationaldiscussion and local action for some time. They are evidentin the objectives of Agenda 21, and in the Habitat Agendawhich was agreed at the UN Conference on HumanSettlements in Istanbul in 1996.

The UNCHS Sustainable Cities Programme, for example, in1991 defined a sustainable city as "a city whereachievements in social, economic and physical developmentare made to last", whilst the Habitat Agenda suggests thatsustainable human settlements should

“make efficient use of resources within the carryingcapacity of ecosystems and take into account theprecautionary principle approach, … provid[e] allpeople, in particular those belonging to vulnerable anddisadvantaged groups, with equal opportunities for ahealthy, safe and productive life in harmony with natureand their cultural heritage and spiritual and culturalvalues, and … ensure.. economic and socialdevelopment and environmental protection, therebycontributing to the achievement of national sustainabledevelopment goals.” 2

In its breadth and detail, the Habitat Agenda definition ofsustainable settlements sets out a huge challenge,particularly as many of the goals do, at times, conflict with

“In most nations, cities aremajor generators of economicactivity, offering employmentopportunities, education, health,and other social services. At thesame time cities are the mainconsumers of natural resources

and the main producers of pol-lution and waste. Furthermore,most of the world’s populationwill soon live in cities. Urbanissues are thus crucial to theenvironmental challenge oftoday.” 1

3 www.un.org/esa/sustdev/agenda21.htm.

4 See also Satterthwaite, 1997

Moving towards moresustainableurbanisation willrequire theinvolvement andcommitment of a widerange of stakeholders


7

each other, requiring negotiation, compensation andeffective policy responses. However, increasing thesustainability of urban settlements in general cannot beachieved by treating them in isolation; equally, treating citiesseparately will make it impossible to achieve sustainabledevelopment overall4.

Sustainable urbanisation, therefore, requires all aspects ofsustainability to be addressed, within the context of theopportunities and challenges posed by the massive scale ofglobal urbanisation. The following Section of this paperlooks at the scale and pattern of that urbanisation process,overall and in different parts of the world. This sets thecontext for Section 3, which highlights the key challengesfor the achievement of sustainable urbanisation.

To move towards sustainable urbanisation, it will benecessary to learn from recent experience and to developand operationalise new ideas and approaches to address awide range of concerns. These are discussed in Section 4.While there are clear general principles, and increasingevidence of approaches which are successful in a variety ofcircumstances, priorities vary among countries and urbancentres and to be appropriate these approaches will have tobe tailored to local circumstances – no one model can fit alltowns, cities and countries.

Moving towards more sustainable urbanisation will requirethe involvement and commitment of a wide range of

stakeholders: local governments, local communities and civilsociety, the private sector, national governments, andinternational agencies. The roles that actors at all levels,from the local to the international, can play in enhancing thecontribution of cities and towns to sustainable developmentare outlined in Section 5.

The World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD),with its emphasis on implementation of Agenda 21, providesa timely opportunity to look more closely at the challengesand opportunities posed by urbanisation – an opportunity tobroaden the ways in which we think about sustainabledevelopment and the means by which the global communityseeks to achieve it.

The Rio Declaration on Environ-ment and Development affirmsthat sustainable developmentmust equitably meet the devel-opment and environmentalneeds of present and futuregenerations, eradicate poverty,improve the quality of life for allpeople, protect the environmentand tackle environmentaldegradation. Agenda 21 elabo-rates how these principles canbe achieved through, amongst

other actions, promoting sus-tainable human settlementsdevelopment (Chapter 7). Urbanareas, whether in rich or poorcountries, are generally muchmore energy- and resource-consuming than rural areas, andhence as the world becomespredominantly urban it is clearthat only by developing sustain-able patterns of urbanisationcan the objectives set out inAgenda 21 be achieved. 3

Toph

am P

ictu

repo

int

11 Source: UNCHS (2001a)Table A2.

12 World Bank, 2000a.

Urbanisation is aresponse to economic,social and politicalforces, but the specificways in which urbansettlements developand grow, in differentcountries, changeunder the influence ofnew factors


98

5 See also UNCHS, 1996band 2001a.

6 UNDESA and UNCHS,2001.

7 UNCHS, 2001a.

8 Measured or estimatedurban growth is comprisedof one relativelypredictable component(natural increase of theurban population, whichaccounts for about half theurban growth in developingcountries, although theincreasing impact ofHIV/AIDS may significantlyaffect this, especially inAfrica), one variable butgenerally decreasingcomponent (net in-migration) and oneunpredictable component(boundary changes, whichmay periodically have adramatic effect onapparent growth rates).

9 Source: UNCHS (2001a)Table A2.

10 UNCHS, 2001a.

2. Urbanisation

The Process of Urbanisation

Urbanisation is the process through which cities andtowns develop and grow. It includes the movementof people from rural areas to urban areas as well as

movements among towns and cities. It also encompassesthe development of urban economies and urban social andpolitical systems. Urbanisation viewed as a process is thusconcerned not just with individual cities but with systems ofcities, with linkages between urban places, and withinteractions between them and the countryside.

In historical perspective, the world has become steadilymore ‘urban’ and less ‘rural’; indeed, the process we nowcall development is very closely correlated with urbanisa-tion. Individual cities or groups of cities may flourish andgrow, or sometimes may falter and decline; equally, indi-vidual cities change and transform themselves as urbanisa-tion proceeds. Nonetheless, the broad picture is clear: asthe world develops, the number and size of urban placeswill continue to grow.

There is no easy way to define‘urban’, either within a countryor, especially, for comparingacross countries. Urbandwellers are generally taken tobe people living in areas whichhave populations above a cer-tain size and/or density thresh-old, which varies from countryto country and over time.Because demographic data arecollected for administrativeunits, the term ‘urban’ does notnecessarily coincide withdensely settled areas dependenton economic sectors other thanagriculture; the boundaries ofurban settlements may exclude

large populations linked closelyto the urban economy and mayinclude people who live in vil-lages or on farms and are pri-marily agriculturalists. In addi-tion, some people do not livepermanently in either an urbansettlement or a village butinstead migrate periodically andmaintain farm-based as well asoff-farm economic activities.Enumeration may also excludepeople who are not officialurban residents (most notably inChina), and under-counting oftransient or homeless urbandwellers is common in manycountries.5

An Urbanising WorldStatistics on urbanisation are never precise, but the broadpicture is quite clear. By the year 2000 nearly one-half ofhumanity (47 per cent) lived in urban areas, yet as recentlyas 1975 the urban share was just over one-third.6 Withinthese global averages, however, there are major differ-ences. The urban share of the population in more devel-oped countries, for example, was 76 per cent in 2000 ascompared to 40 per cent in less developed. In Africa andAsia the shares were 38 per cent and 37 per cent, whereasin Latin America, Northern America, Europe and Oceania theproportions were between 70 and 77 per cent.7 For theworld as a whole, the urban share is expected to rise to 60per cent by the year 2030, at which time the shares forAfrica and Asia are projected to reach 55 per cent and 53per cent respectively.8

Projected Proportion of the Population Living in Urban Areas9

The scale of urban growth which lies behind these projectedpercentage changes is truly enormous. Of the additionalworld population expected between 2000 and 2015, about970 million will be added in urban areas, compared to only130 million in rural. Most (93 per cent) of the world’s addi-tional urban population will live in the towns and cities ofthe less developed countries. In Asia, eight times as manyof the additional people will be urban rather than rural (590million compared to 70 million), an increase of 44 per centin the region’s total urban population. Even in Africa, morethan twice as many of the additional people will be urban(200 million compared to 90 million), representing an in-crease of 69 per cent in Africa’s total urban population. Incontrast, Europe will probably add only about 20 million toits urban population, an increase of 4 per cent over 15years.10

The challenge of coping with massive urbanisation will thusbe greatest for the countries least able to meet it. The less-developed countries will on average face an urban popula-tion growth rate of about 2.6 per cent per year. Some of thevery poorest countries in the world are expected to face the

The enormous scale of urbanexpansion facing Asia and Africais unprecedented in world histo-ry. The urban population ofAfrica is expected to increase bynearly 70 per cent in the period2000 to 2015, meaning thatsome 200 million additionalpeople will have to be accom-

modated in the continent’s citiesand towns in just 15 years. InAsia, the total urban populationwill increase by almost 45 percent representing an additional590 million people living in theregion’s urban areas (of whichabout 170 million will be in Chi-na and 150 million in India).

fastest rates of urban population growth (Burkina Faso 5.4per cent per annum, Ethiopia 5 per cent, Laos 4.7 per cent,Malawi 6.3 per cent, Nepal 4.9 per cent), as will many coun-tries disrupted by conflict (Angola 4.5 per cent, Burundi 5.5per cent).

Patterns of Urbanisation

Urbanisation is a response to economic, social and politicalforces, but the specific ways in which urban settlements de-velop and grow, in different countries, change under the in-fluence of new factors. Globalisation, democratisation, newinformation and communication technology, economictransformation, social and cultural changes – all of theseare strongly influencing the pattern of urbanisation in theearly 21st Century. Equally, the sheer scale of urbangrowth (nearly a billion new urban residents in 15 years) ischanging the nature of urban settlements.

The location and size of urban centres has always re-sponded to changes in the technology and cost of transportand communication, but the rapid technological advancesof recent years are enabling cities (even in poor countries)to grow at relatively low densities ever further into the sur-rounding countryside. Given the scale of urban growthwhich needs to be accommodated, rural land is rapidlybeing converted into urban, a worrying trend because theareas surrounding cities are often high quality agricultural

land or have important ecological uses. This trend is exac-erbated in many middle and low income countries by the in-ability of tenure registration, land use planning, anddevelopment regulation systems to keep pace with the de-mand for land for urban use.

As cities increase in size, ‘metropolitanisation’ becomes aprogressively more dominant mode of urbanisation. It takesdifferent forms in different places. It may refer to a denselysettled city region in which villagers commute to work in thenearby city but where many production and service activi-ties are located in villages, while intensive agricultural ac-tivities continue in the interstices between urbansettlements. It may refer to the stagnant or declining pop-ulation and economic base of a core city when demographicand economic growth shifts to nearby secondary cities be-cause diseconomies of congestion are experienced in thecore, as in some of the great metropolises of Latin America.Alternatively, it may refer to the development of interlinkedsystems of cities, as manufacturing assembly and other ac-tivities seek out lower cost locations, as in the HongKong/Pearl River Delta region of China.

Changes in the organisation of economic activity, coupledwith changes in transport and telecommunications and ex-pectations of an improved quality of life, give rise to diversepressures on the urban built environment. In the maturecities of the North, facing little aggregate growth, the needfor regeneration and renewal now takes priority; changingfamily and social structures generate changing demands fornew dwellings; and modernising economic activities seek avariety of specialised locations, often outside congested citycores. In the cities of transition economies, the priority istackling the legacy of underused central areas, industrialdereliction, decaying infrastructure, and a deterioratingpublic housing stock. In the cities of developing countries,the need to accommodate rapid growth, provide essentialinfrastructure, deal with rapidly deteriorating physical envi-ronments, and improve shelter opportunities, especially forthe poor, is urgent. Global economic changes have had par-ticularly dramatic effects on cities and towns; even in highlydeveloped countries, a poor minority have failed to benefitfrom increased prosperity, while in transition and devel-oping countries, impoverishment and deprivation remainwidespread.

Whatever the patterns of urbanisation, activities in urbansettlements are inextricably linked to those in rural areas,while many people’s lives straddle both urban and ruralareas. For instance urban settlements provide markets forrural produce – food, industrial raw materials, constructionmaterials, fuel etc – as well as many of the services neededby rural populations, such as financial services, farm inputsand health care. On the other hand, the extraction of re-sources and disposal of urban wastes can adversely affectrural areas both close to and far away from cities. Theseinter-linkages underlie many of the challenges to achievingsustainable urbanisation which are discussed in the nextsection.

Projected Growth in the Urban Population11

Very large cities receive most ofthe media attention, but theyactually contain a relativelysmall (although growing) shareof the world’s total urban popu-lation. In the developing coun-tries, only 15 per cent of theurban population in 1990 lived

in cities of 5 million or larger;two-thirds lived in cities smallerthan one million. Even by theyear 2015 it is anticipated thatno more than 19 per cent will bein the 5 million plus cities, with59 per cent still living in theunder one million cities.12

Tim

Vau

lkha

rd

Public investment inroads and transport,communicationsfacilities, sewerageand drainage, watersupply, tertiaryeducation, etc. is oftenheavily concentratedin larger cities


1110

13 UNCHS, 2001a.

14 World Bank, 2000a, p.126.

15 It is often possible tomaintain in the short runan artificially high level ofpublic expenditure oninfrastructure and services,primarily by building upunsustainable levels ofdebt (‘stealing from thefuture’) and/or byruthlessly squeezing othercomponents of theeconomy particularly theprivate sector (‘killing thegoose that lays the goldeneggs’). Unfortunately, thiscannot be sustained in thelonger term, and it almostinvariably leads to acrushing collapse of thepublic economy.

