2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion, global perspectives
Report #3 2016 HABITAT NORWAY www.habitat-norge.org
Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 1
Summary from «Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion, global perspectives”, the third consecutive preparatory conference for Habitat III in Oslo 12th September 2016.
Layout and editing: Oddrun Helen Hagen, Habitat Norway Text and presentations from key note speakers and organizations. Summarized text: Tore Kiøsterud, Sven Erik Svendsen, Erik Berg og Oddrun Helen Hagen, Habitat Norway
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
2 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
PREFACE Habitat Norway is pleased to present the report from the third consecutive preparatory conference in Oslo 12th September 2016 for the “UN Housing and Sustainable Urban Development Conference”, Quito, Ecuador 17th-20th October 2016. We thank the Royal Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation for its constructive support and cooperation. Whereas the April conference resulted in a policy and knowledge platform for Habitat Norway – “The Oslo Statement on the New Urban Agenda” (NUA), the September conference gave opportunity for Norwegian civil society stakeholders, research and teaching institutions, local government etc. to present their views on the draft NUA and on urban Norwegian foreign and development policy. This report presents all their interventions as submitted. Habitat Norway will through its work continue to stimulate policy exchange and development of this nature in the coming years. Thematically this conference focused on “Who owns the City”. On exclusion and inclusion in a globalizing world. It was discussed from a global perspective by professor Yves Cabannes, from a city perspective by researcher Cihan Uzunçarşılı Baysal (Istanbul) and from an informal settlement perspective by activist Rose Molekoane. We are happy to enclose their unique contributions in several “forms” in this report. As underscored by all speakers the world faces an unprecedented urban housing crises. Approximately 1.6 billion people are considered inadequately housed, one million are homeless and sixty million displaced from home. The situation is multifaceted, includes issues ranging from forced evictions to displacement to gentrification, from mortgage crises to austerity driven decline in public housing, to exponential slum growth. The global urban poverty and housing challenge is precipitated by war and destruction; natural disasters and climate change; misguided and capital-driven development; land speculation and corruption. The above are the challenges and opportunities that Habitat Norway through arranging three major conferences in Oslo in 10 months have created broader understanding on. There is a strong need for Norwegian stakeholders to continue sharing knowledge, opinions and to act concretely in partnership on the “march order” that the Sustainable Development Goals, the Climate resolutions and the New Urban Agenda give us.
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 3
CONTENT PREFACE ...... 2 INTRODUCTION ...... 4 Welcome speech 12th of September 2016, Erik Berg, Chair, Habitat Norway ...... 4 Introduction and welcome, Laila Bokhari, State secretary ...... 7 KEY NOTE SPEAKERS ...... 8 Erik Solheim, Executive Director, UNEP (submitted video) ...... 8 Juan Clos, Executive Director, UN Habitat (submitted video) ...... 8 Cihan Uzuncarsilioglu Baysal: The Case of Istanbul ...... 9 Yves Cabannes: The challenge of slum evictions in a neo liberal world...... 16 Rose Molokane: The strategies, tactics and activities of the excluded ...... 25 NORWAY AND THE NEW URBAN AGENDA, WHAT DO WE EXPECT? ...... 28 The follow up in Norwegian foreign/development policy ...... 28 Statement by Mayor of Asker Municipality, Lene Conradi ...... 28 Statement by the Norwegian children and youth council, Tone Vesterhus ...... 30 Statement by Spire, Hilde Rognlien ...... 31 Statement by Norwegian Mapping Authority (Kartverket), Helge Onsrud ...... 32 Statement by NTNU, Rolee Aranya ...... 34 Statement by NIBR - HIOA, Trond Vedeld ...... 35 Statement by the Norwegian Cultural Heritage Research (NIKU), Cornelis H. Evensen ...... 37 Statement by Norwegian Red Cross, Ansa Masaud Jørgensen ...... 38 Statement by The Norwegian Refugee Council, Jørn C. Øwre ...... 40 Statement by Norwegian People’s Aid, Alfredo Biamont ...... 41 Statement by Eat Foundation, Emily Norford ...... 42 Statement by Rodeo Architects, Anders Ese ...... 44 Statement by Norad/Health Section, Austen Davies ...... 46 CONCLUSION AND THE WAY AHEAD ...... 49 Closing remarks on the behalf of Habitat Norway, Oddrun Helen Hagen ...... 49 ENCLOSURE ...... 51 Final draft programme ...... 51 Participants ...... 53 The Oslo Statement on the “New Urban Agenda” ...... 56
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
4 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
INTRODUCTION Welcome speech 12th of September 2016, Erik Berg, Chair, Habitat Norway It is a pleasure and an honor to welcome you all to this Conference. To the third consecutive encounter in 10 months jointly arranged by Habitat Norway, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD). These three conferences have been central in Norway’s preparations for Habitat III. The last messages will be delivered today hopefully contributing further to a distinct Norwegian profile in Quito. We would like to thank the MFA and NORAD for your support and a constructive dialogue and cooperation. Ahead of us and the international community lies major follow up challenges. One of them will be to merge the Sustainable Development Goals, the Paris climate resolutions, the Humanitarian Summit recommendations and the New Urban Agenda into a holistic program of implementation. A silo – bits and pieces approach – must be avoided. We need to strengthen the global urban development architecture. Create new mechanisms where necessary – but rather than duplicate, build on what already exists. And provide fresh financial resources in particular for the follow up of local government and global civil societies and their partnerships. Habitat Norway would like to welcome State secretary Laila Bokhari. We are proud to have you with us this morning. New as State secretary in the MFA, but for long known for strong engagement in global development, including girls’ education in Pakistan. We also welcome today’s speakers Cihan Bayul, researcher and activist from Istanbul, presently one of the fastest growing cities in Europe with vast ecologic, social and economic externalities; also professor Yves Cabannes, University College of London, former chair of UN’s Advisory Group on Forced Evictions. With more evictions globally than ever it has been decided closed down. And last, but not least, Rose Molokoane, leader of FED UP – (mark it – it is in two words – FED UP). She is national coordinator of the South African Federation of the Urban Poor and Deputy President of Slum Dwellers International. I also bid welcome to the Europe representatives of UN Habitat, Mr. Thibault Nguyen, and of Slum Dwellers International, Mr. Nico Keijzer. Our context is the neoliberal world, dominated by what has been termed “an all you can eat mentality – privatizing gains and socializing losses”. In this neo liberal world the “owner-ship of cities”– issue has since the global financial crises of 2008 entered into an emergent, new phase. From mid-2013 to mid-2014 corporate buying of existing properties exceeded USD 600 billion in the top 100 recipient cities. A year later it had almost doubled exceeding 1 trillion. Norwegian finance capital is also involved. The present trend reflects a move away from a system of small properties embedded in city areas, crisscrossed by streets and small public squares. The trend moves towards mega projects with sometimes huge footprints that erase much of the public tissue of people, streets and squares. This privatizes and de-urbanizes city space – no matter the added
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 5
density. It forces people out of areas where they have been living for years. It destroys the economic activities upon which ordinary people base their lives. It reduces opportunities for a decent future for children. This is fatal because it is in the cities to a large extent that the powerless have left their imprint – culturally, economically and socially – and forged alliances and advocated policies with great success. It is only in cities that the power in one’s powerlessness can be gained. Because nobody or nothing can fully control such a diversity of people and engagements. Not even extreme police brutality can do this as we have seen in Brazil where young, black people according to Amnesty International and Norwegian Church Relief have been killed in scores. All this in order to facilitate the so called inclusive games. They turned out to be rather exclusive. A lutta continua. Thus, the theme of this Conference reflects directly a contentious clause in the negotiations on the draft New urban agenda: the clause on the “Right to the City”. The term originates in the French philosopher Henri Lefebvre’s 1968 book “Le Droit a la ville”. He prioritizes collective right over individual right to urban space and gives every inhabitant – and not just the legal citizens – the right not only to occupy a pre-existing urban space, but also to produce spaces according to needs. Until last week’s New York negotiations on the New urban agenda the US and the EU explicitly rejected that a country needs to adhere to the principle of social justice for all urban inhabitants, and not only the legally recognized citizens. Now a compromise agreement seems to preserve the contentious term, however, by diluting its definition in comparison to what was initially proposed. This is not a play with words. Globally, it is serious business for millions of people. But let me use Oslo and the situation of a small ethnic group as an example. A representative of the Roma people living in the slums or informal settlements around the forested Sognsvann Lake, some time ago told me the following: “Before we used to live in nice houses. We did our necessities in the bush. Now we live in the bush and do our necessities in nice houses”. Is this what we call welfare state development? We need your cooperation, Mdm. State secretary, to make politicians see the problems, the challenges and the opportunities of urbanization. Presently there is urban blindness. The Norwegian Parliament’s Foreign Policy committee has never discussed the implications of the megatrend that urbanization and population growth represent. Never. This is regrettable also because many of the challenges cities, towns and settlements face – to a large extent are universal and relevant for Norway. There are signs of hope. A Parliamentary Whitepaper is presently being prepared by the Ministry of Modernisation and Local Government with the theme “Sustainable cities and strong districts”. It is important that this global, urban, same, same but a little bit different perspective just mentioned, would constitute the Whitepaper’s context and frame. We require a stronger and more comprehensive global, urban approach both foreign policy wise and with regard to development cooperation. Which are two sides of the same coin. Norway needs an urban foreign policy and an urban diplomacy. Hope is certainly perceived
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
6 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
in the work done by the MFA in the Habitat III/New Urban agenda preparations. Lifting the challenges of urban health, drawing attention to the fatal consequences of air, soil and land pollution- is an important contribution. The fact that 15 organizations and institutions have registered for today’s panel presentation shows the potential for our civil society – in the broadest meaning of the word – having an urban, political impact – locally, nationally and globally. Oddrun Hagen, Habitat Norway Board member, will in the “Concluding session” today present some ideas on how we can work together to increase our outreach and political impact regarding urban issues. To conclude: Norway needs a New Urban Agenda. A New Urban Agenda needs Norway. And Habitat Norway needs you. Please join us as a member.
1 From the Habitat III Conference in Quito. Chair of Habitat Norway to the far left. Habitat Norway was, together with Slum Dwellers International, Huairo Commission and WIEGO responsible for the side event “Who is aiding whom”.
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 7
Introduction and welcome, Laila Bokhari, State secretary Welcome to the third seminar on Habitat III and the adoption of a New Urban Agenda, arranged by Habitat Norway. The previous seminars have provided us with inputs to the development of Norway’s Habitat III priorities. We believe that these inputs are well covered in the drafted New Urban Agenda. Your inputs will also contribute in further development of our urbanization policies, both nationally and internationally. It is important that the Habitat III process, including the national preparations, is inclusive with participation by all relevant stakeholders such as yourselves. The New Urban Agenda is about planning, about buildings, infrastructure, national policies, urban policies, local governments, civil society, resilience, partnerships – and the list goes on! But most of all it is about people. And about how we can improve their lives. Most people live in cities and more will follow in the coming years. This gives us an unprecedented opportunity for making progress if we get this right. On limiting climate change, since 70% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions are produced in cities. And on clean energy, since 70% of the total energy is produced in cities. On jobs, since 80% of global GDP is generated in cities. But also on hunger, education, industry and infrastructure, consumption and production. In other words, the urban agenda is relevant to most of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, and not only goal 11. The 2030 Agenda has provided us with direction for urbanization toward 2030. We believe that the New Urban Agenda should bring urban relevant SDGs and targets to the next level – and provide advice and recommendations on how to operationalize them. To ensure sustainable cities for all. The need for green, livable and healthy cities is a clear priority for Norway. Cities should promote public health with clean air, sufficient supply of clean drinking water and clean streets with managed waste and sanitation. They should be safe, accessible, innovative and productive, as well as resilient with adequate public space. Ensuring engagement from youth through investing in their education and employment is another Norwegian priority. It is clear that we have a great task ahead of us that will require a holistic and cross-sectorial approach. The momentum is now and we need to act accordingly. We look forward to the rest of the seminar and to listen to your viewpoints and advice!
