Background Papers on Un Habitat
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
BACKGROUND PAPER
ON
UN HABITAT
BY
AUGUST 2003 I N D E X
SECTION SUBJECT PAGE
Introduction…………………………………………………. 3
Un Habitat Organisation Chart …………………………… 4
1. Overview on Un-Habitat …………………………………. 5-7
2. Organisational Structure…..……………………………… 7-9
3. Executive Director..………………………………………… 9-11
4. Governing Council ………………………………………….. 11-15
5. Programmes …………….…………………………………… 16-66
6. Media & Events …………………………………………...... 66-69
Annexe 1………………………………………………………. 70-74
2 INTRODUCTION
The agencies of the United Nations system play an essential role supporting work for a more sustainable future for everyone. Stakeholder Forum carries out capacity building to ensure effective stakeholder involvement in enhancing the UN.
Stakeholder Forum works closely with a number of UN Agencies, UNEP, UNDP, UN Habitat and the UN Commission of the Economic and Social Council of the UN.
This report is to enable the members of the Network of Regional Government for Sustainable Development (NRG4SD) to get a better understanding of the work of UN Habitat.
It was complied with information taken from the UN Habitat website.
Aretha Moore, Stakeholder Forum.
Stakeholder Forum for Our Common Future 7 HOLYROOD STREET LONDON SE1 2EL Direct Number +44 (0) 207 089 4313 Tel: +44 (0) 20 7089 4300 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7089 4310 Email: [email protected] websites: www.stakeholderforum.org and www.earthsummit2002.org
3 UN HABITAT ORGANISATION
UN General Assembly
UN EcoSoc
Governments
UN Habitat UN Agencies Governing Council Working Group 1 Policy & Programme Matters
Committee of Permanent Working Group 2 Representatives Finance, Budget & Admin
Office of Executive Stakeholders Bureau Chief of Staff Director
The Shelter & The Regional & Sustainable Human The Monitoring & Technical Settlements Development Research Division Cooperation Division Division
4 1. OVERVIEW ON UN-HABITAT
Mandate
The United Nations Human Settlements Programme, UN-HABITAT, is the United Nations agency for human settlements. It is mandated by the UN General Assembly to promote socially and environmentally sustainable towns and cities with the goal of providing adequate shelter for all. The main documents outlining the mandate of the organization are the Vancouver Declaration on Human Settlements, Habitat Agenda, Istanbul Declaration on Human Settlements, the Declaration on Cities and Other Human Settlements in the New Millennium, and Resolution 56/206 The agency's 2002-2003 budget is US$300 million and comes from four main sources - 80 per cent in the form of contributions from multilateral and bilateral partners for technical cooperation, 10 percent in earmarked contributions from governments and other partners, including local authorities and foundations, with 5 per cent from the regular UN budget and 5 per cent in the form of voluntary contributions from governments.
History
In 1978, when Habitat was established, after a meeting in Vancouver known as Habitat I, urbanisation and its impacts were less significant on the agenda of United Nations that had been created over three decades earlier, when two- thirds of humanity was still rural. From 1978 to 1997, with meagre support and an unfocused mandate, Habitat struggled almost alone among multi-lateral organizations to prevent and ameliorate problems stemming from massive urban growth, especially among cities of the developing world.
From 1997 to 2002, by which time half the world had become urban, UN- HABITAT – guided by the Habitat Agenda and the Millennium Declaration – underwent a major revitalisation, using its experience to identify emerging priorities for sustainable urban development and to make needed course corrections.
In 1996, the United Nations held a second conference on cities, Habitat II, in Istanbul, Turkey to assess two decades of progress since Vancouver and set fresh goals for the new millennium. Adopted by 171 countries, the political document that came out of this “City Summit” is known as the Habitat Agenda and contains over 100 commitments and 600 recommendations. On 1 January 2002, the agency’s mandate was strengthened and its status elevated to that of a fully-fledged programme of the UN system in UN General Assembly Resolution A/56/206. (Prior to this it was known as the centre for Human Settlement). Key recommendations and fine tuning of the agenda are now underway as strategy clusters for achieving the urban development and shelter goals and targets of the Millennium Declaration - the United Nations’ development agenda for the next 15 to 20 years. The revitalisation has placed UN-HABITAT squarely in the mainstream of the UN’s development agenda for
5 poverty reduction with a more streamlined and effective structure and staff and more relevant and focused set of programmes and priorities.
It is through this agenda that UN-HABITAT contributes to the overall objective of the United Nations system to reduce poverty and promote sustainable development. Its partners range from governments and local authorities to a wide international cross-section of Non-Governmental Organisations and civil society groups.
The Challenge
The United Nations Millennium Declaration recognises the dire circumstances of the world’s urban poor. It articulates the commitment of Member States to improve the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers by the year 2020 – Target 11 of Goal No.7 – a task mandated to UN-HABITAT. (The Millennium Declaration was adopted by the UN member states in the year 2000. It contains eight Millennium Development Goals (MDG)1 ranging from poverty reduction, health, and gender equality to education and environmental sustainability. The MDG detail out 18 specific development targets, each of which has a target figure, a time frame, and indicators designed to monitor to what extend the target has been achieved. The target most closely related to UN-HABITAT's mission is Goal 7 Target 11 to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of 100 million slum dwellers by the year 2020.)
As large as 100 million may seem, however, it is only 10 per cent of the present worldwide slum population, which, if left unchecked, will multiply threefold to 3 billion by the year 2050. The challenge is made more daunting by the fact that, according to UN-HABITAT’s own research, the world’s slum population has already grown by 75 million in barely three years since the Millennium Declaration.
As our towns and cities grow at unprecedented rates setting the social, political, cultural and environmental trends of the world, sustainable urbanisation is one of the most pressing challenges facing the global community in the 21st century. In 1950, one-third of the world’s people lived in cities.
Just 50 years later, this proportion has risen to one-half and will continue to grow to two-thirds, or 6 billion people, by 2050. Cities are now home to half of humankind. They are the hub for much national production and consumption – economic and social processes that generate wealth and opportunity. But they also create disease, crime, pollution and poverty.