3. The Challenges of Sustainable Urbanisation

To realise the potential contribution of urbanisation tosustainable development, a number of challengeshave to be tackled. Some of the most serious are

identified in this section, including issues of economicsustainability and poverty reduction, environmentaldegradation, social injustice and exclusion, and governancefailures.

The Challenge of Economic Sustainabilityand Poverty Reduction

There is a strong link between urbanisation and nationallevels of economic and human development: urban as ashare of total national population is above 70 per cent incountries with highly developed economies and in thosewith a high Human Development Index.13 Goods and serv-ices are generally produced most efficiently in densely pop-ulated areas that provide access to a pool of labour withappropriate skills, supporting services, transport and com-munication links, and a critical mass of customers. Theseattractive qualities are associated with urban areas, withthe result that, as countries develop, urban settlements ac-count for an ever-increasing share of national income: theygenerate 55 per cent of GNP in low-income countries, 73per cent in middle and 85 per cent in high-incomeeconomies.14 It is this economic growth, moreover, whichprovides the basis on which cities can contribute to the Mil-lenium Development Goals by building infrastructure, pro-viding social, health and educational services, andgenerating income-earning opportunities for the urban poor.Conversely, in the absence of a healthy urban economy, itwill not be possible to provide these things, certainly not ona sustainable basis.15

The economic functions of cities and towns are diverse, andalthough dynamic ‘world cities’ may attract the greatestpublicity, the majority of the world’s urban population willcontinue to live in other urban places. Often small andmedium sized, these cities and towns will generally con-tinue to have locally, regionally or nationally orientedeconomies, even though international economic influenceswill be substantial. For this reason attention should be fo-cused not just on how urban areas can compete globally,but also on how they can best develop diversified andhealthy economies within their national contexts.

The larger cities have important economic advantages.However, in many countries a disproportionate amount ofpublic investment, especially in infrastructure, appears togo to the very biggest cities - particularly where these arenational capitals. Public investment in roads and transport,communications facilities, sewerage and drainage, watersupply, tertiary education, etc. is often heavily concen-trated in larger cities. Its relative absence in small andmedium sized urban centres is a brake on economic de-velopment, discouraging private investment and makingurban activities in general less efficient and productive. Ef-forts to ‘decentralise’ economic activities into such settle-ments by administrative means are unlikely to succeed,however, unless the cities and towns offer viable eco-nomic locations, supported by investment in infrastructure

Sustainable development is ulti-mately about people, abouthuman societies and well-being. Human development (asin the UNDP’s Human Develop-ment Report) is about expandingthe choices people have to leadlives that they value, buildinghuman capabilities, realising

rights, and securing social andeconomic well-being. Peopleare also at the centre of theinternational commitment tosustainable developmentembodied in the Rio Declaration.Thus, sustainable developmentis a much broader concern thaneconomic development.

and public facilities and by financial and institutionalstrengthening of local governments.

Economic growth is unsatisfactory if it is accompanied bycontinuing or increased inequity and poverty, not least be-cause low levels of education and health care provision orsocial disruptions have an adverse effect on economic de-velopment. Urban poverty is growing in scale and extent; itis characterised not only by material deprivation (low in-comes and low levels of consumption) but also by squalidliving conditions and lack of access to opportunities andservices. One of the dilemmas is that policies designed toencourage investment and achieve economic growth do notnecessarily result in economic opportunities accessible tothe poor and may exacerbate poverty, even while expandingthe economy overall.

For example, the organisational arrangements for improvingthe provision of infrastructure and services were subject tosome radical rethinking in the 1990s, including commer-cialisation (increased cost recovery), competition, a reducedrole for the public sector, and increased private sector andcommunity participation. While confirming the importantpotential gains from such reforms, experience has alsohighlighted some of the obstacles: limited public sector ca-pacity to regulate private provision, absence of effective

Economies never stand still.The ability to adapt to changingeconomic circumstances hasalways been important in deter-mining how well a country, cityor region copes with theinevitability of change. Howev-er, the increasing scale, scopeand complexity of connectionsbetween far-flung places andprocesses of economic changemean that urban settlementsand the people and businesseswithin them are ever more sub-ject to the pressures of change.Reliance on a narrow economicbase and the lack of capacity to

adapt to changing economic cir-cumstances make urban resi-dents and enterprises vulnera-ble to these economic influ-ences, positive and negative.The challenge is to reduce eco-nomic vulnerability by develop-ing diverse economies andlivelihoods, as well as skillswhich are robust and flexible.Actions which can help achievethese aims include, for example,generating and disseminatingeconomic intelligence toimprove preparedness andadopting strategies which fosteradaptability at firm and city levels.

competition, reluctance to recognise the potential contribu-tion of small and informal operators and (especially) ofcommunities, poorly developed operational capacities in thedomestic private sector, political interference and lack oftransparency and accountability.17 Although commercialisa-tion of urban services to achieve improved provision and fi-nancial sustainability may be necessary for the city as awhole, providers may be uninterested in extending provisionto the areas where poor people live and increased chargesmay make the improved services unaffordable to lower in-come residents. In addition, regulations that protect orfavour formal sector businesses and restrict informal eco-nomic activities reduce the economic opportunities avail-able to the poor.

It has sometimes been argued that size itself is important,with assertions that cities can grow ‘too large’, becomingeconomically costly, socially unsustainable, unmanageableand environmentally damaging. The evidence, however,suggests that this is not the case, certainly with respect toeconomic variables (productivity, efficiency, output). Indeed,the continued concentration of manufacturing and servicesin large cities demonstrates that the economic advantagesexceed the additional costs of highly priced land, higherwage levels and increased congestion. These benefits arealso perceived by individuals and households, as shown bythe numerous failed attempts to curtail rural-urban migra-tion and halt the growth of large cities. The criticism ofbeing ‘unmanageable’ unfortunately applies to almost allcities and is related not to size per se, but to political andgovernance failures (see below). Similarly, economicgrowth can result in environmental degradation in cities ofall sizes, posing the second major set of challenges to sus-tainable urbanisation.

“Urban poverty is growing in scale and extent, especially at the periurban rim. In … LatinAmerica and Europe and CentralAsia, more than half the pooralready live in urban areas.

By 2025 two-thirds of the poorin these regions, and a third to almost half the poor in Africa and Asia will reside cities or towns.” 16

16 World Bank, 2000b, p.5.

17 Nickson and Franceys,2001.

Toph

am P

ictu

repo

int

Bern

d De

cker

Even where localcommunities seeagricultural productionas important to theirlivelihood strategies,support from localgovernance institutionsis lacking.


1312

18 Gleeson and Low, 2000.

19 DFID, EC, UNDP and WorldBank, 2002, see also DFID,2000a.

20 DFID, 2001. Urbansettlements, and especiallytheir poorer residents, areparticularly vulnerable tohazards and disasters,including hurricanes, floodsand earthquakes. Theseare not specificallyconsidered in this bookletbut see El-Masri and Tipple(2002), Sanderson (2000)and UNCHS (2001b).

21 The UN Food andAgriculture Organisationdefines urban and peri-urban agriculture (UPA) asoccurring within andsurrounding the boundariesof cities throughout theworld and including cropand livestock production,fisheries and forestry.

The Environment: Impacts and Challenges

All human settlements use natural resources (food, con-struction materials, raw materials for industry, energy,water, air and land) which they consume, process, trans-port, and from which they subsequently generate waste.Urban production often has adverse environmental impacts,the full economic and social costs of which are unequallydistributed and often ignored.18

The environmental conditions within human settlements area central concern, particularly because of the strong linksbetween poverty and the environment. A discussion paperprepared for the WSSD by DFID, the European Commission,the United Nations Development Programme and the WorldBank identified three key poverty-environment linkages,through health, livelihoods, and vulnerability.19 These link-ages are clearly seen in urban areas, as the poor are mostseverely affected by inadequate urban environmental serv-ices, particularly a lack of sanitation, drainage, waste col-

lection, and adequate supplies of drinking water, and oftenlive and work in hazardous locations.20 The health impactsof such service deficiencies contribute significantly to thedisease burden of the poor, particularly women and chil-dren, and the population density (and poor layout) of low-in-come areas, especially informal settlements and slums,exacerbates the situation, creating conditions in which in-fectious and parasitic diseases spread more readily.

Pollution and the generation of wastes from industry is a se-rious problem in most urban centres – and a grave problemin most developing countries, where rapid urbanisation istypically accompanied by rapid urban industrialisation.Heavy (polluting) industry is prevalent in many cities of thedeveloping world, as are small-scale industries that are dif-ficult to regulate. Growing vehicle emissions make a majorand rapidly growing contribution to air pollution. Air, waterand soil pollution, in turn, raise the costs of doing business,as does a high incidence of disease.

Sustainable urbanisation highlights the linkages betweenurban and rural areas, which have numerous environmentaldimensions. The flows of water, food, raw materials, en-ergy, etc. from non-urban to urban areas have important im-plications for the ecology of both the originating and thereceiving areas. The disposal or impact of urban wastes(solid wastes, air and water pollution) in peri-urban andrural areas and beyond is also significant. Existing policyframeworks are often inadequate to deal with these issuesbecause they are sectorally fragmented and do not apply tothe broader regional context, encompassing both urban andrural areas.

Urban and peri-urban agriculture (UPA21), for example, is animportant element in the livelihood strategies of the poor,and can also add to the sustainability of urban areasthrough the local provision of food and the use of treatedwastewater. But UPA can also pose risks to public healthand the environment, through the use of inappropriate agri-cultural inputs (polluted water, raw organic matter, chemicalpesticides). For example, the use of untreated wastewaterhas as yet unknown consequences, in terms of scale andimpact, for the health of urban agriculturalists and con-sumers, as well as for the environment. Land availabilityposes particular challenges to the viability of UPA, particu-larly in cities where the built-up area is densely settled,rapid peripheral expansion is occurring and competition forland is great. The scope for reserving land permanently foragriculture within urban areas varies. Even where localcommunities see agricultural production as important totheir livelihood strategies, support from local governance in-stitutions is lacking. Often inadequate land is reserved forrecreation in rapidly growing urban areas, let alone forurban agriculture, despite the vital role of green space in hy-drological management (absorbing rainwater runoff andflood water and re-charge of aquifers), mitigating the ad-verse climatic effects of urban development (by reducingthe ‘heat island’ effect created by hard surfaces and pro-viding windbreaks) and increasing social well-being (by

Because towns and cities areresource users, environmentalmanagement must go beyondend-of-pipe clean-ups orimproved waste disposal andembrace wider resource man-agement concerns – how to use

renewable and non-renewableresources as efficiently as pos-sible, how to ensure that non-renewable resources are notdepleted, and how to reduce thegeneration of waste and emis-sions.

providing space for recreation and play). Unplanned urbansprawl is not only costly to service, it can also threaten theviability of peri-urban agriculture.

Finally, there are crucial international or global environ-mental issues which are related to the process of urbanisa-tion. Emissions of ‘greenhouse gases’ which contribute toglobal warming are predominantly from urban sources (in-dustry, heating, motor vehicles) and the way in which ur-banisation is managed significantly affects the type andquantity of such emissions. Sewage disposal from cities isthe principal source of pollution in lakes and coastal seas,yet proper treatment of sewerage is not always achieved incities in richer countries and is seriously inadequate (ornon-existent) in most cities of the developing world.

The sustainable, equitable and efficient provision of envi-ronmental goods and services is an enormous task, withecological, social, economic and governance implications.The planning and management of environmental goods andservices is often inadequate, resulting in services which areboth deficient and inequitable in terms of cost and physicalaccess. As a result, not only are infrastructure and servicesinadequate in many towns and cities, but also environ-mental degradation is worsening and the wider ecologicalimplications of urban development are not being well han-dled.

Social Dimensions: The Challenges ofInjustice, Inequality and Exclusion

Whilst urban centres clearly have a major role to play ineconomic development, they are also characterised by rapidsocial changes which may have adverse consequences.Such changes are associated with the shifting compositionof urban populations, but also with the lack of economic op-

portunities for all and the lack of political voice. The socialdimensions of sustainable development have often, how-ever, been less well-defined than the environmental andeconomic dimensions.

A study commissioned by the World Bank and DFID inpreparation for the WSSD explored the meaning and impli-

UNEP

/UNC

HS N

airo

biRi

ver B

asin

Pro

ject

Toph

am P

ictu

repo

int

27 Vanderschueren, 2001.

28 Blair, 2001.

Many of the urbanpoor face the threat ofeviction or strugglewith a lack of clearrights, even to shelterwhich they haveprovided forthemselves


15

© T

opha

m/U

NEP

14

22 Thin et al., 2002.

23 Gleeson and Low, 2000;Devas et al, 2001.

24 Thin et al., 2002.

25 Tacoli, 2001.

26 World Urban Forum, 2002.

The socialdimensions ofsustainabledevelopment haveoften, however, beenless well-definedthan theenvironmental andeconomicdimensions.

cations of socially sustainable development.22 The authorsidentify four areas of social objectives and processes thatare core elements of socially sustainable development:• social justice• solidarity• participation, social inclusion and diversity• security: resilience and adaptability.