Thank you.
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
8 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
KEY NOTE SPEAKERS Erik Solheim, Executive Director, UNEP (submitted video) The video is available from http://habitat-norge.org/. Cities are faced with same challenges; clean cities, pollution and clean water. A power shift is going on from west to east and downwards. Rapid economic growth and innovations in the large cities are important. Urban areas are the hope of humanity. Juan Clos, Executive Director, UN Habitat (submitted video) The video is available from http://habitat-norge.org/ Who owns the city? Participation is important. The wellbeing of the people is the value of the cities. Large increase of migration is pushing and stressing the cities. All stakeholders should make a contribution to the function of the city, a shared collective ownership. A visional view from Norway is wanted!
2 Clos, Solheim, Baysal, Cabannes and Molokoane were key Note Speakers. Financially support from the Ministry of Foreign affairs and NORAD made it possible for Habitat Norway to host three conferences in head the Habitat III conference. “Who owns the city” was the last one out of these three.
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 9
Cihan Uzuncarsilioglu Baysal: The Case of Istanbul Independent researcher and activist, Turkey. Summarize by Habitat Norway: Cihan Uzunçarşılı Baysal gave an inspiring and shocking presentation about how state-led urban transformation is changing Istanbul. New laws are enacted to support a development characterized by large urban projects driven by entrepreneurs in cooperation with central authorities. The city of Istanbul is a major case showing huge projects like new airport, new bridge, new mosques, new malls, removals of old buildings replaced with dense high-rise blocks of flats.
3 Istanbul is a mega city with approximately 13 million inhabitants. The pictures are from Cihan Uzunçarşılı Baysals presentation “State-led Urban Transformation of Istanbul”.
Development plans have been changed from improving the conditions of informal settlements, upgrading of infrastructure and service areas, to criminalizing the same living areas. Self-building of homes is replaced by entrepreneurs with touristic style luxury housing. The local community is losing power and influence. Urban risk zones are declared. Properties are expropriated, and ordinary people have to move to the periphery of the city. They will never afford to live in the transformed projects of their old living areas, and the areas they move to support a different lifestyle, with less social integration. This both changes the style of life and the social security for the people affected, but also the character of Istanbul. Disintegration, solidarity is destroyed. Examples are gecekondus1 like Ayazma, Sulukule and Toklulede. The poor are criminalized, and the gecekondu becomes the cancer of the City: ‘‘Our biggest ideal was to eradicate the gecekondus that have surrounded our cities like a tumor. Now we are fulfilling that ideal and we have to accomplish this goal all over Turkey.” PM R.Tayyip Erdoğan (2006).
1 Gecekundu is a Turkish word meaning a house put up quickly without proper permissions, a squatter's house, and by extension, a shanty or shack. Gecekondu bölgesi is a neighborhood made of those gecekondular.
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
10 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
4 The changing of strategies for the gezekondus. The pictures are from Cihan Uzunçarşılı Baysals presentation “State-led Urban Transformation of Istanbul”.
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 11
5 People are forced to move from their living areas, self-building of homes is replaced by entrepreneurs with touristic style luxury housing. The pictures are from Cihan Uzunçarşılı Baysals presentation “State-led Urban Transformation of Istanbul”.
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
12 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
One of the examples, the Sulukule 'urban regeneration' programme, sees new townhouses advertised at 10 times the price paid to evictees. The Roma living in Sulukule were forced to sell their homes for 500TL per sq metre to private investors and the Fatih municipality. Despite worldwide protests, a Unesco warning and court cases to halt the project, forced evictions and demolitions started in 2008. Now surrounded by construction fences, 640 "Ottoman-style" townhouses and offices are springing up on the 22-acre (nine-hectare) site that had housed the local Roma population for over a millennium. The price of the new properties? From TL3,500 to TL 4,500 per sq metre. The former residents are forced to move to new areas, now living in confined spaces with little access to outside, this has dissolved neighborly relations as well with no or just a few, low quality public spaces for neighbors to meet each other. Economic difficulties make it impossible to call for guests, and a vital way of survival in the big city – solidarity with one another – is lost.
6 The pictures from Cihan Uzunçarşılı Baysals presentation are showing how the characters of the geckondus are changing.
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 13
7 The characters of the living areas are changing, from gecekondus with a social life, to living areas disintegrated from the city and with surroundings that doesn´t support a social way of living. The pictures are from Cihan Uzunçarşılı Baysals presentation “State-led Urban Transformation of Istanbul”.
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
14 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
8 Pictures from Cihan Uzunçarşılı Baysals presentation “State-led Urban Transformation of Istanbul”.
Three projects, Crazy Canal, 3rd Airport, 3rd Bridge comprise a package; each one interdependent on the other while the main objective of this package is to open the hitherto pristine lands of Istanbul to global capital for other construction and infrastructure projects, plundering the lungs of the city. If finished these insane projects, with their multiplier effects, will not only sweep Istanbul from the map but by inducing an irreversible destruction on ecological systems in the area, mainly through deforestation and depletion of water resources - the two major issues discussed in Paris Conference – they will inevitably contribute to climate change and global warming. The EIA reports signal an alarm: ’’The natural ecosystem (forest lands, lakes and ponds that contain 70 living species, running and dry streams, agricultural lands, meadow lands) will be destroyed with the excavation work to be held in the area... natural vegetation and natural characteristics of the area will be removed... lakes, small lakes and ponds will lose their wet- land qualification and the life in them will end... ‘’. All these acreages mentioned in the EIA Reports do not yet include the area of impact of the project. When considered together, it can be predicted that the 3rd Airport project will substantially demolish Istanbul’s forests, basins and great divides by either the direct impacts (during the constructional and operational phases of the projects) or the indirect impacts (new development areas and the population increase that the project will cause) of the mega projects that include the 3rd Airport. The 3rd Airport project causes ,
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 15
as underlined by EIA Reports, ‘’ ..decrease in water catchment amounts at Terkos Lake, Alibeyköy and Pirinççi Dams that supply an important amount of the drinking water need of Istanbul and increase in contamination loads with surface flows... (...) Due to an almost 120% increase in vehicular traffic stemming from the project on the main arterial roads in the region, it is expected that there will be an increase in the current pollution load of the region and with the destruction of the forestlands and the decline in the flow rates of the rivers that provide water for the dams in the region, there will be a decrease in the water levels of the dams....that the pollution will be carried into the dams along with the rivers will be in question too... ‘’
9 Pictures from Cihan Uzunçarşılı Baysals presentation “State-led Urban Transformation of Istanbul”.
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
16 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
Yves Cabannes: The challenge of slum evictions in a neo liberal world. Yves Cabannes is former chair, UN Action Group against Forced Evictions (AGFE). Summarized by Habitat Norway: Land and housing evictions have increased in scale, number and brutality. There are limited, but significant initiatives to face them, and solutions do exist. “At the current pace, 60 to 70 millions people will have been evicted between 2000 and 2020, quite a dramatic number when compared with the objective of improving the living and housing conditions of 100 millions slum dwellers by the year 2020. This is a central challenge for our urban future.” Source: Report to the Governing Council of UN Habitat, 2007. The ongoing evictions are silenced and have been normalized. UN action group has been dissolved, disengagement by UN-Habitat. There is a new NGO tribunal on evictions, but little support. This is a global issue on basis of the right to adequate housing. Forced evictions are the permanent or temporary removal against their will of individuals, families and/or communities from the homes and/or land which they occupy, without the provision of, and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection and with or without State sanction. CESCR GENERAL COMMENT 7: THE RIGHT TO ADEQUATE HOUSING - FORCED EVICTIONS (20/05/97). Evictions include large groups of people, but especially groups like gypsies and romas, and consist of often pure removals of people and destruction of places. Capitalists and authorities cooperate to remove people. Generally, people don’t move back to where they stayed, they are not relocated. Some examples:
Port of Prince, Haiti. In January 2010, approximately three million Haitians were affected by an earthquake, with more than 222,570 fatalities, over 300,500 injured and a staggering 2.3 million people – nearly one quarter of the national population – displaced. The challenge of refugees and the large refugee camps turned into “cities” like in Jordan. The Norwegian Refugee Council has played an important role, with the program Rent free Housing for Syrian Refugees. 18 000 refugees were provided housing in improved houses. Land and water grabbing; China and Arab countries buy land from subsistence to export production. Mega events, like the Olympics, evicts people from their home and make it possible for the host cities to build giant stadiums. In 2009, a CORHE report, report on evictions in 53 countries, threatened and planned in 56 countries, 5 cases of averted evictions, 835 cases identified and 4 312 161 people concerned. We have to widen the concept of evictions, protect the activists, lack of political interest and will. UN-AGFE (Advisory Group on Forced Evictions) was re-established in 2004, but later dissolved. The “Secure tenure and Evictions” dimension is lacking in the MDGs, and the SDGs, primarily SDG 11, are blind to the centrality of land tenure and to displacements, to
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 17
gentrification resulting from slum improvements, to forced evictions, to climate change related displacements or market driven evictions that massively happen in a large number of cities throughout the world. These evictions and displacements are putting in jeopardy in the medium term the huge efforts made and the good results obtained in reducing urban poverty. Evictions are referred to in the New Urban Agenda, there are numerous mobilisations locally, limited but significant initiatives by some international grassroots Federations and Alliances. What should to U.N do to address evictions? What could be your contribution? There is need for a 20 years Action Plan to end up with evictions and a short term Priority Actions Program:
Global / Local Observatories on Evictions Lobby UN agencies beyond Habitat [at the same time reactivate AGFE and UN Habitat mandate] Permanent critical documentation of positive cases Centrality of Land {New Urban Agenda] Protection of Anti-evictions activists and defenders both locally and internationally [see role of Amnesty] International Tribunal Extracts from the following videos were showed at the conference: 1. Witness people before profit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3tLioIVgfY&spfreload=10 2. AMARAVATHI - MAKING OF A CAPITAL CITY- The Bane of My Life. Montfort Social Institute MSI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdaBCuBFlnc 3. Nkomba Douala Cameroun, 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcwHTOJn23Q
The pictures on the following pages are from Yves Cabannes presentation.
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
18 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
10 Slides from Yves Cabannes presentation "The challenge of slum evictions in a neo liberal world".
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 19
11 Slides from Yves Cabannes presentation "The challenge of slum evictions in a neo liberal world".
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
20 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
12 Slides from Yves Cabannes presentation "The challenge of slum evictions in a neo liberal world".
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 21
13 Slides from Yves Cabannes presentation "The challenge of slum evictions in a neo liberal world".
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
22 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
14 Slides from Yves Cabannes presentation "The challenge of slum evictions in a neo liberal world".
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 23
15 Slides from Yves Cabannes presentation "The challenge of slum evictions in a neo liberal world".
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
24 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
16 Slides from Yves Cabannes presentation "The challenge of slum evictions in a neo liberal world".
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 25
Rose Molokane: The strategies, tactics and activities of the excluded Rose Molokoane, FED UP, South Africa; Summarized by Habitat Norway: In her presentation Rose Molokane told about the work of FEDUP and SDI, focusing on how they are both saving money and people and finding solutions. She stressed that the situation is not hopeless, informality is important. Exchange programs and education are important. Policies are being done for the people, but without involving people. SDI will change our minds – both the mind of the government and the mind of the people. Rose said “Talk with us, not about us” – they are FED up, but not hopeless. FEDUP is bringing people together to influence the formal world. Data collection is being used to prevent evection and to inform and to educate their government. Data enumeration of local communities and municipalities is useful, size and qualities of slum places, gravel roads, electricity, toilets and sanitation. Generally, know your city. This should be a national goal; profiles of the communities in the cities. The profiles of settlements are being used to improve the areas, to prioritize what to do. The policies are like sugar, Rose said. If you eat it, it is sweet. But if you just write it on your hand and lick it, it doesn´t taste anything. Policies are not helpful if they´re not implemented. NUA is talking about inclusive cities. Rose continued that they need not just to be included in documents, but also want to be partners. “Our voices need to be heard”, she says. But a voice doesn´t make action on the ground. A good speech much be turned into action. NUA is talking about SDG – but Rose want to see change in the mindsets. Implementable partnership – we have to fight for the space for partnership to implement the NUA. The NUA; who are we going to include? The implementation of the NUA; not do it for us, we are the problem and the solution! Little has been done to follow up Habitat II. Recognize the Partner groups, actions on the ground. SDI need more resources. Norway should support SDI for gathering information and surveys, and monitoring the development. There is need for both financing and technical support. SDI also want the support from the Norwegian government to follow up and implement the NUA. Monitoring. As partners we can get the needed resources to help the poor. Ready to join forces. Are we looking at smart cities to get rid of the people who make the cities smart? Self- building of houses with own equity, corrugated houses are beautiful to us. Program of addressing the health issues. With support they can identify the needs. Cooking stoves. Rose Molokane had an inspiring speech at the conference. After the conference Habitat Norway has received her statements on the SDI position on Habitat 3 / the NUA to use in this summarizing report.