In many cities, especially in developing countries, slum dwellers number more than 50 per cent of the population and have little or no access to shelter, water, and sanitation. This is where UN-HABITAT is mandated to make a difference for the better.
1 Annexe 1 – Millennium Development Goals
6 Activities
UN-HABITAT runs two major worldwide campaigns – the Global Campaign on Urban Governance, and the Global Campaign for Secure Tenure. Through these campaigns and by other means, the agency focuses on a range of issues and special projects which it helps implement.
These include a joint UN-HABITAT/World Bank slum upgrading initiative called the Cities Alliance, promoting effective housing development policies and strategies, helping develop and campaigning for housing rights, promoting sustainable cities and urban environmental planning and management, post- conflict land-management and reconstruction in countries devastated by war or natural disasters. Others take in water and sanitation and solid waste management for towns and cities, training and capacity building for local leaders, ensuring that women’s rights and gender issues are brought into urban development and management policies, helping fight crime through UN- HABITAT’s Safer Cities Programme, research and monitoring of urban economic development, employment, poverty reduction, municipal and housing finance systems, and urban investment. It also helps strengthen rural- urban linkages, and infrastructure development and public service delivery.
UN-HABITAT also has some 154 technical programmes and projects in 61 countries around the world, most of them in the least developed countries. These include major projects in post-war societies such as Afghanistan, Kosovo, Somalia, Iraq, Rwanda, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, to name a few.
The agency’s operational activities help governments create policies and strategies aimed at strengthening a self-reliant management capacity at both national and local levels. They focus on promoting shelter for all, improving urban governance, reducing urban poverty, improving the living environment and managing disaster mitigation and post-conflict rehabilitation.
2. ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE
The Executive Director of UN-HABITAT is United Nations Under Secretary-General, Mrs Anna Tibaijuka. Headquartered in Nairobi, Kenya, with a team of some 200 international and local staff, the agency has regional offices for Asia and the Pacific in Fukuoka, Japan, for Latin America and the Caribbean in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and for Africa and the Arab States in Nairobi. The regional office for Eastern Europe and Transition Countries is also based in Nairobi.
The agency has three main divisions which each oversee a set of programmes:
The Shelter and Sustainable Human Settlements Development Division coordinates the agency’s global advocacy functions. Its departments are the Shelter Branch which focuses on the Global Campaign for Secure Tenure; the Water, Sanitation and Infrastructure Branch which promotes access to basic services and
7 raises awareness on water and sanitation mainly through the Water for African Cities programme, and the Water for Asian Cities programme; the Training and Capacity Building Branch which helps strengthen local authority and civil society management capacity through training and organisation development; and the Urban Development Branch which runs UN-HABITAT’s Global Campaign on Urban Governance. It also runs the Safer Cities Programme, the Urban Management Programme, the Risk and Disaster Management Programme, and a programme called Localising Agenda 21 which seeks to ensure crucial environmental issues are brought into urban development planning.
The Monitoring and Research Division. Also known as the Urban Secretariat, this division runs three programmes. The Monitoring Systems Branch that keeps a closely documented watch over the conditions of human settlements ranging from rights and policy issues, to the lessons learned through the Best Practices Programme and the Local Leadership Programme; the Policy Analysis, Synthesis and Dialogue Branch, which focuses on enhancing the agency’s policies and produces its two flagship reports; and the Urban Economy and Finance Branch which looks at employment issues in urban areas, especially the informal sector in developing nations, and ways of developing municipal and housing finance systems.
Monitoring
A key function of UN-HABITAT in fulfilling its mandate is the monitoring of global trends and conditions and the assessment of progress in implementing the Habitat Agenda at the international, regional, national and local levels.
The monitoring function is done through two main instruments:
Global Urban Observatory and Statistics and Best Practices. By working at all levels and with all relevant stakeholders and partners, the agency contributes to linking policy development and capacity-building activities with a view to promoting cohesive and mutually reinforcing social, economic and environmental policies. On the request from the Human Settlements Commission the agency has devised a monitoring system.
The UN-HABITAT monitoring system has three main components:
The Statistics Programme which regularly collects data from member countries and cities
The Urban Indicator Programme which regularly collects indicators from more than 200 cities
The Best Practices Programme, which has compiled over 1,100 best practice cases in 600 cities
The agency is participating in tracking Millennium Declaration goals by providing 4 indicators and slum index based on them for Goal 7, target 11. Those indicators are:
Percentage of people with access to sanitation
8 Percentage of people with access to safe water Percentage of people with secure tenure Percentage of people in permanent housing/dwelling
The Regional and Technical Cooperation Division responsible for implementing the agency’s technical cooperation programmes and projects around the world. It oversees the regional offices.
Oversight
Every two years, the agency’s work and relationships with its partners are examined in detail by Governing Council. It is a high-level forum of governments at which guidelines and its budget are established for the next two-year period.
This Governing Council then reports back to the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) which coordinates the work of all the United Nations 14 specialised agencies. The governments have representatives in Nairobi with whom senior agency officials meet regularly throughout the year in the Committee of Permanent Representatives (CPR).
3. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Mrs Anna Kajumulo Tibaijuka
Mrs Anna Kajumulo Tibaijuka was appointed The Executive Director of UN-HABITAT in September 2000.
A Tanzanian national, Mrs Tibaijuka holds a Doctorate of Science in Agricultural Economics from the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences in Uppsala. Prior to joining Habitat, Mrs Tibaijuka was the Special Coordinator for Least Developed Countries, Landlocked and Small Island Developing Countries at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).
In this role, Mrs Tibaijuka was responsible for strengthening the capacity of LDCs in trade negotiations with the World Trade Organisation.
From 1993 to 1998, when she joined UNCTAD, Mrs. Tibaijuka was Associate Professor of Economics at the University of Dar-es-Salaam. During this period she was also a member of the Tanzanian Government delegation to several United Nations Summits including the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Istanbul, 1996); the World Food Summit (Rome 1996); the Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing 1995) and the World Summit for Social Development (Copenhagen, 1995).