In practice, social injustice and inequality are widespread insocieties worldwide, not least in urban settlements: resi-dents have unequal access to political power, as well as tourban land, housing and services.23 In the face of the diffi-culties experienced by middle and low-income urban resi-dents in obtaining plots or dwellings through the formalmarket or government systems, they have resorted to livingin informal settlements, sometimes in unsuitable locationsand always with inadequate services. Solidarity is used asa broader term than social capital, reflecting the “instru-

Because of the presence ofmany households headed bywomen, and because of tradi-tional social practices and dis-criminatory legislation, genderinequality is particularly preva-lent in the urban settlements ofdeveloping countries. Althoughtoday’s urban economies aredependent on their labour,women are often denied accessto credit, resources, income

generation and entrepreneurialopportunities. In addition, publictransport is intimidating towomen; basic amenities suchas toilets or crèches are under-provided; women are more like-ly to be poor; they lack politicalvoice; and they are under-repre-sented in positions of politicalinfluence and managerialresponsibility.

mental and the intrinsic value” of social institutions and re-lationships.24 In an urban setting, traditional social networksmay break down because of migration and changinglifestyles. Although new networks are formed, these do notalways provide the social support residents need and some,such as gangs, may be socially disruptive and even crim-inal. Civil society organisations have a particularly impor-tant role to play in facilitating the maintenance anddevelopment of social networks, supporting citizens’ groupsand educating residents on their political rights. In somecountries they are particularly well developed in urbanareas, but in other countries - especially where their devel-opment is resisted by non-democratic governments – thereare relatively few.

Everywhere, some groups are excluded from economic op-portunities, as well as from urban politics, access to serv-ices, and supportive social networks. Such exclusion mayoccur along religious, ethnic or gender lines. Often policiesand administrative practices do not recognise gender, age,and cultural diversity, resulting in discrimination and exclu-sion. Lack of political voice and non-participatory ap-proaches to policy formulation, planning and project designexacerbate the problem.

In participatory poverty assessments in many countries, se-curity has emerged as a critical concern for poor people. Inurban areas, the issue has a number of dimensions: liveli-hood insecurity, tenure insecurity and the physical insecu-rity associated with high levels of crime and violence areparticularly important. Livelihood insecurity arises from thereliance of many poor people on casual work of informalsector activities, which are also vulnerable to disruption bythe actions of public sector agencies. Urban-rural links playan important role in the strategies people adopt to increasethe security of their livelihoods.25 Some of the economic di-mensions of such links have been mentioned above, buttheir social dimensions, such as maintaining family and tra-ditional support networks, are equally important. Remit-tances to rural households enable family members there toimprove their life chances through education and incomegeneration. Links to people living in urban areas may pro-vide seasonal urban work to supplement income or subsis-tence from agriculture. Policies which make it difficult forfamilies to sustain such links adversely affect the security oftheir livelihoods.

The security of the poor, in particular, is affected by theirhealth status, which influences both their ability to work andthe cost of health care. The HIV/AIDS pandemic has partic-ular implications for sustainable urbanisation, especially inAfrica. A World Urban Forum background paper identifiedspecific urban dimensions of the pandemic, notably the lossof household income, exclusion from social and health serv-ices, and the disintegration of social cohesion (including therising number of orphans).26 Insecurity is exacerbated by in-security of tenure, with respect to both land and accommo-dation. Many of the urban poor face the threat of evictionor struggle with a lack of clear rights, even to shelter which

they have provided for themselves. The absence of securetenure and a high degree of homelessness amongst peoplewith HIV/AIDS increases their vulnerability and reduces theirchances of adequate care and treatment. Often, poorpeople are forced to build on land unsuitable for housingand vulnerable to floods or landslides, which worsens theirinsecurity. Finally, crime and violence is commonly aproblem in towns and cities. Although rising levels of phys-ical insecurity affect everyone, the urban poor and womenand children are particularly vulnerable.27 Neither individualthreats to household security nor the relationships betweenthem are adequately addressed by current policies andpractices, in large part because of governance failures.

The Challenge of Governance: Political-institutional Sustainability in Urban Settlements

Economically, socially and environmentally sustainable ur-banisation cannot be achieved without governance arrange-ments that can help to realise the economic potential oftowns and cities, achieve social justice and welfare, and re-duce the environmentally damaging effects of urbangrowth.

The important political changes of the past 15 years, partic-ularly increasing democratisation and steady, if uneven, im-provements in human rights, have largely originated within,and been led from, the cities. These political developmentsare closely connected to economic and social changes, andare strong influences on the progress of urbanisation. Un-fortunately, in most parts of the world the political and ad-ministrative structures for local government have notchanged or modernised sufficiently to keep up with rapidsocial and economic change, and they typically lack the leg-islative authority, financial resources or managerial capabil-

ities which are now required. Basically, most local govern-ments are ill-equipped to handle urbanisation.

Multi-party representative democracy is the most com-monly adopted political system. However, while such sys-tems increase the scope for residents to exercise politicalvoice, there are limitations on their capacity to adequatelyrepresent all, especially the poor and marginalised, and toprovide opportunities for the day-to-day practice of activecitizenship. One of the challenges for political sustainability,then, is to develop more diverse and pluralistic politicalmechanisms as well as more effective and extensive op-portunities for participation, representation and accounta-bility.28

Political and administrative decentralisation is expected toincrease the responsiveness of public sector agencies tolocal priorities, while enhancing their effectiveness by fos-tering co-operation between local government and sectoralagencies. However, democratisation, far from providing thepoor with political influence, may consolidate or increasethe power of local elites and the voice of middle incomegroups, who are not necessarily interested in either equityor poverty reduction. Also, reluctance by central govern-ment to devolve powers and resources to match responsi-

A key message from the WorldUrban Forum (April-May 2002)was that the most immediateand fundamental bottlenecks tosustainable urbanisation are notthe lack of technology, fundingor international agreements(although these are important)but rather the lack of local plan-ning, management and imple-

mentation capacities and soundurban governance. Consider-able attention was thereforedevoted to ways and means ofproviding support to localactors, especially local authori-ties and their partners, to helpthem improve their planning,management and governancecapacities.

Rasn

a W

arah

Toph

am/U

NEP

29 Allen and Dávila, 2002;DFID, 2001.

30 World Bank, 2000b, p.3.

Both under-investmentin infrastructure(especiallymaintenance) andinvestment biasedtowards the largestcities hinder thedevelopment of tradinglinks between urbanand rural areas


17

© T

opha

m/U

NEP

16

One of thechallenges forpolitical sustainabilityis to develop morediverse andpluralistic politicalmechanisms as wellas more effectiveand extensiveopportunities forparticipation,representation andaccountability

bilities reduces the capacity of local government to operateefficiently and responsively. The challenge is to opera-tionalise democratic decentralisation, particularly in theface of resistance by central government politicians andagencies and the lack of financial and managerial capacityat the local level.

A significant barrier to both democratic decentralisation andsustainable urbanisation lies in the general lack of planning,implementation and management capacities on the part oflocal governments and their partners. To be effective, real-location of responsibilities to elected local governments (de-centralisation) should be accompanied by improvements totheir managerial capabilities and financial base. However,local government has commonly been neglected and mar-ginalized by central government. Moreover, the lowly statusof local government and poor pay and conditions of servicehave deterred qualified and experienced professionals fromlocal government employment. Unfortunately, recent expe-rience is not encouraging. Attempts to increase the effec-tiveness of government by shedding surplus labour(including ghost workers), in order to increase the share ofbudgets available for operational costs, improve conditionsof employment (especially pay), and introduce incentives forgood performance (merit-based recruitment and promo-tion), have been widespread, but they have made unevenand limited progress in most cases. Progress at local levelhas generally been even more meagre than at the centre.

In addition, central government departments resist efforts todecentralise taxation powers and other revenue sourcesand are reluctant to remove restrictions on borrowing bylocal authorities to give them more financial flexibility. Lo-

cally, there is often considerable opposition to pricing infra-structure and services on a more sustainable cost-recoverybasis, primarily from those who benefit from the existingsystem: professionals with entrenched views about how tooperate services, politicians who use unsustainable serviceprovision to attract votes in the short term, public sectortrade unions fearful of job losses, consumers who are notconvinced that increased charges will be followed by im-proved services, and the poor and their supporters who areconcerned that increased prices will reduce their access toservices.

Furthermore, many of the environmental, social and eco-nomic problems of human settlements in developing coun-tries derive from or are exacerbated by the lack (orineffectiveness) of urban development planning. Efforts toimplement detailed control over land use, especiallythrough static and out-dated ‘master plan’ approaches,have almost universally failed, except in some wealthycountries with highly developed political-administrativesystems.

Developing participatory and inclusive local politics andovercoming the capability barriers faced by local govern-ment are thus fundamental challenges of sustainable ur-banisation.

Rural-Urban Interdependence: The Challenge of Achieving Synergy

Urbanisation is viewed by some as a negative force, si-phoning private and public resources from rural areas intourban, leaving the former impoverished and further fuellingout-migration; it is viewed by others as a progressive forceunderlying technological innovation, economic developmentand socio-political progress. These contrasting perceptionshave influenced policy, with investment in urban and ruralareas seen as mutually exclusive and competing. Increas-ingly, however, this polarisation is recognised as artificialand unhelpful. Urban areas are not the ‘cause’ of rural de-cline; loss of agricultural jobs has everywhere been a fea-ture of modernisation, and utilisation of surplus rural labourin other (usually urban) activities is a prerequisite for raisingrural incomes and living standards. Equally, it is clear thatthe concentration of human, technical and financial re-sources in cities has become an increasingly importantasset in the more internationalised world economy of today.Most importantly, it can be seen that rural and urban areasare intimately linked and if sensibly planned and managed,could be complementary to one another.29

Urban markets potentially provide a powerful incentive for(and support to) increased rural production, while expandingrural markets can provide an equally powerful incentive forincreased urban production of goods and services. How-ever, past policies on pricing and marketing and under-in-vestment in infrastructure have inhibited the realisation ofthis potential. For instance, subsidised food and utilityprices for urban populations favoured urban production over

In a dramatic reversal of earlierpolicy, the People’s Republic ofChina now actively promotesrural to urban migration and thegrowth of cities and towns, fortwo important reasons. First, thecountry has an enormous ‘sur-plus’ rural population (estimatedvariously from 200 to 400 mil-lion); the new pro-urbanisationpolicy is intended to reduce ruralpoverty by promoting the mod-ernisation of rural areas and giv-

ing underemployed rural labouran opportunity to earn a betterliving in the more productive(urban) parts of the economy.Second, the policy is seen as vitalfor maintaining China’s rapidnational economic development,for which its cities are consid-ered the essential engines ofgrowth [Described by a Ministryof Construction spokespersonduring the World Urban Forum,June 2002].

agriculture. In addition, price controls and/or governmentcommodity purchasing monopolies were disincentives forincreased rural productivity and reduced rural incomes, fu-elling out-migration.

Economic reform policies in the 1980s and 1990s werespecifically designed to eliminate such harmful distortions,although getting the right balance in policies that affect therural-urban terms of trade continues to pose economic andpolitical difficulties. Both under-investment in infrastructure(especially maintenance) and investment biased towardsthe largest cities hinder the development of trading linksbetween urban and rural areas. Impediments limiting theability of rural producers to get commodities (especially per-ishable agricultural produce) to market and of urbanproviders to make business and social services available torural populations (especially the poor) undermine urban andrural economic development and poverty reduction alike.Developing and maintaining transport, electricity andtelecommunications networks continues to pose chal-lenges, especially for heavily indebted poor countries.

Finally, as discussed in an earlier section, links betweenrural and urban areas have important environmental dimen-sions. The challenge is to find ways of managing the re-sources needed for urban development in a sustainableway, reducing the environmental impact of urban economicand demographic growth.

“A particularly important chan-nel through which growingurban areas contribute tonational development is thesynergy between rural andurban economies. ‘Urban’ and‘rural’ do not signify closed sys-

tems within a country, but aseamless continuum of eco-nomic activities and settlementsdistinguished by degrees ofdensity, dependence on agricul-ture or manufacturing and socialorganisation”. 30

Toph

am P

ictu

repo

int

Toph

am P

ictu

repo

int

32 World Bank, 2000a.

Although many of theinfluences oneconomic developmentmay be beyond thecontrol of local, oreven national,governments, a varietyof actions cannevertheless be takento foster urbaneconomic development


1918

In a competitiveglobal economy,most towns andcities are unlikely toattract large-scaleinternationalinvestment

The key challenge of sustainable urbanisation is toachieve the crucial contributions which urbansettlements can make to economic, environmental

and social sustainability at local, national and global levels.Drawing on the growing stock of experience from aroundthe world, some of the main priorities and actions forpromoting and managing sustainable urbanisation will beidentified in this section, taking rural-urbaninterdependence into account throughout.