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
26 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
SDI Response to New Urban Agenda (Surabaya Draft) Discussions around informal settlements and their upgrading - housing, basic services like water, sanitation, and energy - do not make mention of the agency and innovation inherent in urban poor communities - with regards to the use of innovative methodologies, technologies, and finance mechanisms. Language around the co-production of solutions (by both urban poor communities and other urban decision makers) that capitalizes on these must be included in the NUA in order to encourage governments to create space for these in national and local policies and implementation strategies. Community-collected data is mentioned briefly, but the important role that it plays for cities in not adequately emphasized. Community-driven data collection empowers communities to play an active role in the development of their cities, which is of course key to the creation of truly resilient cities. It also allows for active participation of communities from the beginning of the development process through the identification of development needs and priorities, and through to the monitoring of implementation of strategies. Involvement of grassroots communities should be mentioned in further references to the use of data in the implementation and monitoring of the New Urban Agenda, particularly regarding the use of data for the development of a basic land inventory and regarding the monitoring of progress achieved in the implementation of sustainable urban development policies and strategies. Organized urban poor communities should be regarded as invaluable resources in holding governments accountable to their commitments. Urban development policy and practice must be informed by the uniquely rich information that organized informal settlement and slum dwellers gather through settlement and city- wide community-driven data collection methodologies, including profiling, enumeration and mapping. Data collection serves as a critical tool for the empowerment of these communities, and as a powerful basis from which to enter into partnerships with other key stakeholders, including the State, to set the agenda for development priorities and upgrading needs. While the change from "addressed" to "prevented" with regards to evictions is definitely welcome, there is little discussion (as has already been mentioned) of strategies that cities can implement to prevent evictions. Indeed, the language around the prevention of informal settlements is concerning. At SDI we like to talk about "inclusive" cities as being "slum friendly cities." That is the kind of attitude and those are the types of strategies we want to see the NUA advocating for - ones that create cities that are embracing of informality. This includes the approaches to evictions. What we would advocate for then would be the creation of a holistic approach to evictions that calls for the co-production of alternatives to evictions through active partnerships between organised urban poor communities and urban decision makers, particularly local governments. The NUA should strengthen its commitment to prevent forced evictions through a call to institutionalize collaborative planning towards eviction alternatives in partnership with organized communities of the urban poor. We emphatically insist that the New Urban Agenda commit to an end to the practice of forced evictions of any kind and for any reason.
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 27
The co-production of in situ, incremental slum upgrading solutions should be referenced as providing effective alternatives to evictions and as the default approach to dealing with inadequate, unsafe housing, infrastructure and basic services. When this is not feasible, organised urban poor communities should be central to the planning and implementation of the relocation and resettlement process.
17 From the negotiations on the New Urban Agenda, in Surabaya, Indonesia. Photo by Erik Berg.
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
28 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
NORWAY AND THE NEW URBAN AGENDA, WHAT DO WE EXPECT? The follow up in Norwegian foreign/development policy One of the main purposes of the conference “Who owns the City? Challenges of Exclusion and Inclusion”) was to give Norwegian civil society, research/training institutions and private business etc. the opportunity to voice their views on the New urban agenda and Norwegian urban foreign/development policy. Part two of the Conference programme was organized to accommodate this intention. Fourteen stakeholders used this opportunity and took part. Their contributions are all reflected in this report together with the “Oslo statement on the New urban agenda” which was adopted in connection with the 25 April Conference on Urban Knowledge and Policy, also arranged by Habitat Norway in cooperation with the Royal Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Norwegian Agency for Development Co-operation (NORAD).
Statement by Mayor of Asker Municipality, Lene Conradi Dear all, Who owns the city – I think we all know the answer to that – the people who live there. And the people themselves must be empowered and involved in shaping their present – and future living conditions. As the mayor in Asker municipality - sustainable urbanisation is of course very close to my heart, and I firmly believe that the slogan “think globally, act locally” is more important than ever. I have had the honour of being a member of United Nation’s Advisory Committee on Local Government – UNACLA, and this experience has led me to realise that local governments despite our differences, have a lot of similar challenges across the world, and that we have a lot to learn from each other. Asker is situated in a typical semi-urban area, close to one of the fastest growing capital regions in Europe. We face challenges such as maintaining a balance between urban centers with services, transport, public transport possibilities, and housing – and at the same time, conserving green recreational areas. Holistic and cross-sectoral planning for land use, and how to size infrastructure for future needs, are major challenges for us, challenges we have in common with the other fast growing semi-urban areas of the world. I have been asked to give the “local” point of view to: How Norway could develop a new development policy where sustainable urbanisation is integrated and mainstreamed, as well as what priorities such a policy should have. Not a small task, but building on the experience from Asker, I have some small thoughts on the subject. First, I would like to emphasise the approach of “co-creation”, where public, civil and private sectors work together for common interests. A new policy for urbanisation must have clearly defined roles, and channels for participation for relevant stakeholders, such as NGOs, civil
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 29
society, various sports associations, as well as private business, acadEmia and media. And of course including the population in general; young people, the elderly, and a good gender balance. I will in particular emphasise the importance of involving young people. They are the inhabitants of the future we plan for, and they are our future leaders! Many talented young people are also in leadership positions today. One of the most exciting results from my involvement with the UN is the follow-up in the form of an international conference for young people – The Asker-Conference on youth and governance. We have hosted this conference twice, and have seen and heard brilliant young people from all over the world share experiences and discuss solutions for the future. We have to make sure that young people get to voice their opinions and be part of shaping their future. To do that we need to create some relevant arenas for them to meet and be heard. Youthless governance is useless governance - I´ve heard from the horses mouth! Some few comments from me as well on how local governments in Norway can be included in international urban discussions, and especially giving input to Norwegian priorities for the New Urban Agenda. And maybe more importantly, in the follow-up of the agreement. I hope we can make better use of the practical experience and know-how that exist at the local level, around various municipalities in Norway. Maybe we can create a platform to share our local experience, so that it can help strengthen Norwegian international involvement in the area? Local government would also feel included that way. I am sure we, in turn, will learn from such cooperation. I think we could benefit from making better connections between our local urbanisation challenges, and local work internationally.
18 Asker Municipality has been a member of United Nation’s Advisory Committee on Local Government – UNACLA. Photo from Asker by Erik Berg.
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
30 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
Statement by the Norwegian children and youth council, Tone Vesterhus Dear guests. Thank you for the opportunity to talk about what LNU prioritizes for the NUA and Norway’s role in the process and follow-up. My name is Tone Vesterhus, and in addition to being a board member of Habitat Norway I am a youth delegate for Habitat III appointed by the Norwegian Children and Youth Council. Through our member organizations we represent roughly 600 000 young people, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak on behalf of them today. I want to first speak of why including youth in governance is important. Then I would like to talk about our priorities for Habitat III and last I will sum up our most important inputs for the follow up of the NUA. First of all: I am very happy to hear that Laila Bokhari says that Norway prioritizes youth participation as well as many of the other issues that we care about. The Habitat III process has shown that there is a need for strong, permanent mechanisms for youth participation in the UN system. When such mechanisms are not established from the very beginning, we run a great risk of losing valuable input from young people and youth organizations. Norway has traditionally been at the forefront of promoting youth participation in the UN system, such as through supporting the SGs envoy on youth as well as the urban youth fund of UN- Habitat. Unfortunately, the push towards a stronger mechanism for youth participation has come to a bit of a stand still. Here, Norway can step up and lead the way – if not us, then who? And we should lead by example. So while pushing youth participation in the UN, we have to work with all levels of governance to ensure that there is real and meaningful youth participation in Norway, too. Of particular relevance here, of course, is the process of implementing and following up the NUA once it has been signed and sealed. We have to work together to ensure that you get the value that youth can bring to the table here. Some of that value is the scope of issues that youth is concerned with and have competence on. Because youth do not only care about “youth issues”, the case is rather the opposite. Youth are concerned with the issues that you are concerned with. So I will stop talking about youth participation now. I had a workshop with some of our member organizations this spring to get input on what should be our focus for the work towards Quito and beyond. The youth organizations that participated gave input on what urban issues were most important to them – both in Norway and globally. The main takeaways from the workshop feed into the LNU position for Habitat III. Two main themes that emerged as most important were social inclusion and urban environmental issues. Within social inclusion, a stricter regulation of the housing market in order to allow vulnerable groups to enter is a priority. Promoting a welfare system in which public services are universal and of high quality is a key to ensuring urban equity. And I cannot underline this point enough: a sustainable city must have inclusive public spaces. Without this, you take away safety, room for prosperity and a tool for equality and equity. Although this is seemingly high on the agenda, we see time after time that the increased privatization of urban planning restricts the opportunity to maintain and create spaces that are truly public and accessible for all. This is universal, it goes for Norway and for other countries. It should, then, be high on the agenda in Norway and in the follow up of the NUA.
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 31
Within urban environmental issues we should pay particular attention to the health related challenges that urban pollution causes. Through restricting car use and increasing public transport and facilitating for walking and biking, we can contribute to mitigating both local and global consequences of emissions. Creating and preserving urban green spaces is also something that is very important in this respect. In addition to this, an important priority for LNU for the Habitat III agenda is to create quality education and adequate employment opportunities for young people. Urban unemployment among youth is a massive challenge, and if we solve this challenge, we solve a range of issues affecting our societies. These demands for a new urban agenda are highly relevant in both a national and international context. Our input then, goes for both what we would like to see here in Norway as well as what we want Norway to prioritize in the follow up of the NUA. To sum up our main inputs are:
Solving environmental issues in an urban context to reduce local and global environmental effects, particularly through a sustainable transportation modal shift. Creating inclusive public spaces in Norway and globally to ensure a safe and equal city. Targeted action to create quality education and adequate employment for young people. And last, but not least, making youth and other underrepresented groups an integrated part of the follow up of the NUA, both on a UN-level and in Norway.
It is great to hear that we have reached agreement on the NUA. I have not had the opportunity to study the text yet, and although this is important, it means nothing if the commitment to the implementation in the aftermath of Quito is not strong. The historic agreement on bringing in language on “the right to the city” will be especially interesting, and what this will mean in practice is still very much uncertain. To echo Marit Pettersen: we really do not want this to be just a piece of paper. We want Norway to be a strong stakeholder in the follow up of the agreement, and in forming the legacy of the agenda. Lene Conradi said some very wise word: A youthless future is a useless future. Well, we are here and ready to be a part of the next step, that is where the real work begins.