9 At these conferences, Mrs Tibaijuka was an active member of the Civil Society and NGO Forums. At the World Food Summit in Rome, she was elected Coordinator for Eastern Africa in the Network for Food Security, Trade and Sustainable Development (COASAD). Mrs Tibaijuka has also been a Board Member of UNESCO's International Scientific Advisory Board since November 1997.
Dedicated to the role, and rights, of women in development, Mrs. Tibaijuka is the founding Chairperson of the Tanzanian National Women's Council (BAWATA), an independent, non-politically aligned, organisation advocating for women's rights to land, inheritance and social services.
Mrs Tibaijuka is also founding Chairperson of the Barbro Johansson Girls Education Trust which is dedicated to promoting high standards of education amongst girls in Tanzania and in Africa.
Mrs Tibaijuka was also the convener of Tanzania’s Local Entrepreneurs Initiative (TALE), a voluntary group mobilising and assisting Tanzanians to form joint venture companies with overseas investors. She has been a Board Member of the Tanzania Economic Policy Development and Management Foundation and is a Director of a number of private companies dedicated to encouraging entrepreneurship and efficiency in the marketing of agricultural commodities.
Mrs Tibaijuka has undertaken extensive research on agriculture, rural development and human settlements policy; trade and marketing, cooperative development and aid policy; welfare economics with a focus on education, health and nutrition, water and food security; women in development; and tropical agriculture and environmental economics. She has published five books and numerous articles and papers. Her books include: Strategies for Smallholder Agricultural Development in Kagera region, Tanzania (Agricultural University, Uppsala, 1979); Tanzania's Priority Social Action Programme (Dar-es-Salaam University Press, 1993); Poverty and Social Exclusion in Tanzania (ILO, International Institute for Labour Studies, 1996); The Social Services Crisis of the 1990s (Ashgare Publishing Ltd, London, 1998).
Mrs Anna Tibaijuka speaks English, Swahili, Haya, Swedish and some French. She is a widow and has four children.
USEFUL CONTACTS AT UN-HABITAT Rolf Wichmann UN-HABITAT Office of the Executive Director Chief, Office of the Executive Director UN-HABITAT P.O. Box 67553 P.O. Box 30030 NAIROBI Nairobi, Kenya Tel: 254-2-623066
10 Fax: 254-2-623919 Tel: (254 20) 623120 Mobile Telephone: 254-733-841733 Fax: (254 20) 623477 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Mary-Anne Ouma-Mbasro Jochen Eigen Office of the Executive Director (OED) Chief, Technical Advisory Branch United Nations Human Settlements UN-Habitat, Nairobi Programme Tel: 254-2-623226 Fax: 254-2-624264 Tel: 254 -2- 623 125 e-mail: [email protected] Cellular: (254) 721 485 673 Fax: 254- 2- 623 919/ 254 -2- 624 325 Charles Wambua Email: Mary-Anne.Ouma- Best Practices & Local Leadership [email protected] Programme UN-HABITAT, P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: 254 20 624981, Fax: 254 20 623080 E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]
11 4. THE GOVERNING COUNCIL
In its resolution 56/206 of 21 December 2001, the General Assembly decided to transform the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements into the United Nations Human Settlements Programme, UN-HABITAT. The Assembly also decided, in the same resolution, to transform the Commission on Human Settlements to the Governing Council of the United Nations Human Settlements Programme, UN- HABITAT. The Governing Council, which was also made into a subsidiary body of the General Assembly, reports to the General Assembly through the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and provides overall policy guidance, direction and supervision to UN-HABITAT. The objectives, functions and responsibilities of the Governing Council are set out in General Assembly resolution 32/162 and in paragraph 222 of the Habitat Agenda. Each UN Region elects to the Governing Council.
Membership ASIAN STATES (13)
AFRICAN STATES (16) Bangladesh (2004) China (2004) Algeria (2003) India (2003) Benin (2003) Indonesia (2006) Burkina Faso (2006) Iran, Islamic Republic of (2006) Burundi (2006) Iraq (2004) Democratic Republic of the Congo Japan (2006) (2006) Jordan (2003) Egypt (2004) Malaysia (2003) Ethiopia (2004) Pakistan (2006) Guinea (2004) Philippines (2003) Kenya (2003) Sri Lanka (2003) Madagascar (2004) United Arab Emirates (2004) Malawi (2006) Morocco (2003) WESTERN EUROPEAN AND OTHER STATES Sierra Leone (2006) (13) Senegal (2006) Uganda (2003) Austria (2004) United Republic of Tanzania (2004) Belgium (2004) France (2004) LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN Germany (2003) STATES (10) Greece (2003) Italy (2004) Argentina (2006) Netherlands (2006) Barbados (2003) Norway (2003) Brazil (2006) Spain (2003) Ecuador (2006) Sweden (2004) Chile (2006) Turkey (2006) Colombia (2003) United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Haiti (2004) Ireland (2006) Jamaica (2004) United States of America (2006) Mexico (2003)
12 Trinidad and Tobago (2004) Bureau Members The Following Officers were elected EASTERN EUROPEAN STATES (6) Chairman: Croatia (2003) Mr. Sid-Ali Ketrandji, Algeria Czech Republic (2003) Poland (2006) Vice-chairmen: Republic of Moldova (2004) Mr.S.K. Bhattacharya, Bangladesh Russian Federation (2006) Mr. Jose Luis Casal, Argentina The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (2004) Rapporteur Mr. Osman Mengu Buyukdavras, Turkey
The Committee of Permanent Representatives (CPR)
The Committee of Permanent Representatives (CPR) to the United Nations Human Settlements Programme, UN-HABITAT, serves as the inter-sessional subsidiary body of the Governing Council. Its terms of reference are as follows:
1. To review and monitor, within the policy and budgetary framework provided by the Governing Council, the implementation of the work programme of UN- HABITAT as well as the implementation of decisions of the Governing Council;
2. To review the draft work programme and budget of UN-HABITAT during their preparations;
3. To prepare draft decisions and resolutions for consideration by the Governing Council; and
4. To meet at least four times in a year with the participation of the Executive Director of UN-HABITAT.
Membership of the CPR comprises all Member states accredited to the United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT).