Priorities and Actions for EconomicSustainability in Towns and Cities

Local economic development strategies in urban settle-ments work best when focused on developing the basicconditions needed for the efficient operation of economicenterprises, both large and small scale. These include• reliable infrastructure and services, including water

supply, waste management, transport, communicationsand energy supply;

• access to land or premises in appropriate locations withsecure tenure;

• financial institutions and markets capable of mobilisinginvestment and credit;

• a healthy educated workforce with appropriate skills;• a legal system which ensures competition, accounta-

bility and property rights;• appropriate regulatory frameworks, which define and

enforce non-discriminatory and locally appropriateminimum standards for the provision of safe andhealthy workplaces and the treatment and handling ofwastes and emissions.

In a competitive global economy, most towns and cities areunlikely to attract large-scale international investment; inany case, reliance on a limited number of investors (do-

mestic or foreign) increases vulnerability to economicshocks. Hence, local economic development strategiesneed to focus on developing diversified urban economieswhich complement the economies of their surrounding ruralareas and which can recover from shocks and adapt to eco-nomic trends. Although many of the influences on eco-nomic development may be beyond the control of local, oreven national, governments, a variety of actions can never-theless be taken to foster urban economic development(see Box 1).

For urban and rural producers to respond effectively to de-mand for goods and services, rural and urban areas needgood inter-connections, including transport and telecommu-nications networks, as well as essential services such aselectricity and water.32 The terms of trade between ruraland urban areas should not favour one over the other, andalthough getting the right policies is difficult, governmentsare today much more aware of the potentially adverse ef-fects of inappropriate policies than in the past.

Recent experience has demonstrated that there is consider-able scope for improving infrastructure and service provi-sion through public-private partnerships, privatisation andcommercialisation, selective out-sourcing, and passing overmore responsibilities to local communities. If properly or-ganised, with genuine competition, sensible market pres-sures, consumer sovereignty, and intelligent monitoring andoversight, then significant benefits – to urban businessesand citizens and to the public finances alike – can begained. There is also scope for increased use of usercharges, which experience has shown can be introducedeven in low-income communities if they are organised andmanaged on a transparent and participatory basis, and if in-creased charges are associated with improved servicequality and reliability. To realise the potential benefits of in-creased private sector and community participation in infra-structure provision and service delivery, however,considerable public sector capacity is needed, to developappropriate policies and regulatory systems, to subcontractto and supervise non-governmental providers, to generate

4. Promoting and ManagingSustainable Urbanisation

Although the challenges of sus-tainable urbanisation are daunt-ing, there is encouraging evi-dence that appropriate andeffective responses are beingworked out in cities and townsall over the world. There is agreat variety of differentresponses, reflecting the greatvariety of local conditions, butmany common lessons arebeing learned – and increasing-

ly documented. It is this grow-ing body of knowledge andinformation which provides thebasis for general recommenda-tions about sustainable urbani-sation. The Best Practices Pro-gramme (of UN-HABITAT) isprobably the best-known general source (www.bestprac-tices.org) but many other usefulcompilations have been made.31

In common with many transition countries,Poland experienced considerable disruption inthe process of economic modernisation follow-ing the end of communist rule. Unemploymentin cities dependent upon older heavy industrieswas particularly severe, and the lack of effectivetraining and other labour market mechanismssuited to the emerging market economy madethe problems worse. The town of TomaszowMazowiecki was one of the more badly affected,with unemployment well above the nationalaverage.

The Tomaszow Enterprise Incubator Foundation(TEIF) was established in late 1993 to developlocal solutions to the unemployment problem. Itwas based on a partnership approach in whichtraining organisations, employers, local govern-ment and the unemployed worked together at allstages, from survey to planning to implementa-tion. Beginning with a forum which developed

communication among the partners and agreedpriorities, the initiative included surveys of train-ing capacity in various organisations and firmsand of the training needs of local employers, onthe basis of which three data-bases were creat-ed (training organisations, employers and unem-ployed persons with skills). In addition, a smallbusiness incubator unit was set up to encourageand support new enterprises, providing a rangeof business advisory services.

With these mechanisms established, it was pos-sible to continuously adjust and adapt them, asthe local economy continued to change. Themajority of trainees have been able to findemployment and new businesses have beenable to obtain the types of labour skills theyrequire. The activities initiated by the TEIF havenot solved the economic problems of TomaszowMazowiecki, but they have significantly easedthe problems of transition, bringing direct bene-

fits to the unemployed as well as helping theemerging economy grow more successfully. Akey lesson from the TEIF is that a partnershipapproach is crucial: improved communicationand information flows among training organisa-tions, local government, employers and theunemployed allow training and redeploymentstrategies to respond to the real needs of thelocal labour market. Encouraged by the successin Tomaszow Mazowiecki, the TEIF model isbeing introduced in other Polish cities. Althoughexternal sources provided much of the initialfunds, the local government paid 20 per cent ofproject costs, and as activities have matured theFoundation has begun to generate income bycharging modest fees for its services, thusincreasing its sustainability.

Sources: UN-HABITAT Best Practices Pro-gramme; DPU (2001) Implementing the HabitatAgenda: In Search of Urban Sustainability, p. 75.

31 These include Partnershipfor Local Action (UNCHSand CITYNET, 1997);Effective ParticipatoryUrban Management(CITYNET, 1997);Implementing the HabitatAgenda: In Search of UrbanSustainability (DPU, 2001),The State of the World’sCities 2001 (UNCHS,2001b), Implementing theHabitat Agenda (UNCHS,2001c).

Topham Picturepoint

Bern

d De

cker

Bern

d De

cker

1. Promoting local employment and economic development: The Tomaszow Enterprise Incubator Foundation, Poland

Toph

am/U

NEP

34 UNCHS, 1996a, IV.C.35 See, for example, Bartone,

2001; Nickson andFranceys, 2001.

Until water supply,sanitation and solidwaste managementare available to allurban residents, theseshould be the highestpriority for urbanmanagers


2120

33 Rakodi with Lloyd-Jones,2002.

Appropriateregistrationprocedures andregulations can bedeveloped through aconsultative process,with priority inenforcement beinggiven to significantpolluters and largeenterprises

funds for investment and maintenance, and to ensure anappropriate balance between meeting the needs of formaland informal businesses as well as rich and poor citizens.

A healthy urban economy which generates work opportuni-ties for the growing urban population in general, and poorpeople (especially women and young people) in particular,requires both positive measures of support and a cessationof public sector activities which unnecessarily constrainlocal businesses. This means, for example, eliminating un-necessary controls and bureaucratic procedures (which areoften the source of corruption), relaxing unrealistic and lo-cally-inappropriate building and planning standards, and re-moving subsidies or licences which benefit particularorganisations and distort the economy. The development offinancial and business services needs to be supported, es-pecially for small-scale enterprises. Improved environ-mental health, improved access to education, training and

financial services, and reduction of the hazards associatedwith dangerous living and working conditions can togetherincrease the health, access to livelihoods and economic se-curity of poor people.33

Regulation is needed to reduce pollution, safeguard publichealth and ensure safe workplaces, but this should not beused to remove informal markets or street businesses,which have important roles in both the livelihoods of thepoor and the provision of services to formal sector busi-nesses and wage earners. Appropriate registration proce-dures and regulations can be developed through aconsultative process, with priority in enforcement beinggiven to significant polluters and large enterprises.

For several reasons, special attention needs to be given tosupporting the urban informal sector, which is vital for asustainable urban economy:

• it is often the source of livelihoods for the poor;• it is vital to and closely linked with the urban formal

sector through sub-contracting and provision of inter-mediate goods and services;

• it provides, in an appropriate way and at affordableprices, essential goods and services for the population,especially the poor; and

• it functions as an ‘incubator’ for small-scale enter-prises.

Regulations therefore need to be carefully designed andsensibly and flexibly implemented, with recognition of thedifferent needs and characteristics of the informal sector.Basic training in literacy and numeracy can give a powerfulboost to informal businesses, as can the provision of suit-ably designed financial services, including micro-credit.Recognition of mixed land uses, together with regularisationof tenure, can significantly increase investment in informalsector enterprises.

Priorities and Actions for UrbanEnvironmental Sustainability

Sustainable urbanisation requires that non-renewable re-sources are sensibly used and conserved, that renewableresources are not depleted, that the energy used and wasteproduced per unit of output or consumption is reduced, andthat the waste produced is recycled or disposed of in wayswhich do not damage the wider environment. Only bydealing with urbanisation within regional, national and eveninternational planning and policy frameworks can these re-quirements be met.

Production for sale to urban markets is vital to ruraleconomies, but this production can easily cause environ-mental damage, so sustainable management of naturalcapital is a key policy goal. This may imply changes both inurban consumption patterns (e.g. from firewood to elec-tricity) and also in resource management practices (e.g. treeplanting for fuel or construction timber).

In common with other Chinese cities, Kun-ming has been experiencing rapid economicand physical growth since the early 1990s.This has been accompanied, however, byincreasing environmental problems, espe-cially air pollution resulting from motor vehi-cles. Despite an initially low rate of vehicleusage, the number of vehicles on the roadshas risen very rapidly (in Kunming, the num-ber of registered cars has doubled every 3and a half years) and this put great strain onthe transport network. Streets becamechronically congested and average travelspeeds dropped to 10 km/hour. This coin-cided with a general lowering of (previouslyvery high) urban residential densities and asteady expansion of urban development intothe surrounding countryside.

In most cities the response to increasingvehicle numbers and consequent trafficproblems has been to undertake massiveroad-building explicitly to accommodate pri-

vate cars. In Kunming, a quite differentapproach has recently been adopted, on apilot basis but with considerable success. A15-km bus line (exclusive lanes in the centreof existing streets) was constructed (togeth-er with bus shelters and platforms andpedestrian walkways) to run from the citycentre to the airport and the site of a horti-cultural exposition. The bus line began oper-ations in April 1999 with a capacity of 6,000persons per hour in each direction. Despitethe relatively small scale of the bus line, ithas had a significant impact: the speed ofbuses has increased by 68 per cent in thecorridor, car numbers have dropped; andemissions and noise have decreased. Thebus line has widespread public support (80per cent approval, according to the localpress) and locally it is widely acknowledgedto have shown the feasibility and desirabilityof a policy focussed on improvements inpublic transport.In undertaking this initiative,Kunming has benefited from a long-term

(since 1982) city partnership with Zurich,Switzerland. The creation of the bus line waspreceded by many years of careful study anddiscussion, which gradually re-oriented pri-orities in the city by showing how newstrategies could lead to a more sustainableprocess of urban development. A particularachievement was moving toward strategicintegration of transport planning with urbanplanning – and of both with environmentalplanning – together with mobilisation ofpolitical and community support. Thus, thedemonstration bus line is not a one-off inter-vention, but a first step toward a dynamicand effective public transport system whichis closely coordinated with urban develop-ment plans and programmes.

Sources: UN-HABITAT Best Practices Data-base; DPU (2001) Implementing the HabitatAgenda: In Search of Urban Sustainability,p. 42-3

2 Public transport for sustainable urban development: the Demonstration Bus Line in Kunming, China

Achieving a better environment for human health and well-being, which will improve the living conditions of people anddecrease disparities in the quality of their lives34, depends toa large extent on the development of environmental healthservices. Until water supply, sanitation and solid wastemanagement are available at a standard that provides af-fordable access to all urban residents, these should be thehighest priority for urban managers. The provision of pipedwater, appropriate sanitation and solid waste collection willreduce pollution of ground and surface water both withinand downstream of urban settlements. However, improvedtreatment and disposal of human and industrial waste doesnot necessarily imply the universal use of conventional wa-terborne sewerage systems (since these are costly in termsof both water and finance). Nor does improved treatmentand disposal of solid waste necessarily imply incineration,which has controversial environmental impacts. Enormousenvironmental improvements can be achieved by providingimproved pit latrines, shared toilet facilities or low cost sew-erage systems, as well as better management of sewagesettlement ponds and landfills. Improvements to servicedelivery also have important governance aspects and les-sons from recent experiences should inform the develop-ment of future partnership arrangements.35

As industrialisation proceeds and incomes rise, reducing thegeneration of waste and pollution from factory productionand vehicles rises up the list of priorities. ‘Clean production’– minimising the generation of waste and pollution throughimproved operating practices and technological improve-ments - can be supported by:• provision of appropriate incentives to encourage volun-

tary action;• removal of subsidies which promote the over-use of re-

sources such as coal or water, and also administrativebarriers to operational improvements;

• institutionalising environmental responsibility, for ex-ample through the use of environmental managementsystems such as ISO14001;

• community empowerment so that citizens and NGOs

In Havana, a city of around 2.2 million inhab-itants, urban agriculture has taken off since1989, when food shortages, resulting fromthe drastic curtailment of Soviet aid, prompt-ed the government to support agriculture inurban, as well as rural, areas. Much of theurban agriculture is carried out by BasicUnits of Production, which are small collec-tives owned and managed by the workers.