Statement by Spire, Hilde Rognlien Spire is an environment- and development organization for young adults that works towards a sustainable and equitable world. Dealing with this requires us to focus on the bigger picture, and to see the links between poverty, distribution, environment, trade and food security. This perspective is fundamental for Spire in our understanding of urbanization and the growing importance of cities globally, and we believe that this understanding needs to guide all decisions aimed at creating cities that are socially, economically and ecologically sustainable. Habitat III represents a great opportunity for Norway to show that we take seriously the ongoing trend of urbanization and its implications on an environmental scale, and for urban citizens from all social and economic backgrounds.
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
32 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
Active participation and involvement of all groups in society is a precondition for diverse and inclusive cities. Important decisions on urban development and planning is often undertaken in arenas that are perceived as inaccessible to many, especially young people. The power gap between decision makers and urban citizens is one of the biggest challenges in cities today – this applies both in countries like Norway and in developing countries. A Norwegian urban development policy needs to focus on measures that strengthen local democracy. and spread public information – especially knowledge on democratic rights. Formal structures for youth participation at the local scale should be established. We want to encourage support of grassroots organizations and social movements that promote democratic inclusion and citizens’ sense of belonging. Ecological considerations must be one of the main values of the Norwegian urban development agenda. Norway must take seriously its obligations in the Paris Agreement, and support developing countries' efforts through the exchange of expertise, technology transfer and investments in green funds. Civil society actors and environmental NGOs are central here, and Norway should direct efforts at supporting initiatives that implements such measures. The New Urban Agenda must be implemented in a holistic way, and not by a pick-and- choose manner in which countries choose those measures that are most easily achieved. In order to get truly sustainable urban development, it is crucial that environmental, social and economic aspects are given equal weight in the decision making process. It is also very important that Norwegian policy is coherent. Norway is seen as a constructive actor in many areas when it comes to international development, however Norway must look at how its trade and foreign policies are sometimes undermining the global fight to end poverty. Currently we are seeing an increased interest in bilateral and regional trade agreements, which give more advantages to already powerful actors. A multilateral forum, such as the WTO, is a more just arena, and gives less powerful countries a better opportunity to voice their concerns and make alliances with others. Norway should aim to get trade back into the multilateral system. This means that Norway and other rich countries must allow developing countries to be given the space to implement policies they see legitimate and important in order to promote development and the fulfilment of universal human rights (such as food security programs supporting domestic food production, or export restrictions on food in times of crisis).
Statement by Norwegian Mapping Authority (Kartverket), Helge Onsrud Reflecting the domain of Kartverket’s work and experiences, Helge Onsrud provided the following contribution to Norway’s follow up of the New Urban Agenda. Kartverket is the Norwegian state institution responsible for mapping cities and land as well as for registering properties and rights in them, buildings and addresses.
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 33
Since 2005 Kartverket has been engaged in foreign aid, providing technical assistance to more than ten former socialist countries in Europe, mainly related to restitution of private ownership to land. Data is a key factor in slum dwellers and other groups dialogue with local and central authorities on recognition and on improving their livelihoods. Facts are strong tools in such dialogues. Methods for surveying and mapping relevant information, to be applied by the people themselves, are developed by SDI, Habitat’s Global Land Tool Network and by FAO. However, legal recognition and formal registration of tenure rights are needed to provide satisfactory and durable security. Everyone should enjoy the right to have their houses and land formally registered, at an affordable price. This is the situation in Norway, being a fundamental factor for the national economy and for the welfare of all citizens, enjoying security for dwellings, investments and finally facilitating borrowing money using their property as collateral. In most developing countries only the rich elite enjoy these benefits. New technologies and methods have shown that mass registration could be done at low costs, as best demonstrated in the registration of millions of parcels in Rwanda by local people with very limited training. Developing countries often lack a functioning civil registry. Thus in many countries, poor people are not formally registered in a public civil registry and are without identity cards, hindering them in many aspects of life. Furthermore, they are without a formal address identifying where they live or do business. Norway, through Kartverket, is funding addresses for all in Kosovo; For the first time post, goods and different services can be delivered directly to citizens and businesses. Along with civil registration, addresses, including signs at streets and entrances, is key to having a recognized identity. Public registers play a crucial role in developed economies. Property register, civil register and business register are largely lacking in developing countries –at least not accessible for the poor. The importance of accessible public registration services was highlighted by the Commission of Legal Empowerment in their report from 2008; “Making the Law work for Everyone”. The Commission was largely funded by the Government of Norway, but quickly almost forgotten as input to Norwegian policies and foreign aid. The recommendations are still valid and the report should be brought into the picture again. Transparency in ownership to land is another vital issue. In Norway all sales, with the names of the seller and the buyer as well the sales price, are open to inspection by all, and published regularly in newspapers. Not all appreciate this, but transparency of ownership and land purchases is a democratic right and an effective weapon in fighting land grabbing and other illegal dealings with land. Transparency in land dealings is far from the situation in most developing countries. Transparency in land matters should be promoted and monitored globally. Implementation of the New Urban Agenda as well as of SDGs has to be monitored. Monitoring and publishing the results is a strong tool. Georgia, for example, has made some remarkable developments in establishing affordable public services for registration of land,
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
34 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
issuance of identity cards, passports, registering births etc. Public service centers are established throughout the country. The fact that Georgia has been reported no. 1 in the annual doing business reports of the World Bank has significantly contributed to the government’s ambitions. Establishing key public registers affordable to all, transparency in land matters and putting in place mechanisms to monitor the implementation of the Urban Agenda, the SDG as well as other internationally adopted development policies, should be an important element in Norwegian policies and actions for sustainable urban development. It is doable!
Statement by NTNU, Rolee Aranya While the New Urban Agenda raises to the fore extremely relevant and well-articulated priorities for urban development, the capacity to plan and implement the urban agenda is only partially addressed. The World Cities Report of 2016, illustrates that planning capacity varies greatly in the world. While the UK with 38 planners per 100,000 population is the best equipped, Nigeria for example has 1.44 qualified planners and India, 0.23 qualified planners for the same population. The lack of capacity emerges from three main issues – the shortfall in the demand versus education of planners, the outdated and limited curriculum of planning education and the lack of acknowledgement about the role of the profession and professionals in the shaping the urban environments. Data presented in the Global Report on Human Settlements in 2009 reveal that there was only a total of 550 schools educating planners globally in 2008. Of these 50% are located in developed countries, that represent only 20% of the world’s urban population. The same study (conducted by the African Schools of Planning and the UN Habitat, presented by Bruce Stiftel at the Pre Con III at Surabaya) also reveals that of these 550 schools, 65% did not have climate change on their curriculum, 47% did not teach social equity, 41% did not deal with public participation 26% did not include sustainable development. Curriculum of most schools educating planners still take departure in the traditional practice of physical planning and large scale master planning, with very little emphasis on current urban challenges. In addition, there is a commonly held perception that planners solely represent the now infamous public planning institutions and real estate developers. The diverse roles adopted by professional planners as advocates for the rights of the marginalized, as negotiators in multi stakeholder processes in a liberalized planning practice, as awareness creating agents of change in urban practice and as actors in public debate are largely ignored. In conclusion, if implementation of a ‘new’ urban agenda is to be insured it is imperative that we stress on educating more planners, with the right skills and knowledge to play diverse roles in shaping the urban environment.
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 35
Statement by NIBR - HIOA, Trond Vedeld Trond Vedeld is MFA representative in UN-HABITAT III – POLICY UNIT 8 – URBAN ECOLOGY AND RESILIENCE I will address three issues in my intervention:
1. Will HABITAT III be able to deliver an effective New Urban Agenda (NUA) with a focus on cities for all? 2. What lessons can be drawn from other international programs for its effective implementation 3. How can Norway/MFA facilitate the implementation of the New Urban Agenda? Regarding the first issue, I would say there are three main preconditions for making the New Urban Agenda effective in implementation.
1. We need an agenda that is concise and clear in objectives and tasks – with clear priorities. As it stands in the text from New York it is a very broad and complex agenda with a long and complicated text with reference to an array of Social Development Goals (SDGs) that are not easily measurable 2. Moreover, the agenda must focus not only on what must be done but also on how and by whom and with what level of support it will be implemented 3. Finally, the agenda needs to be locally relevant and basically within the capacities of local governments and local citizens to implement. This also means it must be inclusive and participatory (in part since considerable external financing is not likely to evolve in support of the agenda) The main issue with the New Urban Agenda as presented in the agreed document from New York is not what it says – it is not hard to imagine that there will be relatively wide support for urban development–at least at policy level- that is inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. Rather, what will decide the NUA’s effectiveness in operational terms in reaching the variety of SDGs set up, is whether it is perceived as relevant to local urban governments and by urban dwellers and a variety of other urban stakeholders (private sector and civil society), including by the many slum dwellers and urban poor in informal areas (Satterthwaite 2009). Can we expect local relevance to evolve out of HABITAT III given that the text is being developed and approved by national state governments? And will national governments really be supportive & endorse genuinely locally driven agendas, strategies and plans and contribute to resource mobilization? If they are to, the national governments, as well as the local governments, need to do so beyond the support to the SDGs. As suggested by Satterthwaite (2016), the SDGs have plenty of goals and targets – related to what needs to be done – but they are weak on how, by whom (in each locality) and with what support (see also Simon et al. 2016, Buckley and Simet 2016). In this regard, the organization and governance and coordination of the New Urban Agenda require more thorough elaboration in order to reveal how the required capacity for
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
36 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
coordination can be built and furthered. This is what Quito will be about, building on the agreed New York Habitat III document. However, the global to local governance of the agenda should ideally be researched better both upfront and as a process oriented research and monitoring exercise. Here, academia has a role to play on researching governance and strategic coordination issues. The Habitat III document does, however, outline a set of general observations about effective implementation (B) under three headlines;
1. Building the urban governance structure: establishing a supportive framework 2. Planning and managing urban spational development 3. Means of implementation The Habitat III document furthermore states that the agenda needs to be set out within a participatory framework to support local stakeholders and local groups to meet the SDGs and the goals of the Paris Agreement. In this regard, dangerous climate change and related extreme events and disasters will not be avoided unless urban governments all around the world act on both adaptation and mitigation (Satterthwaite 2016). However, the text lacks sufficient details about how more precisely the agenda can become governed globally, nationally and locally and, as such, operationalized. This is also about how more precisely urban authorities will go about urban development in a holistic or cross- sectoral way to further e.g. the SDGs (Simon et al. 2016, Earle 2016). It is to this end an open question whether many or most cities around the world finally will subscribe to the SDGs and the New Urban Agenda as a guide for own policies and strategies. Regarding the second issue, what lessons and knowledge can be drawn from other international programs of relevance to the NUA for its effective governance and implementation? Overall, effective governance of the NUA depends to a large degree on urban (and national) governments that work with their citizens (not against) and support those millions of people living in informal settlements -- and mobilize their involvement To this end, many observers agree that we can learn from relative successful international programs such as the Healthy City Movement, Local Agenda 21, Participatory budgeting programs, and the Making Cities Resilient Campaign (UNISDR) (Satterthwaite 2016). Among these I know the Making Cities Resilient program best. This program helped – with minimum external support from UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) – relatively clear and concise targets (10 policy principles for making your city resilient), these were perceived by local government and citizens as locally relevant goals. Local governments could see the value of applying them – so could local citizens. The approach was basically participatory – or at least it was participatory in its policy framework. The approach depended to limited degree on external support – although UNISDR provided technical backstopping and policy development support and worked as node for the evolving network of cities that took part. The approach was developed and driven by the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction with minimum external financial support. The program has reached 2600 cities and municipalities across the 98 countries. By signing up to the campaign, the cities agreed to voluntary reporting by urban governments. Many of the governments
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 37
committed to regular reporting (as under the Hyogo Framework of Action), despite limited external funding (Satterthwaite 2016). Third, how can Norway/MFA facilitate the implementation of the New Urban Agenda? The following key points can be considered by MFA/Norway related to the follow up the NUA in Quito and beyond.