Bureau Members
The Bureau of the CPR is composed of five members, representing the five regional groups of the United Nations who are elected on a rotational basis to serve two-year terms. The current composition of the Bureau for the biennium 2002-2003 is as follows: H.E. Mr. Subir Kumar Bhattacharyya, Chair of the CPR and Permanent Representative of Bangladesh to UN-HABITAT (Asian Group); H.E. Mr. Jose Luis Casal, Vice-chair of the CPR and Permanent Representative of Argentina to UN-HABITAT (Latin American and the Caribbean Group);
13 H.E. Mr. L.M. Makhubela, Vice-chair of the CPR and Permanent Representative of South Africa to UN-HABITAT (African Group); H.E. Mr. Wojciech Jasinski, Vice-chair of the CPR and Permanent Representative of Poland to UN-HABITAT (Eastern European Group); and H.E. Mr. Varol Özkoçak Rapporteur of the CPR and Permanent Representative of Turkey to UN-HABITAT (Western European and Others Group). *Pending the election of the nominee of the Asia and Pacific Group.
Working Groups: The CPR has two formal Working Groups, which normally meet once or twice a month. These are:
The Working Group on Policy and Programme Matters, which is chaired by H.E. Mr. Wojciech Jasinski, Permanent Representative of Poland to UN- HABITAT, and The Working Group on Finance, Budget and Administrative Matters, which is chaired by H.E. Mr. L.M. Makhubela, Permanent Representative of South Africa to UN-HABITAT.
Special Working Groups In addition to these two Working Groups, the CPR may also establish ad hoc Working Groups to deal with specific issues. Currently, two Working Groups have been established by the CPR, and these are:
a. The Working Group on Preparation of Draft Resolutions for the nineteenth session of the Governing Council. Chair: H.E. Mr. Jose Luis Casal, Permanent Representative of Argentina to UN-HABITAT.
b. The Working Group on Policy and Programme Matters. Chair: H.E. Mr. Wojciech Jasinski, Permanent Representative of Poland to UN-HABITAT.
Rapporteur for both Working Groups: Mrs. Magdalene Williams, Deputy Permanent Representative of South Africa to UN-HABITAT.
Inter-Agency
In implementing the Habitat Agenda, UN-HABITAT cooperates with other organizations and specialized agencies of the United Nations system, including the five regional commissions (Economic Commission for Africa, Economic Commission for Europe, Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, Economic and Social Commission for Western Africa, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific), as well as with inter-governmental organizations such as the Commonwealth Secretariat, African Union, African Development Bank, Asian Development Bank, Caribbean Community, European Union, Organization of American States and Shelter Afrique.
Paragraphs 210 and 211 of the Habitat Agenda emphasize that the implementation of the Habitat Agenda should take place within a coordinated framework, in
14 collaboration with organizations of the United Nations, including the Bretton Woods institutions, regional and sub-regional Development banks and Funds, and inter- governmental organizations. This emphasis on inter agency cooperation in the implementation of the Habitat Agenda is reaffirmed in paragraphs 1-4 of Part Three of GA resolution 56/20 entitled "Strengthening the mandate and status of the Commission on Human Settlements and the status, role and functions of the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat)."
Goal: To promote cooperation in the implementation of the Habitat Agenda and to address the global challenges of Human Settlement issues through collaboration with UN organizations and agencies and with inter-governmental bodies and other UN- HABITAT agenda partners.
Documents: Inter-Agency coordination reports:
Current Previous UNEP-UN-HABITAT cooperation Resolutions
Contact Secretary to the Governing Council
Mr. Joseph Mungai Secretary to the Governing Council and Chief, External Relations and Inter-Agency Affairs UN-HABITAT P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya Tel No.: (254 20) 623133/623132/623131 Fax No.: (254 20) 624175/624250 Email: [email protected]
15 5. PROGRAMMES
5.1 Best Practices & Local Leadership Partners: The Best Practices and Local Leadership Programme (BLP) was established in 1997 in response to the call of the Habitat Agenda to make use of information and networking in support of its implementation. It is a global network of government agencies, local authorities and their associations, professional and academic institutions and grassroots organisations dedicated to the identification and exchange of successful solutions for sustainable development.
BLP partners are specialised in such areas as housing and urban development, urban governance, environmental planning and management, architecture and urban design, economic development, social inclusion, crime prevention, poverty reduction, women, youth, cultural heritage, municipal finance and management, infrastructure and social services.
Objectives: The objective of the BLP is to raise awareness of decision-makers on critical social, economic and environmental issues and to better inform them of the practical means and policy options for improving the living environment. It does so by identifying, disseminating and applying lessons learned from Best Practices to ongoing training, leadership and policy development activities. Best Practices are actions that have made a lasting contribution to improving the quality of life and the sustainability of our cities and communities.
Key Clients and countries served: BLP products include: documented and peer- reviewed best practices, examples of good policies and enabling legislation, case studies and briefs and transfer methodologies. These products are destined for decision-makers and practising professionals at all levels of government and organised civil society. Media products, including videos and newspaper articles are developed for the general public.
Working methods: Every two years, up to 10 outstanding initiatives receive the Dubai International Award for Best Practices to Improve the Living Environment, a biennial environmental award established in 1995 by the Municipality of Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The Award system reviews and assesses best practice submissions through an independent technical committee and jury.
Flagship Products: Those initiatives meeting the criteria for a Best Practice are included in the Best Practices database. The lessons learned from selected best practices are analysed in case studies and guides and are transferred to other countries, cities or communities through peer-to-peer learning and city-to-city transfers.
The BLP works closely with Habitat’s Global Campaigns on Secure Tenure and Urban Governance on the Inclusive Cities Network. Together with Urban Indicators Programme, the BLP forms the Global Urban Observatory (GUO), UN-HABITAT’s facility for monitoring global trends in sustainable urban development and evaluating
16 progress in the implementation of the Habitat Agenda and Agenda 21.