Urban agriculture is strongly supported bythe national and provincial governments,through the urban agriculture programme,integrating: 1) access to land; 2) extensionservices; 3) research and technology devel-opment; 4) new supply stores for small farm-ers; and 5) new marketing schemes andorganisation of selling points for urban pro-ducers. The Havana City Government has

prohibited the use of chemical pesticides inagriculture within the city limits, so urbanagriculture is almost entirely organic.

The promotion of urban agriculture hasincreased the food security of urbandwellers, and has reduced the need for stor-age and transportation of fresh produce,reducing post-harvest loss. New employ-ment opportunities have also been created.The government estimates that 117,000people work (to some degree) in urban agri-culture and about 26,000 are employed inrelated work. Allocating land for cultivation isnow seen as part of the urban planningprocess and urban agriculture has madepositive environmental contributions in termsof the provision of green space, using organ-ic waste generated within the city, using

urban wasteland and improving water reten-tion and air quality. The example of Havanaillustrates the need for strong governmentsupport if urban agriculture is to make a pos-itive contribution to sustainable urbanisation,as well as the need for such support to beintegrated with a range of other governmen-tal activities, including urban planning, agri-cultural extension, public health promotionand education.

Source: Novo, M. G. and Murphy, C. (2000)"Urban agriculture in the city of Havana: A pop-ular response to a crisis", in Bakker, N.,Dubbeling, M., Gündel, S., Sabel-Koschella, U.and de Zeeuw, H. (eds) Growing Cities, GrowingFood: Urban Agriculture on the Policy Agenda,Deutsche Stiftung für internationale Entwick-lung (DSE), Feldafing, Germany.

3 Urban agriculture in Havana, Cuba

37 See also DFID, 2000b

38 Goetz and Gaventa, 2001.

Efforts to address theproblems of urbancrime and violencerequire a multi-facetedand multi-stakeholderapproach


2322

36 McGranahan andSatterthwaite, 2000.

Dealing withparticulates, leadand other dangerouspollutants in cities isa central part of theso-called ‘brownagenda’

can more effectively demand action by elected officialsand industry;

• regular and accurate monitoring of pollution and effec-tive enforcement of regulations; and

• allocation of suitable sites for industrial development, tominimise the damaging impact of poorly located in-dustry on public health and the environment.

Thus, a mix of managerial, technological, community, andgovernance actions are required to improve the sustain-ability of industry in urban areas. Many of these require ac-tion at national and international as well as local levels.

Recent experience has shown that air pollution caused byincreasing vehicle numbers, the use of inappropriate fuels,and poor vehicle maintenance can be reduced dramaticallyin a relatively short time. Effective measures include:• the promotion of public transport (see Box 2);• removal of subsidies for the use of private vehicles (in-

cluding fuel subsidies and free parking) and the use oftaxes to ensure that vehicle users pay the full economicand social costs of their use;

• shifting from diesel and leaded petrol to lead-freepetrol, compressed natural gas, liquid petroleum gas orelectrically powered vehicles; and

• introduction and enforcement of emissions testingDealing with particulates, lead and other dangerous pollu-tants in cities is a central part of the so-called ‘brownagenda’. However, reduction in sulphur dioxide and carbonmonoxide emissions is also relevant to the ‘green agenda’concern for global environmental threats (ozone depletionand global warming).36

The demands placed by growing urban populations on foodsupply can be met by intensification of production. Althoughthis may itself have adverse environmental consequencesin rural areas, which will not be considered here, it also gen-erates opportunities for improved livelihoods and createspotential for mitigating the adverse environmental impactsof waste generation. For urban and peri-urban agricultureto contribute to urban food supply and the livelihoods of thepoor, and to safely use urban wastewater and organic solidwaste, support is needed from public sector institutions(see Box 3). Firstly, land for green space, including agri-cultural production, needs to be safeguarded through moreeffective planning and land administration systems (seebelow). Secondly, more research is needed into the healtheffects of irrigation with untreated wastewater, accompa-nied by improvements to sanitation and waste treatment toremove the most dangerous pathogens. Thirdly, solid wastemanagement practices should emphasise recycling and re-use and, in this context, the composting of biodegradablewaste and its sale to cultivators.

Access to security of tenure for the urban poorthrough formal registration and the mass pro-vision of individual property titles is often notpossible. In many cases, incremental regular-isation of tenure in informal settlements is theonly realistic option, starting with protectionfrom eviction. India offers promising exam-ples of different forms of tenure, which pro-vide secure rights to homeowners in informalsettlements.

In Visakhapatnam, a port and industrial city inthe state of Andhra Pradesh with a populationof over a million, 240,000 people live in 251officially designated slums, over half of whichare on state or municipal government land,including squatter settlements along roads,railways and city drains, inner city slums,peripheral villages and illegal subdivisions.During the last twenty years, an integrated

and intersectoral approach to informal settle-ments has been implemented, includingtenure regularisation, house improvements,infrastructure installation and other health,education and training programmes. Tenureregularisation is achieved by the issue of pat-tas. Those occupying state government landfor more than five years are eligible: poor fam-ilies are given freehold pattas without anycharges, while others have to pay the marketprice. Pattas are given in the name of women,they can be inherited but not sold and theycan be mortgaged for obtaining housingloans. Squatters on municipal land are issuedwith possession slips which may later bereplaced with pattas issued by the state gov-ernment revenue department. Some slumson unsuitable land have been relocated (occu-pants are first issued with identity cards tosignify their eligibility for plots in relocation

sites) but increasingly land shortages areleading to regularisation even on these sites.Slums on private or central government land aremore problematic – acquisition of the formerfaces long drawn out legal wrangles and some-times land sharing has been negotiated instead;housing owners on central government landcontinue to have insecure tenure. Nevertheless,basic infrastructure had been provided to over90 per cent of slum dwellers and, by 1989, 58per cent had been granted some form of patta,greatly increasing their security.

Sources: Banerjee, B. (2002) "Security oftenure in Indian cities" and "Security of tenureof irregular settlements in Visakhapatnam" inDurand-Lasserve, A. and Royston, L. (eds)Holding Their Ground: Secure Land Tenure forthe Urban Poor in Developing Countries,Earthscan, London, p. 37-58 and 86-97.

Many aspects of environmental sustainability, it is clear,cannot be dealt with within urban areas – they reflect rural-urban linkages and can only be successfully tackledthrough governance arrangements which encourage co-op-eration between local governments and provide for policyformulation and action on a city-regional scale.

Social Sustainability: Towards Social Justice and Inclusion

The social aspects of urbanisation and economic develop-ment must be addressed as part of the sustainable urbani-sation agenda. The Habitat Agenda incorporates relevantprinciples, including the promotion of:

• equal access to and fair and equitable provision of serv-ices;

• social integration by prohibiting discrimination and of-fering opportunities and physical space to encouragepositive interaction;

• gender and disability sensitive planning and manage-ment; and

• the prevention, reduction and elimination of violenceand crime.

Social justice recognises the need for a rights-based ap-proach, which demands equal access to ‘equal quality’urban services, with the needs and rights of vulnerablegroups appropriately addressed.37 Access to services isclosely linked to access to land, sites for economic activitiesand shelter, as recognised by UN-HABITAT’s Global Cam-paign on Secure Tenure. In addition to reforms to the formalland administration system to ensure that the supply of landmatches demand and to make it easier for low-income res-idents to access land through the formal system, measuresto improve security of tenure in informal settlements areneeded. Regularisation (which does not necessarily implythe issue of individual title) is crucial both to ensure security

and to encourage the provision of improved infrastructureand services (see Box 4). Some settlements are inappro-priately located for regularisation (for example in valley bot-toms or on steep slopes) and in these cases alternative sitesare needed, with sensitively handled relocation arrange-ments.

Civil society organisations have an important role to play infostering social inclusion: providing social support, devel-oping the capacity of citizens (especially poor women andmen) to exercise political voice, strengthening the capacityof citizens’ representatives to fulfil their roles and responsi-bilities in the political arena and supporting community or-ganisation.38 Planning, management and service provisionneeds to be sensitive to diversity and socially inclusive - theHabitat Agenda highlights the need for gender and disabilitysensitive planning and management, and the need to recog-nise the rights and needs of young people.

Efforts to address the problems of urban crime and violencerequire a multi-faceted and multi-stakeholder approach, in-corporating social concerns of exclusion and discrimination

Dar es Salaam is in many ways typical oflarge, fast-growing cities in Africa: along withphysical development and environmentalproblems, there has been a rise in crime andincreased feelings of increased insecurity, feltespecially by women. The traditional police-based approaches to crime prevention, how-ever, have been unable to stem the rise incrime or to deal effectively with the increas-ingly critical security issues.

One response, supported since 1997 throughthe Safer Cities Programme (of UN-HABITAT),is based on the understanding that a widerange of partners must be involved: centraland local government departments, police,NGOs, religious and training institutions,CBOs, the media, women’s groups, neigh-bourhood watch groups, ward and sub-wardleaders, and individual communities. An earlyinitiative was in Manzese Ward and focusedon safety for women. It began with a Safety

Audit, which is a process that brings partners(men and women) together to examine anddiscuss the physical features of an area asthese affect crime and feelings of insecurity:narrow streets, dark and unlit areas, openspaces, unfinished buildings, bars and clubs,etc. A variety of incremental measures wererecommended which together could signifi-cantly upgrade security in the area.

Actions to be taken at the municipal levelincluded improving accessibility and circula-tion by demolishing buildings which haveblocked roads and paths; providing street-lighting at critical points; and introducingsome restrictions on bars and night-clubs.Actions at the local level included better light-ing at houses, opening up additional path-ways, training and strengthening local securi-ty groups, and persuading owners of unfin-ished buildings to complete them. As an addi-tional step, it was agreed that local tribunals

led by traditional leaders should be estab-lished at the ward level with powers to dealwith petty crimes. In addition to these specif-ic actions, it was clear that the process itselfhad greatly increased people’s awareness ofcrime and security – and especially of the fac-tors which influence it at the local communitylevel.

As a result of these actions Manzese Ward hasexperienced a notable decrease in crime and,especially, a reduction in the sense of insecu-rity felt by local people, especially women.Initiatives are under way in other wards of Dares Salaam, and other Tanzanian cities havesought assistance to develop similar SaferCities initiatives.

Sources: UN-HABITAT Best Practices Pro-gramme; DPU (2001) Implementing theHabitat Agenda: in Search of Urban Sustain-ability, p. 65.

4 Improved security for the poor through regularisation of tenure: Visakhapatnam, India

5 Improving security through partnership: The Safer Cities Programme, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

Topham Picturepoint

2524

Over the last fewyears, the UN-HABITAT-ledCampaign for GoodUrban Governancehas built on theHabitat Agenda toarrive at a widelyaccepted set ofprinciples or normsagainst whichdecision-making andorganisationalarrangements can bejudged

and infrastructural issues of land use planning and streetlighting, in addition to law and order elements, embracingco-operation with the police and accessible justice.39 Giventhe increasing priority accorded to these issues by urbancitizens, it is clear that sustainable urbanisation must takethem into account. A UN-HABITAT initiative, the Safer CitiesProgramme, launched in 1996, seeks to directly address theissue of rising crime and violence in urban centres. Themain objectives of the programme are to build capacities atcity level, among the full range of stakeholders, to ade-quately address urban insecurity and to contribute to theestablishment of a culture of prevention (see Box 5).

Good Governance for SustainableUrbanisation

Over the last few years, the UN-HABITAT-led Campaign forGood Urban Governance has built on the Habitat Agenda toarrive at a widely accepted set of principles or normsagainst which decision-making and organisational arrange-ments can be judged.These are:• sustainability in all dimensions of urban development;

• subsidiarity of authority and resources to the most ap-propriate level;

• equity of access to decision-making processes and thebasic necessities of urban life;

• efficiency in the delivery of public services and in pro-moting local economic development;

• transparency and accountability of decision-makersand all stakeholders;

• civic engagement and citizenship; and• security of individuals and their living environment.

Directly elected local government with responsibility for areasonably comprehensive set of urban management tasks– and empowered with legal authority and financial re-sources - is likely to constitute the core of the political, or-ganisational and financial arrangements needed for goodurban governance. But recent experience has demon-strated that such basic arrangements should also be ac-companied by:40

• establishment of lower-level representative govern-ment structures, especially in large cities and metropol-itan areas, to increase responsiveness and bringgovernment closer to residents at the neighbourhood

and community levels;• mechanisms and channels, alongside the formal struc-

ture of elected local government, to provide for participa-tory decision making and improved accountability, withparticular attention to the empowerment of disadvan-taged or socially excluded groups (women, minorities);

• constructive engagement with regional and nationalgovernments to balance the legitimate roles of centralgovernment in achieving national development objec-tives and monitoring the performance of sub-nationalgovernments with the need of municipal governmentsfor local autonomy and sufficient financial resources toaddress local needs and interests in ways determinedlocally; and

• predictable central-local fiscal transfers designed to fitnational policy objectives while providing incentives tolocal revenue generation and supporting local re-sponses to local priorities; because predictability is asimportant as volume for planning purposes, basic cen-tral-local fiscal transfers should be based on explicitpolicy aims translated into financial terms through anagreed formula.