1. Reflecting Norway’s overall development policy, it would be important to maintain a strong focus on pushing issues of environment, climate, health, health and pollution, and social justice issues. 2. MFA might like to utilize the momentum created in MFA/KMD/KLD through the Habitat III process (and the upcoming white paper on cities and city regions in Norway) to produce a new urban development policy paper in line with NUA. This could build on the 2007 policy document that MFA once produced. 3. This might also provide an opportunity to further a cross-ministerial coordination group between the above mentioned ministries (including also NORAD) to further the new urban agenda both globally and nationally (in Norway) 4. MFA (and such a coordination group) might like to keep strengthening its relationship to academia, civil society and other stakeholders in furthering the NUA 5. Considering the magnitude of urban challenges confronting low- and middle-income countries in the decades to come, MFA might consider to reinforce its support to urban development internationally – both policy wise, administratively and financially (e.g. through various development channels: multilaterally/multi-bilaterally (UN/World Bank/Regional banks), bilaterally through the Embassies, civil society, and research/academia) 6. Considering the policy-based knowledge requirements for understanding how the NUA might be governed and coordinated globally, nationally and locally MFA should consider increasing the support for research and science-policy interactions on key urban development issues. This is also about how SDGs can actually be measured through data gathering on targets and indicators (Simon 2016)
Statement by the Norwegian Cultural Heritage Research (NIKU), Cornelis H. Evensen NIKU’s advocacy platform vis a vis the New Urban Agenda and Norway’s urban foreign /development policies is “The Oslo statement on the New Urban Agenda from the Oslo Urban Policy and Knowledge Conference”, 25 April 2016. In the struggle for public spaces – pavements, streets, places, parks, railway stations,airports etc. – new, marginalized groups are organizing themselves, also globally. They are local businesses. and market men/-women, street vendors, garbage pickers, homeless and slum dwellers. Cultural heritage in cities, both material and immaterial – has important identity promoting functions. At the same time, they imply a considerable employment and income generating potential also for deprived groups. The Conference will strongly encourage the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its Agency for International Development as well as relevant Norwegian civil society organizations, to support the development of urban, social movements and their work. Promoting cultural heritage in cities needs to be integrated in poverty reduction contexts by
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
38 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
all relevant stakeholder organizations, in particular UNESCO and the World Bank. We encourage the Ministry, in cooperation with the Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage research (NIKU), to advocate such perspectives nationally and internationally”.
Statement by Norwegian Red Cross, Ansa Masaud Jørgensen Norwegian Red cross is pleased to see the negotiations for drafting an urban agenda. The refer -ences to resilience,investment in infrastructure, focus on diversity and inclusion are welcome As an organization mandated to respond to humanitarian needs globally, and as part of Red Cross and Red Crescent movement, our recommendations are focused on connecting the urban agenda with the humanitarian and resilience agenda. The urban agenda also provides a unique opportunity to bring these 3 areas together. We have 4 recommendations for Norway: 1. Urban resilience, recovery and reconstruction through the urban agenda The current draft has quite a good focus on resilience and risk reduction. It could be stronger on response and recovery. We heard this morning about Port au Prince and Istanbul. How will we respond if there is an earthquake, differently than we did in Haiti and in other cities? The current global coalitions /alliances on resilience, urban development and urban crises work as standalone coalitions. Norway can play a role to bring these them closer and together. Joining forces. Post disaster urban response cannot only be concerned with recovery but must consider risk reduction and increased resilience in the event of future disasters. The objectives of urban recovery should be defined in terms of more resilient systems, based on appropriate indicators, rather than on short term replacement of lost assets. 2. Forging of partnerships for expertise Cities represent concentrations of resources including human resources: individuals, formal and informal associations and institutions. Humanitarian sector lacks knowledge about cities and their functionality. Pre and post disaster urban strategies should seek to capitalise on diverse capacities and partnerships through flexible mechanisms to enable access to capacity for ideas and action. This should include new relationships between national and local governments, urban development and humanitarian and actors, between civil society and state authorities, new roles for universities, community based organizations, for professional associations and public private ventures. Many agencies and individuals in a post disaster response will not have or feasibly develop expertise in urban contexts or the specific city affected. Norway as lead humanitarian actor can advocate for pooled urban expertise to provide reference and resource capacity for the wider response community on topics of housing, land and property, services, economy and integrated urban issues. Pooling expertise across local actors and international where needed is key for urban settings.
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 39
3. Invest in urban services and infrastructure in armed conflicts in urban areas ICRC has been a strong voice at Habitat III. 60% of ICRC’s budget is spent in humanitarian urban areas. Cities like Aleppo and Fallujah are being destroyed. Gaza, Mogadishu and Sana'a have faced urban warfare. Conflicts and violence in urban areas leads greater loss of human lives, livelihoods disrupted and often destroys essential urban services such as health, water and education. Millions of people in towns, cities and informal settlements rely on interconnected infrastructure to meet their needs for essential electricity, water, sewerage and waste management. Norway should support investments in urban infrastructure and services during conflict. This means working closely with humanitarian partners and committed to multi-year financing mechanisms. 4. Acknowledgment of the role of volunteers in building resilience and responding to urban crises A 2011 study found that Red Cross Red Crescent volunteers donated nearly 6 billion US dollars’ worth of volunteer services in 2010 worldwide, particularly in the fields of health promotion, treatment and services, disaster preparedness, response and recovery. In light of the restricted means and human resources available to urban governments, volunteers possess critical community based knowledge that can be tapped into for reducing the risks and support resilient communities. We call for a more explicit recognition of the role of local communities and volunteers not only as first responders in a crisis, but for their important contributions to disaster risk reduction, disaster preparedness response, and recovery.
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
40 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
Statement by The Norwegian Refugee Council, Jørn C. Øwre Our main political messages will be a substantial increase in support to communities and local / national authorities, and better ways of ensuring efficient ways of managing this approach.
The complexity of urban challenges demands multi-sectoral efforts and the development of new programing adapted to changing realities. Better programming that focus on communities and settlements needs to be supported and funded! Resilience and climate change adaptation is an integrated part of addressing urban challenges! Resilience and early recovery should be better integrated at the first stages of a crisis. The approach should increase the collaboration between the humanitarian and development sectors. Migration should be integrated in urban planning globally and be built in to urban development strategies Norwegian authorities along with other possible countries of destination for migration flows, need to engage urgently to provide sustainable urban solutions decreasing motivation for migration. Funding needs to be made available for piloting these needed approaches and developments in humanitarian programming. A strong and visible commitment will ensure that Norwegian authorities are taking a needed role in this challenging field that will define future security and sustainability globally!
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 41
Statement by Norwegian People’s Aid, Alfredo Biamont Oasen, Women Crossing Borders Norsk Folkehjelp er humanitær organisasjon for fagbevegelsen og driver omfattende utenlands-bistand til ca. 30 land. Vi er med på og støtter april 2016 Habitat, Oslo-uttalelsen om en bedre global politikk for bærekraftig byutvikling. Samtidig ønsker vi å understreke noen prinsipper som er viktig når det gjelder Oslo-uttalelsen, målsetninger som er retningsgivende for vårt arbeid:
Forsterke demokratisering og folkelig deltakelse, Mindre ord, mer handlinger i alle instanser System, regjering, myndighetene skal fungere Langsiktig utviklings- og demokratiarbeid Støtte rettferdig fordeling av makt og ressurser Null toleranse til vold, korrupsjon, kaos, terrorisme og krig.
Disse er viktige prosesser for å oppnå endringer, tror vi. Norsk Folkehjelp bistand er blant annet rettet mot hjemløse, flyktninger og internt fordrevne, blant annet i Gaza, Syria, Sudan, Irak og Colombia. Vi administrerer flere flyktningmottak i Norge, samt driver integreringsprogrammet for innvandrere og arbeidsinnvandrere fra EØS i Oslo. Dette sistnevnte arbeidet har gitt oss en kunnskap om hvordan bosituasjon er i Norge, spesielt hvordan er for innvandrere og flyktninger i Oslo og Akershus. Oslo og Akershus omfatter i dag nesten 25 % av Norges befolkning.
I dag er 32,2 % av Oslos innbyggere innvandrere, 214 000 personer, de største gruppene er 23 000 fra Pakistan, 16 500 fra Polen og 14 500 fra Somalia. I Akershus er 18,8 % av befolkning innvandrere, 120 000 personer, de største gruppene er 15 000 fra Polen, 7 000 fra Pakistan, og 7 000 fra Somalia.
Prognoser viser at i 2037 vil Oslos befolkning skal være ca. en million og at 50 % av Oslo befolkning vil ha innvandrerbakgrunn. I dag er situasjonen for denne delen av befolkningen preget av følgende karakteristikker som jeg ønsker å peke på i dag:
Diskriminering på leiemarkedet Etnisk segregering på boligmarkedet, forskjellen mellom øst og vest øker Ghettoer, er ikke enda ekte ghettoer, men små ghettoer, men det er en tendens som også vokser Trangbodhet, familier med mange barn Høye leiepriser i forhold til prisindeksen, dette er særlig vanskelig for innvandrere med lav inntekt Utnyttelse av arbeidsinnvandrer, ofte er det slik at fire-seks sover på ett soverom. En side ved dette er at boforholdene er elendig når det er for mange som bor på en leilighet, folk sover i en del tilfeller på omgang i leiligheter som ikke en gang er egnet for en enkelt familie
1. Motvirking av ghetto - tendenser: Forskere forteller oss at i Groruddalen er det i enkelte lokale områder opphoping av sosiale,
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
42 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
økonomiske og kulturelle problemer. Den dynamikken som slår inn her, er at lav standard på boligmassen og utemiljøet gjør at boligprisene faller. Dermed flytter folk med lav inntekt inn, noe som gjør området enda mindre attraktivt. Utemiljøet forfaller ytterligere osv, dvs man går inn i en negativ spiral. Grorudal - satsingen har vært et forsøk på å bryte de onde sirklene man har kommet inn i en del lokalmiljøer, men det har bare til dels lyktes.
Forsker Susanne Søholt påpeker at etnisk sammensatte nabolag trenger kontinuerlig oppfølging for å bli gode å bo i. Her er det fremdeles mye som kan gjøres. Politikerne må ta tak i boligbyggingen, gjøre mer for å oppgradere uteområdene og sørge for å stryke lokale initiativer som miljøvaktmestere, bydelsverter (som nå har kommet på Holmlia) osv. Politikerne må gjøre mer for at lavinntektsgrupper skal kunne kjøpe sin egen bolig, f eks gjennom billige lån, stimulere til mer boligbygging, overvåke og slå ned på diskriminering på markedet osv.
2. EØS Arbeidsinnvandrere Vi har i fem år drevet omfattende prosjekter for EØS arbeidsinnvandrere. Vi orienterer dem om lover og regler, forhold på arbeidsmarkedet og tilbyr norskkurs. Etter finanskrisen har det kommet mange arbeidsinnvandrere, særlig fra Sør-Europa. Det har utviklet seg et betydelig problem med sosial dumping i arbeidslivet, men også på boligmarkedet er det mye utnytting og uforsvarlige forhold. Mange bor i farlige hus, i alt for trange leiligheter, på korte kontrakter, eller til og med uten kontrakt osv. Det er viktig at myndighetene gjør mer for å ta imot arbeidsinnvandrere. De har stort behov for informasjon og en måte å skaffe seg leiebolig som sikrer dem mot utnytting og diskriminering.