The policy implications and lessons learned from Best Practices are incorporated into Habitat’s State of the World’s Cities report.
Contact:
The Co-ordinator Best Practices and Lessons Learned Urban Secretariat, UN-HABITAT P.O. 30030 Nairobi, Kenya Tel: 254-2-623029 Fax: 254-2-623080 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.sustainabledevelopment.org/blp Database: www.bestpractices.org
5.2 Cities Alliance
Why Was the Cities Alliance Formed?
To realise the vision of Cities Without Slums
The Cities Alliance was created to foster new tools, practical approaches and knowledge sharing to promote local economic development and a direct attack on urban poverty. Its activities support the implementation of the Habitat Agenda.
What Is the Cities Alliance?
A global alliance of cities and their development partners committed to improve the living conditions of the urban poor through action in two key areas:
City development strategies (CDS) which link the process by which local stakeholders define their vision for their city, analyse its economic prospects and establish clear priorities for actions and investments, and City-wide and nation-wide slum upgrading to improve the living conditions of at least 100 million slum dwellers by 2020 in accordance with the Cities Without Slums action plan.
The Cities Alliance was launched in 1999 with initial support from the World Bank and the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (UN-Habitat), the political heads of the four leading global associations of local authorities and 10 governments —Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, the UK and the US. The Asian Development Bank joined the Cities Alliance in March 2002. Alliance partners have joined forces to expand the level of resources reaching the urban poor, by improving the coherence of effort among on-going urban
17 programmes, and by more directly linking grant-funded urban development cooperation with investment follow-up.
The Cities Alliance
pools the resources and experience of Alliance partners to foster new tools, practical approaches and an exchange of knowledge to promote city development strategies, pro-poor policies and prosperous cities without slums; focuses on the city and its region rather than on sectors, recognising the importance of cities and local authorities in the social and economic success of a country; promotes partnerships between local and national governments, and those organisations directly representing the urban poor; promotes inclusive urban citizenship, which emphasises active consultation by local authorities with the urban poor, with time being taken to develop a shared vision for the city; looks to scale up solutions promoted by local authorities and the urban poor; encourages engaging slum dwellers as partners, not problems; promotes the role of women in city development; engages potential investment partners from the outset, encouraging the development of new public and private sector lending and investment instruments to expand the level of resources reaching local authorities and the urban poor, enabling them to build their assets and income.
Cities Without Slums
The Cities Without Slums initiative is a creative and daring response to urban poverty. Poverty reduction and upgrading of informal settlements will not be possible unless cities are productive and efficient and capable of providing the poor with economic opportunities to build their assets and incomes. - Nelson Mandela, patron of the Cities Without Slums action plan at its launch in December 1999.
The Cities Without Slums action plan sets an agenda and clear targets for improving the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers by 2020. It focuses on upgrading the most squalid, unhealthy and unserved urban slums and squatter settlements in the world. The Cities Without Slums action plan, a product of the Cities Alliance, has been endorsed at the highest political level internationally—by 150 heads of state and government— at the September 2000 UN Millennium Summit.
The plan also calls for:
Increasing investments aimed at provision of basic services to the urban poor; Leading a worldwide effort to move from pilot projects to city-wide and nation- wide slum upgrading and to generate the required resources to do so, and; Investing in global knowledge, learning and capacity in slum upgrading, and for reducing the growth of new slums.
What Do We Do?
18 Cities Alliance activities are organised around three strategic objectives:
Build political commitment and shared vision
The United Nations Millennium Summit adopted the goal of the Cities Without Slums action plan as a new international development target: the challenge now is to translate this political commitment into a systematic attack on urban poverty.
Create a learning alliance to fill knowledge gaps
Growing networks of cities are sharing their City Development Strategy experience, teaching each other and serving as resource cities.
Catalyse citywide and nationwide impacts
The Alliance is already working in partnership with the local and national authorities of Brazil and El Salvador; Madagascar, Mauritania, Nigeria, Rwanda and South Africa; Egypt and Morocco; Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines and Vietnam; Yemen, Mozambique, Kenya, Ethiopia, Jamaica, and Bulgaria.
Cities Alliance Partners at Work
2002 Annual Report: This is the second annual report of the Cities Alliance. This reports highlights Alliance impacts at both the local and the global level.
2001 Annual Report: This is the first annual report of the Cities Alliance, covering the one and half years since its launch.
Organisational Structure
The Cities Alliance Consultative Group is composed of bi-lateral and multi-lateral development agencies and the political heads of the international associations of local authorities who have pledged their commitment to achieving Alliance goals. The Consultative Group, co-chaired by the Executive Director, UN-Habitat and by the Vice President, Private Sector Development and Infrastructure, The World Bank, is responsible for developing the Alliance's long-term strategy and approving its annual work programme.
The Policy Advisory Board is composed of eminent urban experts from each region who provide guidance to the Consultative Group on strategic and policy issues. They represent non-governmental and community-based organisations, the private sector and regional urban programmes.
A small Secretariat based in Washington, D.C. carries out the mandate of the Cities Alliance and manages its operations. The Secretariat screens and evaluates project proposals in accordance with the criteria adopted by the Consultative Group.
19 Working with the Cities Alliance
Proposals Proposals for country-specific activities typically originate from local authorities and must be approved by the government of the recipient country. All proposals must be sponsored by at least one member of the Alliance. Guidelines for preparing proposals are available from the Cities Alliance web site at http://www.citiesalliance.org.
Criteria Proposals are evaluated based on the following criteria:
Targeting the Objective: The activity must aim at promoting pro-poor policies, the reduction of urban poverty including promoting the role of women in city development, and directly support scaling up slum upgrading and/or city development strategies. Government Commitment and Approval: The activity must have government/local authority commitment and approval, to be documented by attachments to the application form. Linkage to Investment Follow-up: Investment partners must be clearly identified and involved from the beginning in the design of the activity so as to increase the prospects for investment follow-up for implementation. Partnerships: Proposals for City Development Strategies and scaling-up slum urban upgrading must be conceived as a participatory process with local stakeholders including both the private sector and community organizations.