Mobilisation of local resources - whether municipal, com-munity and household, private sector, or other - was em-phasised in the World Urban Forum as a vital element in

making greater progress toward sustainable urbanisation,although external resources will often continue to beneeded. The ability of poor communities to generate re-sources to improve local infrastructure and the potentialrole private operators can play have both been demon-strated in several innovative programmes (see Box 6).


In the cities of Pakistan some 35 to 40 percent of the population live in Katchi Abadis orsimilar low-income and under-serviced hous-ing areas, many of which occupy marginaland unsafe lands and most of which are char-acterised by poor site layout, inadequateaccess, and high building density. Often theydeveloped without legal ownership or permis-sion, some as ‘squatters’ and others in areaswhere land title is disputed or unclear. Mostof the households have low incomes ($40-$50 per month), typically with only oneincome earner for a household of 7 or 8 per-sons,. Most households (more than 80 percent) own their own houses, but because ofunclear title and/or the absence of suitablefinancial institutions these assets cannotreadily be used as collateral for loans.

The larger cities of Pakistan rely extensivelyupon piped water-borne sewerage systems,which include not only commercial zones andhigh-income residential areas but also lowerincome areas, at least where there are pri-

mary and secondary lines nearby. However,the public authorities find themselves unableto make adequate progress in extending thesewerage network into the growing poorerneighbourhoods. As a result, only about halfof the households in such areas are served byunderground sewerage (or any other form ofcollection); it is therefore common to seewaste water from houses draining directlyinto the streets and lanes to collect in foetidpools in low-lying areas throughout the com-munity, with all the predictable public healthconsequences.

The PLUS Programme (of UNDP) works inthree cities (Faisalabad, Multan and Gujrun-wala) to facilitate social mobilisation withinpoor communities, helping local people toorganise themselves for self-help initiativesaimed (principally) at local sewerage provi-sion. The programme also supports imple-mentation of the work in an appropriate butlow-cost manner, by providing technicalassistance directly or through suitably-experi-

enced NGOs and by training of local masonsand workmen. These interventions are basedon 100 per cent community financing raisedby lane-level action (often led by women) andare thus not dependent on external funding.In its first year of operation (2001-2002),working on a pilot basis, the PLUS initiativehelped low-income communities connect tothe city systems by completing 20,250 feet oftertiary (9-inch) and 3,820 feet of secondary(12-inch) sewers. This directly benefited2,220 households, who themselves raisedover $32,250 to pay for the works. This suc-cess demonstrates that the poor can and willpay for local improvements which they con-sider to be priorities, provided that the work isproperly and expeditiously completed - and ata price considered reasonable. Experience inthe PLUS programme also showed that terti-ary and secondary piped sewerage links couldbe built, to proper technical standards,through community initiatives at a cost one-half or even one-third of that for direct provi-sion by the official agency.

Community development funds are designedto provide financial resources to low-incomecommunities, operating on a local level and inpartnership with local residents and theirorganisations. These funds respond to theneed to make resources available throughlocally based organisations which canrespond rapidly, support community organisa-tions directly, and fund a large and diverserange of initiatives, including those requiringvery small grants or loans. Most have soughtto strengthen community-local governmentpartnerships and some have sought to setnew standards of transparency and accounta-bility, especially where past experience hasleft a legacy of distrust between local govern-ment and low income residents. They providesubsidised or unsubsidised loans, grants(which usually require counterpart contribu-tions) or a combination. Local developmentfunds are now operating in a number of coun-tries in Asia, Africa and Latin America andtheir experience shows that they can:• reduce the time and cost for community

organisations to obtain resources• respond flexibly to demands from low

income communities, including shortterm responses to crises and demandsfrom diverse groups

• support innovative approaches, thedevelopment of community capacity toarticulate needs and priorities and man-age funds, and institutional changes(especially in the relationships betweencommunities and public agencies)

• avoid swamping community initiativeswith too much funding, by making max-imum use of low income groups’ capac-

ity to save and pay• develop revolving fund arrangements

and provide a means of leveraging addi-tional local funds.

The Urban Community Development Office inThailand, recently integrated into a neworganisation responsible for rural as well asurban areas (the Community OrganisationsDevelopment Institute), is one of the largestand most successful. It was established in1992 as a ‘special project’ under the NationalHousing Authority with an independent boardand advisory committee which included rep-resentatives of the urban poor through theircommunity savings and credit organisationsand federations.

From its initial government grant, the UCDOprovided credit to community savings groupsto encourage people in poor communities towork together, learn how to manage their ownfunds and link with other communities. Loansare made for housing, income generatingactivities, and revolving funds. As the savingsgroups grew in numbers and strength, theybegan to link with each other and the UCDOincreasingly lends to networks which workout their own systems for on-lending to theirmembers. The availability of this loan fundhas helped to boost the communal savings of100,000 households in 852 savings groupsand strengthened the capacity of communityorganisations to tackle other problems. Anaverage interest rate of 7 per cent is charged,about half of which provides sufficientresources to cover the UCDO’s operating costsand development support work to strengthen

community networks. Small grants are alsomade for community environmental improve-ments. By 2000, over half of Thailand’s 2,000urban poor communities were UCDO mem-bers, linked together into 120 networks andengaged in a wide range of activities.

Experience shows that local funds work bestwhere there are representative and inclusivecommunity-based organisations formed byurban poor groups and local governments thatare sympathetic and have the capacity to besupportive. However, where these conditionsdo not exist, they can still work well if care istaken to develop appropriate institutionalarrangements and support is provided todeveloping the capacity of poor groups.

Sources:Wattanasiratham, P. Bamrungsakulsawat, O.and Muller, L. (1997) “Effective participatoryurban management in Thailand: a case studyof the UCDO” in CityNet (ed) Effective Partici-patory Urban Management, CityNet, Yoko-hama, p.175-88.Boonyabancha, S. (1999) “The urban commu-nity environmental activities project, Thai-land”, Environment and Urbanization, 11, 1,p.101-15.Satterthwaite, D. (2002) “Local funds andtheir potential to allow donor agencies to sup-port community development and povertyreduction in urban areas: Workshop report”,Environment and Urbanization, 14, 1, p.179-88.Asian Coalition for Housing Rights (2002)“Special issue: Community Funds”, Housingby People in Asia, No. 14, February

39 Vanderschueren, 200140 Devas et al, 2001.

6 Successful mobilisation of community resources for local infrastructure improvement: the work of the PLUS programme in Pakistan.

7 Community development funds – promoting community organisation and supporting quality of life improvements


2726

Adapting and up-scaling a community/private/own-re-sources approach could significantly accelerate the provi-sion of adequate water and sanitation in poor communities.Related initiatives such as community contracting andCommunity Development Funds have also proved effective.Community contracting mobilises local resources, buildslocal skills and capacities, empowers local communities,and generates local jobs and income. Community Develop-ment Funds are intermediary financial institutions which

Ilo is an industrial city with a population of70,000, located more than 1000 Km south ofLima. Over the last 15 years much progresshas been made in improving urban conditionsin the city as a whole and for poor residents inparticular. Progress includes much improvedprovision for water, sanitation and electricity,good management of solid and liquid waste,tree planting and street paving, and, byadvance acquisition of an urban expansionarea, an adequate supply of land for housingdevelopment. A large number of public worksprojects, including a pier and seafront walk-way, as well as community level improve-ments, have been financed and executedthrough partnerships between the municipalgovernment and approximately 300 commu-nity-level management committees.

A series of mayors since the early 1980s havegiven priority to formulating a consistent seriesof development plans to provide a basis forurban management and investment: a landdevelopment plan in 1983, an environmentalrehabilitation plan in 1987, a comprehensivedevelopment plan in 1992, and a tourism devel-opment plan in 1996. They have also retainedthe same management team for six consecutiveelected terms of office, which has promotedorganisational learning, consolidation of experi-ence and effective institution building. The

mayors’ approach to urban management hasbeen based on the unifying potential of avision, translated into a series of short termactions to tackle environmental problems; anemphasis on process and adaptation; andconcertación as a way of working. The visionis neither the dream of a few nor a blueprint –instead, it is built and adapted throughprocesses of municipal government-civil soci-ety dialogue and incremental implementation.Concertación implies collaborative decisionmaking and implementation, as a means ofbuilding trust between the municipal govern-ment, residents and other local actors. It isseen at its most effective in the relationsbetween the community management com-mittees, two long-established NGOs and themunicipal government, formalised in agree-ments on the responsibilities of the partners ineach project. Even with the most difficultlocal actor, the giant Empresa Southern cop-per refinery and smelter which dominates thecity’s economy and emits massive air pollu-tion, and with which the municipality is oftenforced to resort to confrontational tactics,efforts have been made to develop collabora-tion based on small joint projects.

The lack of progress in reducing air pollutionis largely outside municipal government con-trol: Southern has until 2006 to comply with

national government requirements for emis-sion reduction, and is using current economicdifficulties as an excuse to postpone earlieraction. The municipality has been limited toestablishing its own air quality monitoringsystem to strengthen its negotiations with thecompany and is currently implementingmeasures to increase residents’ awareness ofthe health risks linked to air pollution, encour-age them to take precautionary action duringhigh pollution episodes, and improve healthcare for children at risk.

Nevertheless, overall the result of good urbangovernance over the last two decades has beena virtuous circle of increased trust betweenresidents and the municipal government,mutual commitment to common and consistentaims, political stability, and growing manage-ment and implementation capacity based onmobilising resources from many local actorsother than the municipal government.

Sources:Follegatti, J.L.L. (1999) "Ilo – a city in transfor-mation", Environment and Urbanization, 11, 2,p.181-202.Boon, R.G.J., Alexaki, A. and Becerra, E.H.(2001) "The Ilo Clean Air Project: a localresponse to industrial pollution control in Peru",Environment and Urbanization, 13, 2, p.215-32.

Changes in national and state governmentconstitutional and legislative provisions haveenabled the City of Coimbatore, an industrialcity of 1.1 million people, to address funda-mental problems of local governance arisingfrom fragmented responsibilities for urbandevelopment and weak institutional capacity.

The Coimbatore City Corporate Plan, devisedin the late 1980s, was the first major attemptby an Indian municipality to develop a strate-gic planning framework for city development.Consultations with citizens, elected represen-tatives, various government departments andother stakeholders led to agreement on themain areas of concern, formulation of astrategic vision and goals, development of aninvestment strategy, and identification of a setof performance indicators. Designed to over-come the two major challenges of unplannedand uncoordinated urban sprawl and unclearand overlapping responsibilities for adminis-trative functions and service delivery, the planintegrated earlier sectoral plans for watersupply, sewerage, drainage, and traffic andtransportation. The core values that emergedfrom the stakeholder consultations (protectingand improving the quality of the city environ-ment, community participation, enhancing the

region’s prosperity, providing basic services toall sections of society and alleviating poverty)guided the Corporate Plan and are the basisfor the performance indicators which arebeing used to monitor changes brought aboutby its implementation.

The City Corporation sees an efficient urbanform as instrumental in aiding economicgrowth and protecting sensitive resources. Tobalance urban development and environmen-tal protection, it has adopted a number ofgrowth management strategies:

• protecting priority resources by restrict-ing development in specific areas, pro-viding incentives to development else-where and general improvements toenvironmental management

• using infrastructure investment and itsregulatory powers to encourage andguide private investment in urban devel-opment

• increasing revenue generated locally bytax reform and improved administration

• improving transparency, accountabilityand performance by decentralisation ofservice delivery to local area offices

• developing land in municipal ownership

strategically to guide development andraise capital funds for infrastructureinvestment

An investment strategy based on agreed pri-orities and close working relationshipsbetween the City Corporation and a range ofother organisations and groups, includingstate agencies, NGOs and citizen groups, is inthe process of implementation.

Strategic development planning is a key toolin improving urban management. However,without the 1992 constitutional changes andsubsequent state enabling legislation whichgave the City Corporation overall responsibili-ty, appropriate powers and increased financialresources for managing the city, it would havebeen unable to adopt a leading role in strate-gic planning, improve coordination of servicedelivery or increase local financial and admin-istrative capacity.

Source: Kumar, R. (2001) "The CoimbatoreCity Corporate Plan: A case study of strategicmanagement", in Freire, M. and Stren, R. (eds)The Challenge of Urban Government: Policiesand Practices, World Bank Institute, Washing-ton DC, p. 73-9.make loan and grant funding accessible to groups of poor

people (see Box 7).41

However, progress toward good governance will be difficultto achieve unless public agencies have the appropriate ca-pabilities. Serious attention must therefore be given to im-proving the policy making and operational capacity of localgovernments. Experience shows that dynamic local leader-ship, strong political backing, legal and organisational re-

form, sound financial management and an ability to attractsuitably skilled staff are needed (see Box 8). Given the scaleof this task, attention must be given to securing local own-ership and support for change, as well as to sequencingchanges in ways that deliver benefits to residents and en-terprises as a basis for building momentum and legitimacyfor further reforms.