Mye av det som skjer med arbeidsinnvandrerne er ukjent for myndighetene, eller de gjør for lite og for sent for å beskytte dem mot utnytting. I arbeidslivet har man f eks først i det aller siste begynt å arbeide på tvers av etater og sektorer (politi, NAV, fagforeninger og arbeidsgiverforeninger) for å bekjempe sosial dumping. http://www.utrop.no/Utdanning%26Karriere/29285
Statement by Eat Foundation, Emily Norford Introduction to EAT
EAT is a global foundation that aims to transform the food system towards one that is healthy and sustainable. We do this by working across science, business and policy, partnering with the world’s leading universities, biggest and most impactful companies in the food sector, international agencies and civil society organizations. EAT’s founder and president, Gunhild Stordalen, saw the impact of the global food system on the health of both people and the planet. EAT recognizes a need to address food, health and sustainability in an integrated way across all sectors. In Norway, EAT is working to improve adolescent health through projects called Matagentene and Eat Move Sleep. Osl o is also part of EAT’s two cities initiatives: a global Food Systems Network in partnership with C40, a group of the world’s cities committed to addressing climate change, and a regional Nordic Cities EAT Initiative. These networks serve
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 43
as platforms for collaboration, peer learning and support for cities to implement concrete projects to improve their food systems. Norway’s priorities for Quito & the New Urban Agenda Food is at the core of sustainable urban development and links to issues concerning health, climate, environmental protection, and governance. We need to get the food system right if we’re going to achieve healthy, inclusive, and sustainable cities. Cities are becoming increasingly important: 70% of the world’s population will be urban by 2050 and most of this urban shift will occur in Africa and Asia. Meanwhile, the majority of the world’s undernourished people live in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Urban food systems have implications for human and environmental health. Living in cities often contributes to a sedentary lifestyle and overconsumption of processed foods, which can lead to overweight and obesity and increase the risk factor for various non- communicable diseases. On the other hand, many city-dwellers lack adequate access to nutritious and affordable foods. Health problems associated with undernutrition can persist across generations and trap families in poverty. Growing demand for energy-intensive foods, as well as food transport and waste are contributing to greenhouse gas emissions and the negative environmental impact of the food value chain. The New Urban Agenda already addresses food in various ways, which Norway could recognize and support. Some examples include food security, nutrition, land use and urban- rural linkages. Land use is closely tied to food, with implications regarding green space, climate adaptation, and public markets among others. The New Urban Agenda also recognizes the importance of promoting sustainable and responsible consumption and production, including the encouragement of local products, connecting small-scale farmers and fishers to the market; and recognizing cities’ impacts across administrative boundaries. Strengthening connections between cities and surrounding areas, especially regarding the food system, will benefit the local economy, will help deliver healthy produce to city- dwellers, and will reduce cities’ environmental impact. We should emphasize the need to see cities as broader, interconnected system and to see food as broader, underlying topic that is crucial for healthy and sustainable urban development. Urban development policy An effective urban policy should promote coherence between multiple levels of governance – local, regional, national, international – and different sectors, including civil society and the private sector. It should facilitate sustainable and healthy food systems, recognizing food as a crosscutting issue with implications for all aspects of urban development. Many cities across the globe are already implementing good practices – we’ve been exposed to some of these through our cities networks. For example:
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
44 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
In Brazil, a municipality has organized a market to better connect consumers to local producers. The market’s location rotates on a weekly basis, targeting lower-income neighborhoods. It directly connects farmers from the surrounding region to urban consumers, provides fresh local produce for a much lower price than a typical grocery store, and also guarantees a decent profit for the farmers. An initiative in Canada is addressing the problem of food deserts and “food swamps,” neighborhoods where only unhealthy foods are available. This project consists of pop-up kiosks in convenience stores and public transit stations as well as a mobile food market selling healthy and affordable alternatives. Cities across the world are changing bylaws to encourage urban farming, which improves local environmental health and biodiversity, helps address climate change, provides healthy produce, and in some cases offers livelihood opportunities for the producers.
We cannot neglect food in urban planning and development policy given its impact on equity, inclusion, health and environment. What can Norwegian ministries do to facilitate collaboration amongst urban stakeholders? It is valuable to have events to connect entities that are working through different channels towards a common goal: healthy, inclusive and sustainable urban development. It’s important to identify synergies and opportunities to work together. It is also important to consider follow-up and implementation of the NUA after Quito. This will require efforts from all actors and linking to other global priorities such as the SDGs, the Paris Agreement, and the Decade of Action
Statement by Rodeo Architects, Anders Ese An indirect and slightly myopic input to the New Urban Agenda: how can the Norwegian government better facilitate for (Norwegian) private sector actors (within urban development) in order to help address urban challenges? Premise: We are a multi-disciplinary private firm working in the overlap between urban development and social sciences. We believe that urban challenges are best dealt with – from a profession point of view – if hard assets and soft assets are worked on in synthesis, in a holistic manner. Meaning that architects and planners need to work in collaboration with sociologists, historians, human geographers etc. We believe that this approach is necessary in cities in the north as well as in cities in the south. We established our East Africa office in Dar es Salaam in 2014. In order for urban challenges to be properly addressed in cities in e.g. East Africa, the development of these cities needs to be: a) “owned” by local professionals b) interested and passionate c) properly trained
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 45
The education of professionals within urban development in Tanzania is lacking, and focus on those that need it the most, e.g. the urban poor, is not present in the local professional discourse in the country. Our goal was to:
Merge with a local partner in TZ Create a practice based training platform for architectural and planning professionals in TZ to match international standards Through this platform create an awareness and passion for urban development issues among professionals within architecture and urban planning and design. We have been both supported and not supported by the Norwegian government in achieving this, and would like to provide input on four specifics points based on the experience from our establishment in Dar es Salaam: things that work, things that can easily be improved, things that should be improved, and things that are hard to change. Things that works:
Economic support for start-ups Connection between IN and Norad (could perhaps be strengthened?) Support for legal assistance Things that Norad/MFA/the embassies can do something about:
Showing interest Following up that show of interest with service provision o E.g. a designated contact at the embassy with which one has regular contact (besides the Programme Officer) o Making sure that this person has the mandate to provide services to businesses Things that Norad/MFA/the embassies should concern themselves with more:
Specific understanding of business in the specific country where the business is establishing itself Specific understanding of running an architecture or planning firm in TZ Things that Norad/MFA/the embassies probably have a hard time changing, but are issues that nonetheless need to be addressed:
All-encompassing, pervasive corruption in the sector Changing the general business climate in the country Changing specific sector legislature
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
46 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
Statement by Norad/Health Section, Austen Davies What do We Know? – the Big Trends Cities can be spaces of enormous opportunity, dynamism, beauty, efficiency and equity. More and more people are choosing to live in cities and well over half of humanity already reside in cities. The only regions that have less than half of the population living in cities are Asia and Africa. But both these regions face the fastest rates of urban migration – and Africa is the locus of global population growth in the next century. So we know there is going to be rapid urban expansion in Africa and Asia in the decades ahead. We also know that the era of infectious disease as the primary scourge of mankind has now been overshadowed by Non-Communicable Diseases. NCDs are less amenable to medical models of diagnosis and treatment – and they are often best managed through prevention of risk exposure. Lastly we know the world is getting fatter. Over-weight is no longer a side effect of wealth – obesity is increasingly a condition of the poor. We also know that the climate is changing and this will make it harder to feed our cities, provide them with fresh water and ensure clean air to breathe. Increasingly the public health and climate agenda converge. The best actions for reducing climate emissions are also the best things to do to secure the public health. How Does the Urban Environment Impact Health? The challenges this poses are not just those created by the commodification and internationalization of markets for urban land sites – creating inequity literally built into the terrain of our cities. Modern Oslo was formed in the industrial era when industry and the poor were housed to the East. Today 150 years later, there is a 10 yr life expectancy gap between West and East Oslo. How we develop our cities matters for each generation and over time. Migration to the city impacts on EVERY dimension of human health and well-being. For health, Urbanization changes everything. When non- health people think of health and urbanization they think of the spatial relationship to health care delivery services and to financial access to care. This is important but only a tiny element of the health transition in the move to “Urban” man. Because It changes the way we lead our lives; it changes what and how much we eat and how much physical work we do – and what risks we are exposed to – it changes the air we breathe and the water we drink – and it changes levels of stress and exposure to violence. 1. Apart from the commodification of land – many other public goods are commodified: - water, sanitation, grazing land, wild foods, networks of social exchange and support. Life in the urban environment is increasing privatized and hence why absolute poverty levels are often set at different levels for urban and rural populations (as urban populations have to buy more of what they need a higher price).
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 47
2. On the one hand there is potential to reach more people with services (health care, education, modern sanitation facilities, treated water) - and complex markets offer a wider and richer array of goods. Secondly, information can cross boundaries and travel faster – populations become experts in navigating change. But the poor are often most excluded from services and information flows. 3. The aggregation of demand leads to new supply systems. In the past 40 years, levels of food import to Africa relative to local production have soared. Africa is increasingly dependent on imports of wheat, rice and corn (of the lowest grade) sugar and vegetable oils. 4. In Kenya at the national level, 35% percent of children under five years are stunted, but in Nairobi’s slums it is over 40%. Yet at the same time the national prevalence for overweight and obesity among women aged 15-49 years is 25% and in Urban areas (including in the slums) it is over 40%. Social and environmental factors are at play, including dietary and lifestyle changes, catalysed by processes such as the rapid urbanisation occurring in Kenya, like in many other African countries – and a good share of negligence. 5. The sheer density of people means infectious disease spreads more often and rapidly – and the density of people creates an imperative to manage human and other waste to reduce exposure to infective agents. 6. Lifestyle changes in every way – how we get to work – what work we do – how we enjoy leisure time. Is it active – is it social? 7. The concentration of people and productivity and transport drives pollution in terms of dust, air pollution (ambient and household), exposure to toxic elements and access to potable water. 8. The unregulated city is a dangerous place - people can be exposed to violence, car traffic etc. at public health levels. A Bit of History In the early parts of the industrial revolution in Europe – the new landless poor flooded off the land and to the cities. They lived in hovels and slums without services and worked in dark and dirty factories. Cities were a place of disease, violence and wretched public health. The rich as well as the poor lived side by side. Poverty and deprivation were all too evident and could not be seen as “natural”. The rich also suffered from the violence, political disarray And spread of diseases (like cholera). The Victorian social pioneers organized for social change. In the 1850s the discipline of public health was developed. The discipline of public health involves the following: 1. Decision making based on evidence 2. A focus on populations over individuals 3. A goal of social justice and equity 4. An emphasis on prevention rather than curative care 5. Multidisciplinary action
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
48 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
The early public health movement focused on water, food, security and sanitation. In the 1930s, the concept of public health became medicalized after the discovery of antibiotics (and medical tools to impact health at the population level increased). Today we face:
widespread anti-microbial resistance to antibiotics and other drugs massive inequalities in terms of access to foods, water clean air etc. we also face levels of pollution and climate change that add another layer of risk. Some academics are calling for a new public health discarding the sanitary model and focusing on man made threats. How to Go Forward In order to make cities healthy and productive and appreciable places for people to live there is an imperative to think about “healthy cities” – both to enhance the experience of living in cities as well as to ensure cities are places of democracy and dynamic productivity. If we want new cities to be areas of emancipation, creativity and life enhancing there has to be attention paid to more than access to health services. 1. We need data on the things that effect health: diet, exercise, access to clean water, clean air, and spread of infectious epidemics as well as violence and its impact. 2. We need technical capacity at municipal level to analyse health data, set priorities for action and respond to inequity – driving reaction to the data 3. We need transparency of data and action plans as well as platforms to include different stakeholders to involve participants in seeking common goals, tracking progress and retooling efforts. 4. We need international assistance in responding to outbreaks of highly infectious disease and controlling public health events of international concern. 5. We need political leadership to ensure joined up multi-sectoral leadership to prioritize and build in a concern for population health across all sectors.