20 They must include appropriate strategies and actions to ensure participation of, and ownership by, resident communities. Cities will need to be able to demonstrate the nature and extent of participation by relevant stakeholders.The Cities Alliance gives priority to proposals with strong demonstrated ownership and buy-in. Co-financing: All proposals should include co-financing, combining seed funding from the Cities Alliance with a target of at least 20% financing from the cities themselves, as well as from other sources. At least 50% co-financing is needed for all proposals requesting over $250,000 from Core Funds. Coherence of Effort: Activities should be designed to promote cross-sectoral, inter-divisional and multi-donor coordination, and to maximize collaboration between the World Bank, the UN system, and other Cities Alliance members. Scaling-up: The focus is on designing city development strategies and citywide and nationwide upgrading rather than on pilot projects. Institutionalization and replication: Activities should contribute to the creation of mechanisms that help cities and their national associations institutionalize support for the formulation of city development strategies and citywide and nationwide upgrading so as to facilitate replication in other cities. The Cities Alliance favors proposals that maximize the use of local expertise. Positive Impact on Environment: Activities supported by the Cities Alliance are expected to achieve significant environmental improvements. These should be clearly stated in each proposal. Any activity in which negative environmental impacts could be anticipated must include an Environmental Impact Assessment and a Mitigation Plan as prior conditions for consideration. Duration: Special attention will be given to those activities that promise deliverables within well-defined time frames, and preferably within 24 months.
21 Cities Alliance Members and Contact Information
Local Authorities
Metropolis World Federation of United Cities World Association of Cities and Local Authorities Coordination
Governments Canada France Germany Italy Japan The Netherlands Norway Sweden United Kingdom United States
Multi-lateral organisations Asian Development Bank (ADB) United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat) United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) The World Bank
22 CONTACTS Mr Pietro Garau Special Advisor to the Executive Director Email: [email protected] and Secretary, UN Advisory Committee of Address: The Cities Alliance Local Authorities Mailstop F-4P-400 UN-HABITAT 1818 H Street, NW, Washington, DC P.O. BOX 30030 20433 TEL: (254 2) 623126 Telephone: (+1 202) 473-9233, Fax: FAX: (254 2) 624250 (+1 202) 522-3224 Email: [email protected] www.citiesalliance.org. Asian Development Bank - Headquarters: International Union of Local 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City Authorities (IULA) 0401 Metro Manila, Philippines Tel: + 632 632 4444 World Secretariat Fax: + 632 636 2444 Laan Copes van Cattenburch 60A Email: [email protected] PO Box Box 90646 2509 LP The Hague Mailing Address: The Netherlands P.O. Box 789 Tel 00 31 70 3244032 0980 Manila, Philippines Fax 00 31 70 3246916 Email [email protected] Fédération mondiale des cités unies Internet :www.iula.org (FMCU) World Federation of United Cities Metropolis Secretariat General (FMCU-UTO) Ajuntament de Barcelona 41 rue de la République Placa Sant Jaume, 1 93200 Saint Denis 08002 Barcelona, Spain FRANCE Tel. 34-93-402 76 00 Numéros définitifs / Definitive dial numbers: Fax. 34-93-402 73 73 Tél./Phone: (+33) 1 55 84 23 50 email: [email protected] Fax: (+33) 1 55 84 23 51 -Internet: www.metropolis.org Email:[email protected] Internet: www.fmcu-uto.org World Association of Cities & Local Authorities Coordination (WACLAC)
General Secretariat. Ajuntament de Barcelona. Plaça Sant Jaume, 1. 08002 Barcelona. Spain Phone: (+34) 93 402 76 00 - (+34) 93 402 75 46. Fax (+34) 93 402 73 73 - (+34) 93 402 78 77. e-mail: [email protected]
23 5.3 Gender Policy Unit
Partners: UN Office of the Special Adviser on Gender and the Advancement of Women (OSAGI), Division for the Advancement of Women, UN Secretariat Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DAW-DESA), UN Inter-Agency Committee on Women and Gender Equality (IACWGE), Huairou Commission (HC), the umbrella body for international networks on women, homes and communities.
Objectives: The objective of the Gender Policy Unit is to ensure UN-HABITAT's effective implementation of its Gender Policy and to address the Habitat Agenda commitment to gender equality. UN-HABITAT’s Gender Policy has three overall objectives: (a) To promote women’s equal rights and women’s empowerment internationally within the area of human settlements development; (b) To support governments, NGOs and other partners in capacity building and development in order to mainstream gender equality in human settlements development; (c) To mainstream a gender perspective throughout the Programme’s activities.
Key clients and countries served: All member states of the Human Settlements Commission, and the global women's networks dealing with women, homes and communities, operating under the umbrella of the Huairou Commission, created at Beijing in 1995.
Working methods: The main method of outreach for the empowerment of women in human settlements is through the global women's networks that form part of the Huairou Commission. These networks include the Habitat International Council Women and Shelter Network (HICWAS), Grassroots Women Organising Together in Sisterhood (GROOTS) and the International Council of Women (ICW).
These networks aim to advance the capacity of grassroots women worldwide to strengthen and create sustainable communities. The Gender Task Force, an internal body in UN-HABITAT, aims to mainstream gender in all aspects of the Programme's work.
This body meets regularly to develop a consolidated gender mainstreaming approach, methods, tools and instruments. It also has members who are the gender focal points in the three regional offices in Rio, Fukuoka and Nairobi.
Flagship products and activities: The women's networks partners of UN-HABITAT are currently engaged in a wide range of activities to bring the concerns of grassroots women into public decision-making and policy at a variety of levels.
Activities currently include the Grassroots Women's International Academy (GWIA) for peer-group learning among communities in the North and South, the "local-local dialogues" to activate grassroots women's participation in local authority decision- making.
The Gender Policy Unit works closely with the global campaigns on Secure Tenure and Good Urban Governance. Extensive work on women's property rights is underway. A draft policy paper on Women and Urban Governance was prepared in
24 2000 and is currently being reviewed by partners.