To support these reform and re-building efforts, and to helplocal governments and local stakeholders build up the capa-bilities required for sustainable urbanisation, more emphasismust be given to capacity-development initiatives directed atthe full range of local actors: local authorities, NGOs, commu-nities, private sector, etc. Diverse and active forms of experi-ence sharing, information exchange, and mutual learning arecalled for, including city-to-city and community-to-commu-nity co-operation, as well as access to and use of informationon existing initiatives and experiences.42

The challenge of integrating urban and rural development,in terms of physical-spatial, economic, social, and envi-ronmental aspects, calls for a pro-active, creative, andflexible approach to planning and managing sustainableurbanisation. Strategic planning mechanisms and skillsneed to be developed to meet this challenge. Planning atthe regional (sub-national) scale is a valuable tool forhelping to ensure a balance in urban and rural develop-ment and cope with the absorption of rural-urban migrantswhile maintaining a good quality of life in both urban andrural areas.43

The limited political and regulatory capabilities of mostcities should be focused on strategic planning. A strategic

urban development plan worked out in co-operation withthe main local actors in the development process can bean effective way to influence urban physical growth evenin the absence of effective control powers (see Box 9). Itshould contain strategies for accommodating and (wherepossible) guiding growth, for instance by carefully plannedand sequenced provision of trunk infrastructure (water,roads, drainage and sanitation). Transport infrastructurehas a central role in guiding new development in ways thatminimise environmental damage, encourage renewal, andsupport economic activity. Transport and communicationnetworks link cities and towns to each other and to theirsurrounding regions and influence the efficiency and envi-ronmental impact of their internal arrangements. Longand medium term development strategies should, there-fore, be linked to transport investment decisions, guidingthe overall direction of future urban development, influ-encing its pattern and density, and minimising its environ-mental impact. To achieve these aims, the instruments ofland administration and infrastructure investment need tobe backed up by other actions, for example, pricing poli-cies which favour public over private transport. Strategicreservation of land, for instance to allow for future roadsand infrastructure, or to preserve ecologically importantzones (flood plains, ground water recharge areas), canhave important benefits.

The actions and priorities identified in this section depend ona wide range of actors for their realisation. The final sectionwill therefore examine the roles and responsibilities whichactors at all levels, from local to global, will need to fulfil forsustainable urbanisation to be achieved, and will discuss howthey can work together for this purpose.

42 City-to-city co-operation isa rapidly growing activitywhich has great potentialfor mutual learning andcapacity reinforcement.See the report circulated atthe World Urban Forum(UN-HABITAT andUTO/FMCU, 2002).

43 Vulnerability to disasterscan best be reduced atboth community and citylevels by improvingpreparedness and takingpreventive measures toreduce risks, based onhazard and vulnerabilityassessments. Riskassessment and disasterpreparedness planningforms part of the strategicdevelopment planningprocess. Post-disastermitigation andreconstruction are alsolikely to be needed (see El-Masri and Tipple, 2002;Sanderson, 2000 andUNCHS, 2001b, p.76-7.41 ACHR, 2002.

8 Ilo, Peru: good urban governance in action

9 Strategic development planning in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India

44 The allocation betweennational, sub-national andlocal governments of theseroles and responsibilities,which are important forsustainable urbanisation,will vary considerablyamong countries. Forinstance, what isappropriate in very largeand populous countries willbe quite different fromwhat is suitable for smallcountries. Similarly, incountries with highly-developed administrativeand managerial capacities,the allocation of roles andresponsibilities may berather different from that incountries with less well-developed capacities.


2928

Local governmenthas a crucial roleand responsibility inaddressing thesustainableurbanisation agenda

5. Working together forSustainable Urbanisation

To achieve sustainable urbanisation action is needed atall levels - local, national and international - and by awide range of stakeholders from government and civil

society, working in partnership with each other.

Action at the Local Level:Urban Government and Civil Society

Local government has a crucial role and responsibility in ad-dressing the sustainable urbanisation agenda. As thesphere of government closest to the people, local govern-ments can best understand and reflect local needs and pri-orities, broker multi-stakeholder partnerships andparticipation, and monitor local trends and emerging issues.They also have a critical role to play in raising awareness ofthe challenges of urbanisation for sustainable developmentand of how local actions can improve quality of life as wellas contribute to the global environmental agenda.

Local Agendas 21, collaborative approaches to developmentand environmental planning, have been pivotal in promotingawareness and implementing broad-based participatoryplanning processes in many urban centres. They typicallyinvolve the local community, civil society organisations andthe private sector in prioritising areas of action and in mo-bilising both public and private resources for improving thelocal environment. These Local Agenda 21 initiatives remainlargely isolated, however, and there is a need to more sys-tematically share lessons learned and to link them withbroader policy.

Sustainable urbanisation also requires that stakeholderslook beyond municipal and city boundaries. Critical con-cerns related to land, water, energy, transport, the promo-tion of local economic development and wastemanagement require concerted rather than competing ap-proaches to decision making and resource allocation. A re-gional approach to strategic urban planning is thusrequired, necessitating the involvement of stakeholders be-yond the administrative boundaries of local government.Such an approach typically includes inter-municipal collab-oration as well as the harmonisation of conflicting policiesand differing development priorities.

Local government can play an important role in facilitatingeconomic development, although sustainable urbanisationrequires that the social and environmental implications areappropriately dealt with (as part of local government’s reg-ulatory responsibilities). To play this role effectively, localgovernment needs to work closely with the private sector(formal and informal) and with civil society organisations,for example to develop partnerships to deliver improved in-frastructure and services which support business as well asbenefit the local community. Experience shows that withappropriately designed partnerships, both objectives can bemet: a more enabling business environment can also be so-cially inclusive, benefiting the poor.

To effectively meet the demands of sustainable urbanisa-tion, local governments will require increased technical, ad-ministrative and financial capacity. This will involve the

development and strengthening of a wide range of compe-tencies and skills, as well as a radical shift in attitude, fromconsidering the urban poor as part of the problem to theirinclusion in forging solutions, requiring training and humanresource development. New approaches will be required aswell, for instance participatory planning and decision-making to increase transparency and accountability, and thedevelopment of partnerships between municipalities andother local actors. To ensure that local authorities have ad-equate financial capacity, greater political and managerialpowers need to be decentralised from the national to thelocal level, accompanied by administrative and taxation re-forms. Achieving these capabilities will require sustainedeffort from local government itself, but will also require con-siderable support from higher levels of government andfrom international partners.

Sustainable urbanisation also requires that local civil so-ciety becomes an informed, empowered and active partici-pant in local governance and urban development.Experience strongly suggests that when NGOs, local com-munities, CBOs, households and individuals are involved ina meaningful way, the results are positive. One cruciallesson from extensive experience in small-scale interven-tions is that people, including very poor people, are bothable and willing to contribute their own resources whenthey are properly involved in the process and when theyhave confidence in a directly beneficial outcome.

National Level:A Supportive and Enabling Role

Local action for sustainable urbanisation requires a sup-portive and enabling policy and legislative framework. At thepolicy level, sustainable urbanisation concerns need to bemainstreamed throughout national ministries and agenciesand should form an integral part of national strategies onpoverty reduction, economic development, environmentalprotection and service delivery. Specific urbanisation poli-cies and urban-regional development strategies will typi-cally be required to deal with the challenges of rapid urbangrowth. On the legislative front, sustainable urbanisationwill require, in most instances, a revision of the mandate oflocal governments, not only as service providers but also aspromoters of local economic development, custodians ofthe local environment, brokers of public-private partner-ships and defenders of social justice (see Box 10). Revi-sion and updating of legislation on urban planning, building

standards, infrastructure provision and environmental regu-lation may well be necessary, to give local governments theauthority and discretion required for the new demands.

To effectively promote sustainable urbanisation, nationalgovernments will thus need to undertake a variety of spe-cific reforms and tasks, such as:

• Decentralisation and the empowerment of local author-ities to enable them to engage in broad-based partici-patory planning, develop partnerships and combinepublic resources with those of the private and commu-nity sectors to improve local economic developmentopportunities and living environments; decentralisationnecessarily implies fiscal and administrative reformsthat provide local governments with a fair and pre-dictable share of public resources and the flexibility re-quired to respond to local priorities and needs.

• Reviewing and harmonising national policies and insti-tutional frameworks to eliminate often-unintended con-flicts that distort or inhibit environmentally soundurbanisation; typical examples include conflicting poli-cies governing the use of natural resources such aswater and land, and competing or overlapping jurisdic-tions and mandates for dealing with infrastructure, en-ergy and transportation.

• Mobilising national (and international) resources for majorurban and environmental infrastructure investment;

• Actively supporting and implementing training, educa-tion and other capacity building efforts to mainstreamsustainable urbanisation concepts, methods and ap-proaches, including participation in relevant interna-tional efforts, such as UN-HABITAT’s Global Campaignson Urban Governance and Secure Tenure.

Throughout, the general role of national government in sup-port of sustainable urbanisation should be as facilitator, en-abler and supervisor. National and sub-national spheres ofgovernment should retain their roles and direct responsibil-ities in areas that fall largely outside the capacity of localspheres of government. These typically include the plan-ning, financing and provision of large-scale facilities andtrunk infrastructure. 44

Other organisations with important potential roles in sup-porting local government include national associations oflocal authorities. They can often play a valuable role as in-termediaries in policy dialogues and in promoting horizontal

A groundbreaking development took place inBrazil in 2001 with the enactment of FederalLaw no. 10.257, the ‘City Statute’, whichexplicitly recognises the ‘right to the city’ as acollective human right. It empowers munici-pal authorities to address critical urban, socialand environmental problems directly affectingthe living conditions of the 82 per cent ofBrazilians who live in cities. It is an example

of how the principles and values of goodurban governance and social inclusion canebe incorporated in national legislation.

The City Statute requires municipalities to for-mulate territorial and land use policies whichbalance the interests of landowners with thesocial, cultural and environmental interests ofother groups, and of the city as a whole.

Municipalities are also required to integrateurban environmental planning, legislation andmanagement with broad-based participatorydecision-making, thus legitimising the role ofcivil society. In addition, the City Statute pro-vides the authority and legal instruments nec-essary for local government to regularise landtenure as a key strategy for reducing urbanpoverty and improving social inclusion.

10 The ‘right to the city’ in Brazil’s City Statute

Bern

d D

ecke

r

47 There is a strong feeling inaid recipient countries thatexternal support is supply-led, following prioritiesaimed at domestic politicsin the donor countries andreflecting what is currentlyfashionable. This oftenmakes aid policy subject tofrequent changes, whichundercuts the need forconsistency and a long-term commitment; it alsomakes it difficult toapproach the developmenttask as a genuinepartnership. Ironically, mostdonor programmes areurging their developingcountry counterparts toshift away from supply-ledapproaches and adoptdemand-led ones.

48 CityNet, 1998


3130

45 The developmentassistance programmes ofthe Netherlands, Denmarkand the UK, amongstothers, have supported anumber of innovative urbaninitiatives.

46 In a conscious effort tobroaden the way in whichsustainable development isapproached, theDevelopment AdvisoryCommittee (DAC) of theOrganisation for EconomicCo-operation andDevelopment (OECD) askedits Working Party onDevelopment Co-operationand Environment todevelop guidance fordonors on urbanenvironmental issues. Aspecial Task Force, led onbehalf of the Working Partyby DFID of the UK,prepared a documentwhich was then endorsedfor publication (in October2000) as a DAC ReferenceManual on UrbanEnvironmental Policy(OECD, 2000).

and vertical exchanges of expertise and experience be-tween and among various agencies and local governments.Specific areas of action include networking and access toinformation; training and continuing education; nationalround tables; and other forms of experience exchange andmutual learning.

International Support

The ultimate responsibility for achieving more sustainableurbanisation depends on actions at the local, sub-nationaland national levels. There are, nonetheless, important rolesfor international organisations, including multilateral and bi-lateral development agencies, United Nations agencies, re-gional and international associations of local governments,professional associations, international support networks,umbrella NGOs and others.

Financial support remains critical to many developing coun-tries in providing the start-up capital or initial impetus for in-creasing urban development capacity. Capital investmentsdesigned to facilitate access by the urban poor to land, in-

frastructure and basic services, such as those funded bymultilateral or bilateral lending and donor institutions, haveproven in many instances to be effective means of bothbreaking the vicious circle of urban poverty and enhancingthe fiscal base of local government. Their effectiveness canbe enhanced by training and institutional capacity-buildingefforts. Similarly, demonstration projects which are usuallygrant funded have also proven their worth in terms of de-veloping new tools and approaches for addressing the chal-lenges of sustainable urbanisation.45 They typically include afocus on participatory planning and decision-making,human resources development and the facilitation of policyanalysis and development.