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 49
CONCLUSION AND THE WAY AHEAD Closing remarks on the behalf of Habitat Norway, Oddrun Helen Hagen On behalf of the board of Habitat Norway I will like to inform shortly about Habitat Norway’s work and why we are here today. As Laila Bohkari said, our conferences give input to both Norway’s Urban agenda, and to Norway’s input to Habitat III. And the aim of Habitat Norway is to promote the interest and awareness of global urban challenges and settlement issues – as we have done today. With the upcoming Habitat III conference we expect to see a new global commitment to address these issues – and of course also a Norwegian commitment. So what can a small Norwegian non-governmental organization do? Habitat Norway has only about 30 members, but an active board, all working on voluntary basis. Financially support from the Ministry of Foreign affairs and NORAD has made it possible for us to host three conferences during the last year. Today’s conference “Who owns the city” is the last one out of these three. We are proud that we in these conferences have gathered people with knowledge who can inform us and share their experiences about urban challenges. Erik Solheim said in his video that “Urban areas are the hope of humanity”. And Joan Clos continued that “The city is where people from different background can live together”. The cities are to be denser, smarter – but as we have seen today, this has major impacts for a lot of the citizens. Good farmland is converted into new city areas built after the smart cities principles. But Yves Cabannes asks us how are we going to feed the people living in these cities? And he shows us examples of people who are evicted from their neighborhoods, and how this is affecting the global peace. We are proud that so many people have joined us both to learn about and to discuss the challenges we have addressed in these three conferences. We are especially happy to see many other NGOs present here today. As we know, the mission of the Habitat III conference is the adoption of the New Urban Agenda which were recently agreed upon. Habitat Norway will be represented in Quito. After Quito, Habitat Norway will focus on sharing information about the outcome and the implementation of the global standards for sustainable urban development. Next week Habitat Norway will adopt a strategy for our work for the next 5 years. The aim is to continue to share good examples that target urban challenges by hosting new conferences, evening meetings and by sharing knowledge and information on our digital platforms. Habitat Norway is an organization with limited resources. In our strategy, we emphasize the importance of collaborating with other organizations, companies and initiatives and we want to be even more active in this approach. And by looking at the list of participants here to today, I am sure that this part of our strategy is very important. As Rose said, “as partners we
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
50 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
can get the needed resources to help the poor”. Because together we are stronger, have more resources and can make changes. With both the eagerness from the board and by the interest we have seen from the participants at these three conferences, I believe that there will be a good chance for us to continue to be a central and active part for promoting and sharing up to date information about the New Urban Agenda, but also about different urban trends and themes. I therefore ask you to continue supporting us in our work, either as members, collaborating partners or as participants in our activities. In that way we can continue our work. Thank you.
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 51
ENCLOSURE Final draft programme Norway’s Habitat Day 2016: “Who owns the City? Inclusion and Exclusion. Some global challenges” Key words: urban/peri urban, cities, slums/informal settlements, speculation/investments, evictions, gentrification, public space, land value capture, funding mechanisms, entrepreneurs, climate, conflict. Key players: National governments/local governments, UN/UN Habitat, UNEP, IMF/World Bank, Regional banks, bilateral/multilateral agencies, NGOs/INGOs/urban social movements, land owners, speculators/investors, developers, households, real estate agents, financiers, architects, lawyers/ consultants, financial institutions, growth coalitions, slum lords. Key contexts: globali-sation, neo–liberalism, Nordic welfare state, enabling city, shrinking city, mega city/meta city, slums/informal settlements, fantasy cities, entrepreneurial/managerial cities. 09.15 OPENING – The Norwegian challenges for Habitat III Erik Berg, Chair, Habitat Norway, Norway - facing the urban world Laila Bokhari, State secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs 09.35 INTRODUCTIONS: Erik Solheim, Executive Director, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP); The City and the Environment.The challenges of finance, food, fuel and floods (climate). The role of UNEP in the/a New urban agenda? (Prerecorded statement) And Juan Clos, Executive Director, United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN Habitat), The challenge of city planning, housing, land speculation, urban poverty, slum evictions, climate change and conflict. The role of UN Habitat in the/a New urban agenda? (Prerecorded) 10.00 KEY NOTE SPEECHES Cihan Uzuncarsilioglu, Independent researcher and activist, Turkey: Urban land speculation and corruption. The case of Istanbul in a neo liberal world system. What facilitates and who are the stakeholders? How to fight challenges on local, national and global levels? The role of the/a New Urban Agenda? Questions and Discussion 10.45 Yves Cabannes, former chair, UN Action Group against Forced Evictions (AGFE). The challenge of slum evictions in a neo liberal world. The entrepreneurial city - inclusion versus exclusion. How to approach challenges, locally, nationally and internationally? The role of the /a New urban agenda Questions and Discussion 11. 30 COFFEE/TEA – BREAK FOR “BITINGS”
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
52 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
12.00 Rose Molokoane, FED UP, South Africa; The strategies, tactics and activities of the excluded (slum/street dwellers, homeless, waste pickers, home workers, textile workers) How to promote peoples’ social, economic and ecological inclusion. The role of the/a New urban agenda? Questions and Discussion 12.45 NORWAY AND THE/A NEW URBAN AGENDA – WHAT DO WE EXPECT? THE FOLLOW UP IN NORWEGIAN FOREIGN/DEVELOPMENT POLICY. Comments from: Asker kommune, SPIRE, Statens kartverk, LNU, NIBR, Norges Røde Kors, NTNU, NIKU, Flyktninghjelpen, EAT, Norsk Folkehjelp, Fellesrådet for Afrika, Rodeo arkitekter, NORAD. 14.00 CONCLUSION AND THE WAY AHEAD – QUITO AND AFTER Deputy Director Anne B. Tvinnereim, NORAD, Oddrun Hagen – Habitat Norway, Thibaut Nguyen, UN Habitat – Representative for Europe
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 53
Participants Navn/Name Organization/Company
Alfredo Biamont Utrop avisen
Anders Ripegutu Stiftelsen Abilsø gård
Anja Stokkan
Anna Skibevaag Habitat Norway
Anne Wodstrup Urba AS
Ansa jørgensen Rødekors
Audun Engh INTBAU Scandinavia
Austen Davis Norad
Barbara Ascher PhD candidate AHO
Brage Vagli Østbye
Camilla lied NIBR
Cathrine Furuholmen Nasjonalmuseet-avd. arkitektur
Christian Schøien Kirkens Nødhjelp
Cihan Bayal Independent researcher and activist
Cornelis Horn Evensen Norsk institutt for kulturminneforskning (NIKU)
Dana Jdid Plan og bygningsetaten
David Benjamin better, Inc.
Diana Huynh University of Cambridge
Einar Braathen NIBR/Høyskolen i Oslo
Einar Braathen Norwegian Institute for Urban and Regional Research (NIBR)
Eivind Lilleaasen Stiftelsen Abilsø Gård
Elin Bergstrøm EAT
Ellen Marie Hansen Fellesrådet for Afrika
Emily Norford EAT
Erica Caballero
Erik Berg Habitat Norway
Erik Toresen Bærum Kommune
Fredrik Drevon Journalist
Gorm Heen Mentale Modeller
Gro Lauvland NTNU/selvstendig næringsdrivende
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
54 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
György Ängelkott Bocz Gaia Arkitekter
Hans Edvardsen Oslo kommune
Hans Skotte NTNU
Heidi Ruokojärvi sosionom
Henrik Lindblom Geomatikk
Hilde Rognlien Spire
Jens Noach Spol architects
Joakim gitlestad Spire - Byutvalget
Jørn C. Øwre Norwegian Refugee Council
Juan Manuel Real Árgola Arquitectos. Madrid.
Julio Perez Gaia Oslo as
June Fylkesnes UNDP Oslo Governance Centre
June Welo
Kirsti Stuvøy NMBU
Kjersti Børve Skjelbreid NMBU, Institutt for landskapsplanlegging
Kjersti Grut Habitat Norway
Laila Bokhari Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Leif Thoring Oslo Urban Peace Week (OUPW)
Lene Conradi Asker kommune
Lillin Knudtzon Norges Miljø- og biovitenskapelige universitet
Magnus Boysen Private
Malin Kock Hansen Nordic Innovation
Mari Boysen Student at NBMU
Maria Lodin Kartverket
Marianne Gjørv Klima- og miljødepartementet
Marianne Millstein NIBR
Marte Randby Steinskog Spire
May Sommerfelt Shelter Norway
Melissa Murphy Nmbu
Minati Bye
Miriam odden Byutvalget i Spire
Mona Helland Kommunal og moderniseringsdepartementet
NIna A. Brattvoll
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 55
Nina F. Høyem Nasjonalmuseet
Noemi Fuentes Various Architects
Odd Iglebæk Habitat Norway
Oddrun H. Hagen Habitat Norway/Transportøkonomisk Institutt
Olaf Christian Olsen Privat
Ole Pedersen Nedenfra - senter for medvirkning og byutvikling
Øystein Marmøy Private
Peter Munck Children at Risk Foundation - Kolibri
Ralph Endemann endeARCHITEKTUR
Rolee Aranya NTNU, Trondheim
Rose Molokoane FED UP
S. Larsen
Saba Loftus EAT Foundation
Silvia Mete NMBU-Universitetet i Ås
Sudhvir Singh EAT
Susana Biamon Norsk Folkehjelp Oslo, Oasen
Svein Lang Shelter Norway
Sven Erik Svensen Habitat Norway
Svenn Larsen KFUK-KFUM Global
Therese Staal Brekke
Thibaut Nguyen Habitat III Secretariat
Tone Vesterhus Habitat Norge
Tore Kjøsterud Habitat Norway
Torstein S. Throndsen Universitetet i Oslo
Trond Vedeld NIBR
Ulf Flink NRC
Vendula Hurnikova SUM UiO/Tvergastein
Viktoria Torp Sergiev Student
Yves Cabannes University College of London
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
56 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
The Oslo Statement on the “New Urban Agenda” “An Improved Global Urban Policy for Sustainable Development”. Statement from “The Oslo Urban Knowledge and Policy Conference”, 25 April 20162
We, the participants of «The urban knowledge and policy conference» in Oslo, have discussed some of the preconditions for global sustainable, urban development with focus on the three e’s: ecology, economy and equity. We would like to make our recommend- ations known to Norwegian and international participants in the process leading up to the “New urban agenda”(NUA) to be finally adopted at the UN Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III), Quito, Ecuador, 17-20 October 2016. With the majority of the world’s population increasingly living in cities, it will have implications for foreign and development policy priorities. Cities are in their own right becoming distinct and separate social, economic and political actors that both impact and depend on regional and global surroundings. This implies that political stakeholders need to select approaches where urban perspectives are integrated and where knowledge about the many functions of urbanisation becomes a condition to do the right things rightly. Strengthened globalisation and neo-liberalism increase competition between cities. Fragmentation in cities increases as well. Cities need more power and autonomy through devolution to regulate the market, limit corruption and speculation. Improved governance, stronger popular participation, social cohesion and conflict prevention needs to be facilitated. The nation state-local partnership needs to be strengthened through development and implementation of national urban policies. It could be argued that global, undemocratic finance institutions neglect poverty orientation and force poorer countries to do the same. Global civil society could have an impact on this. A policy that does not relate to global megatrends like urbanisation quickly becomes irrelevant and ineffective. Important challenges are: Population Today more than half the world’s population, approximately 3.7 million, live in cities. In 2050 probably 7 billion of 9.6 billion will live here. Historically, such increases were caused by migration. During the course of this century cities own, natural growth will become stronger. But as urbanisation gives women opportunities for paid employment, the rates of fertility will be reduced and less children born. People are migrating from countryside to cities looking for a better life, economically and socially. They are forced off their land because of technological development, unfavourable agricultural policies/prices and natural disasters. Or, as result of wars and acts of violence. At the same time the urban ecology is threatened by provision of inappropriate urban infrastructure destroying natural habitat, causing losses in biodiversity and eco-systems. The Conference will underscore that urban development promotes rural development and vice versa. A growing urban
2 The draft “Oslo statement” was initially prepared by Habitat Norway’s board. It has been elaborated based on plenary and group discussions during the “Knowledge and policy conference” 25 April. Habitat Norway is solely responsible for content and distribution.