The Gender Policy Unit also develops training packages for awareness creation and gender planning. So far, 170 UN staff members have attended gender awareness courses and these have now been taken over by the UN Office at Nairobi (UNON) Human Resources Management Service (HRMS).
Contact: Huairou Commission The Coordinator 249 Manhattan Ave. Gender Policy Unit, Urban Secretariat Brooklyn, NY 11211, USA UN-HABITAT Tel: (+718) 388-8915 P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya Fax: (+718) 388-0285. email Tel: (254 2) 623987, Fax: (254 2) [email protected], Website: www. 624250 www.huairou.org E-mail: [email protected] Website:www.unhabitat.org/genderpolic y
5.4 Global Urban Observatory
Better Information for Better Cities
Background: The Global Urban Observatory (GUO) addresses the urgent need to improve the world-wide base of urban knowledge by helping Governments, local authorities and organizations of the civil society develop and apply policy-oriented urban indicators, statistics and other urban information.
The GUO was established by UN-HABITAT in response to a decision of the United Nations Commission on Human Settlements, which called for a mechanism to monitor global progress in implementing the Habitat Agenda and to monitor and evaluate global urban conditions and trends.
Activities: The GUO focuses on building local capacity to select, collect, manage, and apply indicators and statistics in policy analysis as fundamental, both to tracking progress in implementing the Habitat Agenda and to monitoring urban conditions and trends as input to participatory decision making. Current activities are based on the development of an integrated network of National and Local Urban Observatories. The beneficiaries are policy-makers at all levels and organizations of the civil society participating in sustainable urban development.
The main area of work is the generation, analysis and dissemination of global, regional and national urban indicators and statistics.
Flagship products:
Global Urban Observatory Network
25 Global Urban Observatory databases (urban indicators, statistics and city profiles)
Urban Observatories: Local and National Urban Observatories are governmental agencies, research centres or educational institutions that are designated as the "workshops" where monitoring tools are developed and used for policy-making through consultative processes.
A Local Urban Observatory for a city or town is the focal point for urban policy development and planning where collaboration among policy makers, technical experts and representatives of partners groups is fostered.
Networks of Local Urban Observatories are facilitated by National Urban Observatories where necessary. National Urban Observatories co-ordinate capacity building assistance and compile and analyze urban data for national policy development.
Setting-up an Urban Observatory. Guide to joining the Global Urban Observatory Network.
Urban indicators: Urban indicators are regularly collected in a sample of cities worldwide in order to report on progress in the twenty key areas of the Habitat Agenda at the city level. Data collection is conducted through local and national urban observatories as well as through selected regional institutions. The global urban indicators database 2 contains policy-oriented indicators for more than 200 cities worldwide. Its results have been analyzed and incorporated in the State of the World's Cities Report 2001.
A Global Analysis of Urban Indicators Statistics: A main task of the statistics work is the harmonization and standardization of the definitions and classifications at the national and the city level. Data collection, collation, analysis and reporting on national, urban/rural and city level is done on regular basis in order to monitor human settlement conditions and trends.
Databases are being maintained and updated containing national and city level data; these databases are: (a) The Human Settlements Statistical Database version 4 at the national level (b) The Citibase Database at city level (c) The Data house Version 2: 2001 Database Data are published and disseminated through the Compendium of Human Settlements Statistics, Statistical Annex to the Global Report and the State of the World's Cities Report 2001. In addition, an electronic publication entitled Human Settlements Conditions and Trends: Country Profiles and Statistical Analysis is put on the Internet. Household's projections up to 2030 are being produced for almost all the countries every five years.
26 Contact:
The Chief Global Urban Observatory and Statistics Urban Secretariat, UN-HABITAT P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: 254-20-623119 Fax: 254-20-623080 E-mail: [email protected]
5.5 Housing Policy and Development Section
Background/Objectives/Mandate: The Housing Policy and Development Section (HPDS) was created in May 1999 as one of the organizational units of the Shelter Branch. The main mandate of the Branch is to support the world-wide implementation of the Habitat Agenda, with specific focus on one of its two main goals: “adequate shelter for all”. For this purpose, the Branch works towards improving access to shelter for the world’s poor and other vulnerable groups, particularly in developing countries and countries with economies in transition. Within this broad mandate the activities of HPDS focus on three areas, namely: housing policies and programmes; housing rights; and building materials and construction technologies. The work is undertaken in support of the Global Campaign for Secure Tenure, which is one of the main instruments of UN-HABITAT contributing to the implementation of the Habitat Agenda. The activities of the Section focus on the needs and promotion of participatory approaches that can involve and mobilize the aspirations and capacities of the poor, other vulnerable groups and people with special needs.
Main substantive UN-HABITAT main HPDS focus areas mandates organizational mandates Housing policies and Habitat Agenda, Habitat Agenda, programmes paragraphs 60, 62-74 paragraphs 228.a-g Habitat Agenda, Commission on Human Housing rights paragraph 61 Settlements resolution 16/7 Building materials and Habitat Agenda, Habitat Agenda, paragraph construction paragraphs 88-92 228.d technologies
Partners: The main partners in the activities of the Section include the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing, the International Co-operative Alliance (ICA), the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE), the European Network for Housing Research, professional associations related to housing, and relevant civil society organizations.
27 Activities: The main thrust of the Section's current activities is the elaboration and implementation, together with OHCHR, of the United Nations Housing Rights Programme. This Programme was launched in 2001, on the basis of resolutions adopted by the United Nations Commission on Human Settlements in 1997 and by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in 2001. Other activities are related to supporting governments and other stakeholders in shelter development -- such as contributing to the development of co-operatives in the shelter sector -- and policy advice for increasing effectiveness of enabling shelter strategies and programmes. Flagship Products: UN-HABITAT has produced a wide range of publications, reports and documents within the three substantive areas covered by the Section. Several of these outputs were produced by the Shelter and Community Services Section (the predecessor of HPDS) before the organisational restructuring in 1999.