While there has been a recent increase in the amount of of-ficial development assistance to urban development issues,sustainable urbanisation remains marginal in terms of boththe resources involved and mainstreaming within develop-ment assistance policy. This is attributable partly to the na-ture of international assistance, which tends to focus onsector-specific issues such as water and sanitation, healthand education, or economic development, and partly to thelong-lasting and prevailing anti-urban bias on the part ofdonor and international agencies alike. There remains,therefore, a considerable challenge: to convince the inter-national community to properly recognise the crucial impor-tance of urbanisation, to accept that a concerted approachis needed to strengthen all spheres of government, in par-ticular local authorities, and to forge policy responses andactions that will help achieve both sustainable urbanisationand poverty reduction. 46

Additional resources notwithstanding, there is considerableroom for improvement in harmonising approaches to ca-pacity building and for active partnerships between organi-sations (such as the Cities Alliance programme based at the

The Best Practices, Policies andLocal Leadership Programme iscomprised of a global networkof policy and leadership devel-opment institutions and organi-sations dedicated to the sharingand exchange of lessonslearned from experience. Itfocuses on four key capacitybuilding components, namely (i)awareness building throughawards and recognition systems(ii) information exchange andnetworking through databases,e-mail lists, newsletters and anIntranet (iii) peer-to-peer learn-ing through ad hoc conferencesand seminars and the develop-ment and dissemination of casestudies and casebooks, and (iv)analysis of the policy and

capacity-building implicationsof experience for scaling-up andtransferring local practices. Itspartners include national agen-cies, educational and traininginstitutions, local authorities andtheir regional and internationalassociations, and grass rootsorganisations. In the Asia andPacific region, for example,CityNet provides its membermunicipalities and NGOs withservices to support city-to-cityco-operation. Using the BestPractices database, CityNetfacilitates the matching of sup-ply with demand for expertiseand experience for the purposesof organising staff exchanges,study tours and thematic con-ferences and seminars.48

In most countries there areassociations of local govern-ments, and they are increasing-ly taking an active role in differ-ent aspects of urban develop-ment. For example, the Leagueof Cities of the Philippines (LCP)has played a significant role inextending country-wide the CityDevelopment Strategy (CDS) ini-tiatives supported by the CitiesAlliance. Acting as a mediatorand communication network,the LCP has implementedregional ‘experience sharing

workshops’ to expand aware-ness and understanding amongcities in the various regions ofthe Philippines, especially toassist in mutual learning and theapplication of lessons fromcities with early experience ofpreparing a CDS to later ones.The LCP also played a role in theUNDP/UN-HABITAT sponsoredLocal-EPM (Environmental Plan-ning and Management) Project,which began in three cities andthen expanded (assisted by theLCP) into additional cities.

World Bank). Recent studies initiated by UNDP and UN-HABITAT have shown that there are a myriad of internationaland regional support programmes but few mechanisms foridentifying potential synergies, complementarities andgaps. For example, a survey of city-to-city co-operation andpeer-learning, which analysed existing modalities and entrypoints for intervention, revealed major gaps in terms of sup-port for south-south transfers and co-ordinated responsesto demand. These studies point to the following needs andpriorities:• systematic documentation and wide dissemination of

lessons learned from experience in urban-regional de-velopment and management;

• systematic documentation and dissemination of exam-ples of good urban policies and enabling national legis-lation, particularly in the areas of urban povertyreduction, gender equality and social inclusion, urbanenvironmental planning and management, and decen-tralisation and the empowerment of local authorities;

• mechanisms for better co-ordination of international

support to capacity building for sustainable urbanisa-tion, including exchange of information, joint program-ming of interventions, greater flexibility inimplementation, etc;

• greater responsiveness to local needs (a more demand-led and less supply-driven approach) and willingness toengage on a long-term basis with local partners; 47

• mainstreaming of tested and proven tools in supportof sustainable urbanisation, such as participatory de-cision-making, Local Agendas 21, the SustainableCities Programme/Environmental Planning and Man-agement process, and metropolitan or regionalstrategic planning.

UN-HABITAT and other organisations play an important rolein the dissemination of information and experience, and inbrokering effective responses to demand. These effortshave yet to be supported by reliable funding sources or amechanism to enhance the collective efficiency of externalsupport agencies with respect to capacity and awarenessbuilding. The recent World Urban Forum constituted a firsteffort in international dialogue to promote the sustainableurbanisation agenda; it brought together associations oflocal authorities, civil society organisations including thosedirectly representing the urban poor, external support agen-cies and others, to pool their knowledge and experience andto chart new joint approaches to sustainable urbanisation.

Agenda 21 commits its signatories to the achievement ofsustainable development, as elaborated in subsequentglobal agreements such as the Habitat Agenda. As hasbeen argued in this publication, it is clear from the scale ofurbanisation and the challenges it poses that for Agenda 21to be implemented, it is essential that the urban dimensionsof its key concerns must be addressed. In disseminating,learning from and acting upon successful attempts to ad-dress these critical concerns, local, national and interna-tional organisations must work together in a coalition forsustainable urbanisation.

Bern

d De

cker

Bern

d De

cker

Key References and Resource DocumentsACHR (Asian Coalition for HousingRights) (2002) “Special issue: Com-munity Funds”, Housing by People inAsia, No. 14, February (www.achr.net).

Allen, A. and Dávila, J. (eds) (2002)“Mind the gap! Bridging the rural-urban divide”, Insights, No. 41, May(www.id21.ac.uk).

Atkinson, A. (2001) “International co-operation in pursuit of sustainablecities”, Development in Practice, 11,2/3, pp. 273-291.

Bartone, C. (2001) “The role of the pri-vate sector in municipal solid wasteservice delivery in developing coun-tries: keys to success”, in Freire, M.and Stren, R. (eds) The Challenge ofUrban Government: Policies and Prac-tices, World Bank Institute, Wash-ington DC, pp.215-23.

Blair, H. (2001) “Institutional pluralismin public administration and politics:applications in Bolivia and beyond”,Public Administration and Develop-ment, 21, pp.119-29.

CityNet (1997) Effective ParticipatoryUrban Management, CityNet, Yoko-hama.

CityNet (1998) Guidelines for Transfer-ring Effective Practices – A PracticalManual for South-South Co-operation,CityNet, Yokohama. (www.citynet-ap.org)

Devas, N., with Amis, P., Beall, J.,Grant, U., Mitlin, D., Rakodi, C. andSatterthwaite, D. (2001) Urban Gover-nance and Poverty: Lessons from aStudy of Ten Cities in the South, Inter-national Development Department,School of Public Policy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham.(www.idd.bham.ac.uk)

DFID (Department for InternationalDevelopment) (2000a) Achieving Sus-tainability: Poverty Elimination andthe Environment, DFID, London.(www.dfid.gov.uk/Pubs/files/tsp_en-vironment.pdf)

DFID (Department for InternationalDevelopment) (2000b) RealisingHuman Rights for Poor People,DFID, London.(www.dfid.gov.uk/Pubs/files/tsp_human.pdf)

DFID (Department for InternationalDevelopment) (2001) Meeting theChallenge of Poverty in Urban Areas, DFID, London.(www.dfid.gov.uk/Pubs/files/tsp_urban.pdf)

2001, Oxford University Press, NewYork.

UN-HABITAT and UTO/FMCU (UnitedTowns Organisation) (2002) City-to-City Co-operation: Issues Arising FromExperience, Second Interim Report,prepared for the World Urban Forum,Nairobi.

Vanderschueren, F. (2001) “From vio-lence to security in cities”, in Freire,M. and Stren, R. (eds) The Challengeof Urban Government: Policies andPractices, World Bank Institute, Wash-ington DC, pp.91-106.

World Bank (2000a) Entering the 21stCentury: World Development Report1999/2000, Oxford University Press,New York.

World Bank (2000b) Cities in Transi-tion: A Strategic View of Urban andLocal Government Issues, The WorkBank, Washington (www.world-bank.org)

World Urban Forum (2002) Manage-ment of the HIV/AIDS Pandemic at theLocal Level, UN-HABITAT, Nairobi, 29April to 3 May.

World Urban Forum (2002) Prepara-tions for the World Summit on Sus-tainable Development: TheSustainability of cities, UN-HABITAT,Nairobi , 29 April to 3 May.

World Urban Forum (2002) Prepara-tions for the World Summit on Sus-tainable Development: The role ofcities in national and international de-velopment. UN-HABITAT, Nairobi, 29April to 3 May.

World Urban Forum (2002) The ruraldimension of sustainable urban de-velopment (draft theme paper forthe Governing Council at its nine-teenth session). Nairobi, 29 April to3 May.

World Urban Forum (2002) Role oflocal authorities and other HabitatAgenda partners: City-to-City Cooper-ation, transfers and international ex-changes based on documented bestpractices, good policies and actionplans. UN-HABITAT, Nairobi, 29 April to3 May.

World Urban Forum (2002) Citieswithout slums. UN-HABITAT, Nairobi,29 April to 3 May.(www.unhabitat.org/wuf)

“World Urban Forum (2002) Reports ofDialogues II - Sustainable Urbanisa-tion, Nairobi 29 April to 3 May.”

DFID, EC, UNDP and World Bank(2002) Linking Poverty Reduction andEnvironmental Management: PolicyChallenges and Opportunities; a Con-tribution to the World Summit on Sus-tainable Development Process,London. [consultation draft January2002]

DPU (Development Planning Unit)(2001) Implementing the HabitatAgenda: In Search of Urban Sustain-ability, Development Planning Unit,University College London, London.

Elander, I. And Lidskog, R. (2000) “TheRio Declaration and subsequent globalinitiatives”, in Low, N., Gleeson, B.,Elander, I. And Lidskog, R. (eds) Con-suming Cities: The Urban Environmentin the Global Economy After the RioDeclaration, Routledge, London,pp.30-53.

El-Masri, S. and Tipple, G. (2002)“Natural disaster mitigation and sus-tainability: the case of developingcountries”, International PlanningStudies, 7, 2, pp. 157-175.

Gleeson, B. and Low, N. (2000) “Citiesas consumers of the world’s environ-ment” in Low, N., Gleeson, B., Elander,I. And Lidskog, R. (eds) ConsumingCities: The Urban Environment in theGlobal Economy After the Rio Declara-tion, Routledge, London, pp.1-29.

Goetz, A.M. and Gaventa, J. (2001)Bringing Citizen Voice and ClientFocus into Service Delivery, WorkingPaper 138, Institute for DevelopmentStudies, University of Sussex,Brighton.

Hardoy, J., D. Mitlin and D. Satterth-waite (2001) Environmental Problemsin an Urbanizing World, Earthscan,London.

McGranahan, G. and Satterthwaite, D.(2000). “Environmental health or eco-logical sustainability? Reconciling thebrown and green agendas in urbandevelopment”, in Pugh C. (ed) Sus-tainable Cities in Developing Coun-tries, Earthscan, London, pp. 73-90.

Nickson, A. and Franceys, R. (eds)(2001) “Tapping the market: can pri-vate enterprise supply water to thepoor?” Insights No. 37(http://www.id21.ac.uk)

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2000)Shaping the Urban Environment in the21st Century: From Understanding toAction. A DAC Reference Manual onUrban Environmental Policy, OECD,

Paris (www.oecd.org/dac/urbenv)Rakodi, C. with Lloyd-Jones, T. (eds)(2002) Urban Livelihoods: A People-Centre Approach to Reducing Poverty,Earthscan, London

Sanderson, D. (2000) “Cities, disas-ters and livelihoods” Environmentand Urbanisation, 12, 2, pp. 93-102.

Satterthwaite, D. (1997) “Sustainablecities or cities that contribute to sus-tainable development?” UrbanStudies, 34, 10, pp.1667-91.

Tacoli, C. (ed) (2001) Briefing PaperSeries on Rural-Urban Interactionsand Livelihood Strategies, Interna-tional Institute for Environmentand Development, London(www.iied.org/rural_urban/down-loads.html)

Thin, N., with C. Lockhart and G.Yaron (2002) Socially SustainableDevelopment: Concepts and Uses,paper prepared for the World Bankand the UK Department for Interna-tional Development, School of Polit-ical and Social Studies, University ofEdinburgh, Edinburgh.

UNCHS (1996a) The Habitat Agenda:Goals and Principles, Commitmentsand Global Plan of Action, UNCHS,Nairobi.

UNCHS (1996b) An UrbanizingWorld: Global Report on Human Set-tlements 1996, Oxford UniversityPress, New York

UNCHS (2001a) Cities in a GlobalizingWorld: Global Report on Human Set-tlements 2001, Earthscan, London.

UNCHS (2001b) The State of theWorld’s Cities 2001, UNCHS, Nairobi.

UNCHS (2001c) Implementing theHabitat Agenda: The 1996-2001 Ex-perience, Report on the Istanbul+5Thematic Committee, 25th SpecialSession of the UN General Assembly,New York, 6-8 June, UNCHS, Nairobi.

UNCHS and CityNet (1997) Partner-ship for Local Action, UNCHS andCityNet, Nairobi and Yokohama.

UNDESA (United Nations Departmentof Economic and Social Affairs) andUNCHS (2001) Compendium ofHuman Settlements Statistics 2001,United Nations, New York.

UNDP (United Nations DevelopmentProgramme) (2001) Making NewTechnologies Work for Human Devel-opment: Human Development Report

Sustainable Urbanisation

Documents

Transcript of Sustainable Urbanisation