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 57
economy results in increased demand for food crops and agricultural products. Diversification of agricultural production is necessary to stimulate economic growth and avoid one-sided production of raw materials. This would reduce migration to larger cities. Urban natural habitat, biodiversity and ecosystems need protection. Particularly in the Global South, growth in large and very large cities will become even more significant. 70% of the world’s urban population will in 2050 live in non-western cities; many in mega cities with more than 10 million inhabitants and some in meta cities with more than 20 million. 75% of the world’s urban population will however continue to live in medium sized and smaller cities with less than 500.000 inhabitants. Many of these cities lack modern physical, economic and social infrastructure. The Conference would emphasize the importance of prioritizing such (intermediate) cities with regard to investments, technological, economic and social development. Global slum population In 1990 UN Habitat reported that 650 million people lived in slums. In 2014 this figure had increased to 863 million. The United Nations reports a figure of 1 billion in 2016. A significant feature related to the present development of cities is that the gap between rich and poor inhabitants is growing. Inequality creates more poverty. Vast urban population groups are increasingly excluded from a social and economic productive life. Two million people annually have to leave their homes because of forced evictions. Children and youth loose lifelong opportunities. The Conference will maintain that international and national legislation needs to be strengthened in order to secure safe housing for people. A significant part of new urban policies would be to secure permanent permits of stay and work in order for people to decide their own long term future. The “urban” endeavours of the United Nations Human Rights Council - in particular the functions of the “Special Rapporteur on adequate housing”-need strengthening. Effective, urban governance systems promoting accountability, transparency and rule of law are necessary. Development assistance should increasingly favour urban poor within a citywide perspective. In this context ethnic groups and indigenous people represent challenges and opportunities. Land issues People with limited resources cannot choose where they want to live. They are forced into surroundings where environmental conditions are at its worse and living costs minimal. Ownership is unclear, insufficiently regulated and poor people rent housing without rights. One of the most critical issues in growing cities is lack of land for housing pur- poses at affordable price. Approximately ¼ of the world’s population (1.7 billion) are without landed property. The Conference is of the opinion that NUA should promote property forms that include collective, individual, traditional, formal and informal solutions. This would imply strengthened legal protection against forced evictions, destruction, assault and other deprivations. Free legal aid systems need to be upgraded and speculation in land stopped trough strengthened international and national legislation. Increased person/enterprise taxation of empty houses, vacant land and informal enterprise is necessary based on effective public registration systems. The social and ecological functions of land need to be promoted.
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
58 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
Housing During the coming 35 years cities would have to provide housing for 2 billion more people. New homes will have to be built and old ones upgraded. 60% of the building stock in 2050 are not yet constructed. Financing and development of land, infrastructure, housing and basic services could form basis for future economic and social development. Globally, during the last decades a significant liberalization of the finance and housing market has taken place. This development has made it more expensive and insecure to live in many cities. Today 1.6 billion people lack sufficient housing. 100 million are homeless. Another 60 million are forced out of their homes because of failure to pay debts. The Conference will underscore that a precondition for efficient, future housing development implies that poor people get secure access to land where they live. Particularly in inner parts of cities. Housing finance would have to base itself on self - organisation, own contributions and support from public funding arrangements. Globally, lack of effective housing finance is a significant limitation in the work against inequality and poverty. Norway/ the Nordic countries, based on own historic experiences and knowledge, could through their membership in international finance institutions take initiatives to establish lobal, subsidized arrangements. At the same time, public management of housing needs to be simplified and corruption reduced. Urban challenges and social movements 14 million people lost their homes in the United States of America in 2008 as result of housing speculation and a subsequent finance crisis. In 2015 Spain had 3.6 million empty housing units. Barcelona comprised 130000 homeless. Increasing parts of cities’ resources are privatised and made available for sale and profit. Those who already own most take the best areas and build “gated communities”. Poorer parts of the population are forced away. The Conference will draw attention to the important role that urban grass-root movements are playing in organizing poorer population groups- in particular women - in slum and informal settlements. We express support to their struggle for urban public space and recommend that Norwegian and international development agencies increase direct assistance to their mobilization, organisation and participation for more equitable cities (SDI, Huairou Commission, WIEGO, ACHR ). Wars and armed conflict – the humanitarian challenge A total of 60 million people in the world today are forced from their homes because of war and persecution. 70% of all wars and conflicts evolves in urban areas. Kabul, Baghdad, Aleppo, Gaza and Mogadishu are continuous war scenes. The Conference would underline the need for the international humanitarian system to increasingly adopt their work to urban situations in all phases of a situation. Greater knowledge and understanding of the local scene is a prerequisite. Refugees and migrants need to be integrated more efficiently in planning and implementation of measures through local institutions and organisations to relieve and rebuild own neigh-bourhoods better. International humanitarian assistance should be increased and more long term oriented. To promote a regenerative understanding of use of material, energy, water and consumption is important.
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 59
Women/Gender Among the urban poor women led households are the poorest; between 30% and 50% of them live in slum and informal settlements. It is women and their children that suffer most from lack of basic services and insecurity in slums. Women are at the same time important players in the informal economy with household and neighbourhood as prime contexts. The Conference will emphasize that opportunities for female organization, social participation and paid employment are considerable in slum areas. International, national and local authorities should promote an urban gender perspective in their development approaches, including equal roles for men and women in planning and implementation. The principles of same salary for same work, safe work conditions and right to organize need to be observed. It is essential that LGBT groups get a central role in the global struggle for gender equality. Public and private stakeholders at all levels need to prioritize women’s safety and security in cities. Elderly people During the coming 15 years it is assumed that the number of elderly people above 60 years of age will increase with 56% from 901 million in 2015 to 1.4 billion in 2030. One fourth of the world’s urban population is today above 50. The rights of elderly people are neglected for instance in social and physical planning. They are considered unproductive and subsequently not important. The Conference agrees with the “leave no behind” principle adopted by the UN-SDG conference in New York, September 2015. It is relevant for and benefits all marginalized groups. Elderly people can play an important role to develop and implement NUA. Norway can contribute to this by directly involving relevant Norwegian organisations for elderly people. Young people Reduced child mortality, but continuous high fertility have created a population situation in the Global South where the majority consists of children and young people. In Africa approximately 40% of the population is below 14 and almost 70% below 30. Of all slum dwellers half is below 18. In a situation with vast and increasing un-employment the transition from young to adult becomes difficult. Young women are particularly vulnerable. For them unemployment for instance in the Middle East and North Africa is double compared to young men. Young people possesses inherent qualities to promote positive development both for themselves and their societies. To secure good, relevant education and decent work is important to realize this potential. Badly educated and unemployed urban young people are an increasing security risk globally. The Conference will underscore that it is important that international, national and local governments in their engagement for young people give priority to vulnerable and age groups in transition. It is necessary to facilitate children and youth’s participation and influence in voluntary organisations, local government and educational institutions. To create employment for urban youth is a particular challenge that will have to be prioritised politically at all levels. It is also important to promote young peoples’- in particular girls’ - sport and outdoor activities through establishing green areas, parks and safe transport systems for all. The Environmental Challenge It is not incidental that the environment is the most important global challenge as the world becomes more and more urban. Today’s urbanisation is causing less sustainable production and consumption patterns particularly in poorer circumstances resulting among others in obesity problems. Sub-standard housing quality in
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
60 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
densely populated areas also contributes to vast health problems and early death. Housing density increases the frequency of transferable diseases whereas air pollution caused by traffic, industry and cooking threatens the health of many. It results in higher mortality than malaria, HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis combined. Lack of safe drinking water and bad sanitary conditions annually cause the death of 1.5 to 2 million children. In all cities major measures need to be implemented to reduce dangerous air emissions, promoting environmentally sound energy use and creating increased security in transport and road traffic. The Conference will point to the fact that urbanisation offers many opportunities to reduce impacts on ecosystems through “urban sustainability maximizers”. These are efforts and processes where increased population density shrinks the ecological footprint through reduced land use, material and energy consumption. We will recommend that such approaches are used to reduce pollution and related health problems. Environment friendly, accessible and affordable transport solutions exists - e.g. bicycling, walking and mass transport- and should be taken into use. Urban health is a theme of central importance for discussions and follow up of NUA –globally, national and locally. Climate 70-80% of global energy use and related CO2 emissions come from urban areas. Urbanisation and climate change are two sides of the same coin. The sources of city greenhouse gas emissions are directly related to transport of humans, commodities, building of infrastructure and production; and indirectly to light, heating and air condition in buildings. The Conference will emphasize the importance of implementing the UN climate goals. And that the global development community provides sufficient resources for this. Contributions from international climate funds should be made available to city authorities and civil society organisations on concessional terms. Building of new cities needs to be based on principles of local climate adaption and mitigation. Natural disasters 90% of the world’s most populous cities are situated in regions exposed to extreme weather conditions. Many lies in earthquake areas. 360 million live in cities less than 10 meters above sea level. Social structures in poorer parts of cities are often weak with insecure and marginal living conditions. This contributes even further to weaken the ability to meet emergency situations. The Conference advocates a strengthened role for cities, inhabitants, institutions and organisations-not only states-to prevent risks and promote increased resilience in relation to natural disasters. It is necessary that Norwe- gian and international stakeholders- both government and voluntary- strengthen their urban knowledge, preparedness and humanitarian support through all recovery stages. Public spaces In the struggle for public spaces – pavements, streets, places, parks, railway stations, airports etc. – new, marginalized groups are organizing themselves, also globally. They are local business- and market men/- women, street vendors, garbage pickers, homeless and slum dwellers. Cultural heritage in cities – both material and immaterial – has important identity promoting functions. At the same time they imply a considerable employment and income generating potential also for deprived groups. The Conference will strongly encourage the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its Agency for International Development as well as relevant Norwegian civil society organisations, to support the development of urban, social movements and their work. Promoting cultural heritage in cities needs to be integrated in poverty reduction contexts by all relevant
HABITAT NORWAY 2016 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives 61
stakeholder organisations, in particular UNESCO and the World Bank. We encourage the Ministry, in cooperation with the Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research (NIKU), to advocate such perspectives nationally and internationally. CONCLUSION In order to promote global, sustainable urban development where ecology, economy and equity considerations are observed, the Conference will encourage the Government of Norway to actively follow up and fund Habitat III/NUA. The proposed Parliamentary Whitepaper on urban development should include an analysis of global, urban trends and perspectives. It would be an important first step to define new roles and efforts also for Norway’s foreign and development policies. An urban diplomacy is required in particular with regard to promotion of Norwegian business interests. Increased financial contributions to UN Habitat’s, the World Bank’s, Cities Alliance’ and United Cities and Local Government’s normative and operational work are necessary. Today’s global “urban architecture” which these institutions are part of, needs upgrading, stronger coordination and democratization. Urban social movements have their own rationality and behaves differently from non - governmental organisations. It will be of particular future importance to support the development of new knowledge on what takes place in cities. This relates in particular to how market forces and power politics change the living conditions and security of inhabitants. Specific urban humanitarian challenges exist today that are not catered for. To utilize opportunities to learn from cities that improve conditions through participatory approaches will be important. Habitat Norway could play an important role in promoting Norwegian urban knowledge and policy engagement. Finally, we would like to thank all conference participants, the MFA and NORAD for constructively participating in building the road to Quito, Habitat III - and after.
HABITAT NORWAY SEPTEMBER 2016
62 Who owns the city? Exclusion and inclusion – some global perspectives
Fra Buenos Aires
Not member of Habitat Norway? Please join. The most important of all small organizations in 2016 – the year of Habitat III.
www.habitat-norge.org
HABITAT NORWAY 2016