A number of publications on housing policy issues -- such as “Shelter for all: the potential of housing policy in the implementation of the Habitat Agenda”, “Strategies to combat homelessness”, “Shelter provision and employment generation”,
CONTACTS To obtain hard copies of UN-HABITAT publications, please contact: Chief, Housing Policy and Information Services Section Development Section UN-HABITAT UN-HABITAT PO Box 30030, Nairobi, KENYA PO Box 30030, Nairobi, KENYA Fax: (254) 20-623477 (or 624266/7) Tel: (254-20) 624231 E-mail: [email protected] Fax: (254-20) 624265 Website: ww.unhabitat.org/register/shop.asp E-mail: [email protected] Web-site:www.unhabitat.org/housing Electronic copies are available from: http://www.unhabitat.org/housing/pub (Housing policy & development) www.unhabitat.org/unhrp/pub (Housing rights)
5.6 Land and Tenure
Background and Mandate
UN-HABITAT's Land and Tenure Section, formerly known as the Land Management Programme, was established in May 1999, under the Shelter Branch. It is the agency's focal point for land management and tenure systems, policies and legislation that help achieve adequate shelter, security of tenure and equal access to economic resources for all, with a specific focus on gender equality. The main focus areas and mandate are:
Implementation of land, housing and property rights, particularly women's secure tenure Affordable land management systems and pro-poor flexible tenure types
28 Mandate derived from: Habitat Agenda Paragraph 25: Adequate shelter for all Paragraph 26: Ensure full realisation of human rights link to appropriate page Paragraph 27: Equal access to economic resources Paragraph 40(b) + 61(b): Legal security of tenure and equal access to land to all people Paragraph 40(m): Strengthening of land management Paragraph 69(a): Co-ordinating and integrating shelter and human settlements with, inter alia, land policies
UN Commission on Human Rights Resolutions 2000/13, 2001/34, 2002/49 and 2002/22 on Women's equal ownership of, access to and control over land and the equal rights to own property and to adequate housing
Millenium Declaration Paragraph 6 (equal rights), Paragraph 19 (by 2020, to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers, Paragraph 20 (gender equality)
Objective The main objective of the Land and Tenure Section is to further build and widely share concrete knowledge on those land management systems, policies, laws and practices that help achieve adequate shelter and security of tenure for all, particularly for women.
Activities Research, develop tools and identify best practices on (a) the implementation of equal rights to land, housing and property rights, particularly for women, including inheritance and marital property rights and (b) elements of urban upgrading related to regularization, land use, a range of pro-poor flexible tenure types and affordable land management options.
Disseminate tools, best policies and practices and incorporate them in the Global Campaign for Secure Tenure, and the UN Housing Rights Programme. The tools are also made available to national and local governments, professional organizations, civil society and slum dwellers for their advocacy work and for implementation of relevant laws and policies.
Provide technical advice and substantive support on land issues to other sections and programmes within UN-HABITAT and to governments, with particular regard to secure tenure in post-conflict societies.
29 contact: Marjolein Benschop Legal Officer, Land & Tenure Section, Clarissa Augustinus UN-HABITAT Chief, Land & Tenure Section, UN- Tel. (254 20) 62 38 58 HABITAT Email: Tel. (254 20) 62 32 39 [email protected] or Email: email: [email protected] [email protected]
5.7 Localizing Agenda 21 Partners: Government of Belgium, Belgian Administration for Development Co- operation; Post Graduate Centre for Human Settlements, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven; UN-HABITAT. Objectives: This capacity-building programme started as a response to Chapter 28 of Agenda 21 whereby local authorities are called upon to undertake consultative processes to develop and implement "Local Agendas 21" for their communities. The LA21 Programme offers multi-year support to key actors in selected priority towns in Kenya, Morocco and Vietnam to undertake such Local Agenda 21 processes.
The programme aims to promote good urban governance by supporting the development and implementation of broad-based environmental action plans, focusing on context-specific aspects of municipal planning and management.
The Programme also enhances the capability of local authorities to integrate these action plans into strategic urban development plans, stimulating inter-sectoral synergy. Through the implementation of the action plans tangible impact is achieved for low-income communities, leading to more sustainable urban development. Key clients and countries served: Municipal Councils, Ministries concerned with the environment and community-based organisations in Cuba, Kenya, Morocco and Vietnam.
Working methods: For each town the programme strategy emphasises the need for a shared vision for the future development of the city. In parallel, urgent problems are addressed through action planning and environmental conflict resolution.
A continuous broad-based consultative process underpins this process. Capacity- building efforts focus on setting priorities for action, targeted human resources development, institutional strengthening, development and adaptation of tools and instruments, encouraging partnerships, mobilisation of resources, and promoting exchange between cities facing similar problems.
Flagship products and activities: The Programme is currently active in three
30 countries.
In Nakuru, Kenya the Programme involves: the implementation a strategic structure plan; strengthening the Town Planning Unit; resolving space-use conflicts around the bus park and market area; re-vitalising the Council’s rental housing stock; reinforcing community participation in solid waste removal; and providing training to civic leaders concerning their role as guardians of the environment.
In Essaouira, Morocco, assistance is given to the Municipal Council to: create a centre for urban development and environmental protection; stimulate collaboration between the Municipality and community based organisations to revitalise the old historic centre of the town; and develop an urban park between the city and an adjacent dune forest.
In Vinh City, Vietnam the Programme supports the People’s Committee to adopt innovative planning methods and tools, to revitalise the public housing stock and to improve the solid waste management.
Contact:
The Programme Manager Localising Agenda 21 UN-HABITAT P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: (254 2) 623228 Fax: (254 2) 623715 E-mail: [email protected] Web-site: www.unhabitat.org/programmes/agenda21/habrdd/capagd21.htm
31 5.8 Managing Water for African Cities Partners: The Programme works with city and local authorities, national governments, the private sector, civil society, resource centres and the media. It is a product of the United Nations System-wide Initiative on Africa (UNSIA) and of the broad partnership of the UNSIA Water Cluster. National Steering Committees administer the city projects of the Programme.
Objectives: The objective of the Programme is to tackle the urban water crisis in African cities through efficient and effective water demand management, build capacity to mitigate the environmental impact of urbanisation on freshwater resources and boost awareness and information exchange on water management and conservation. It also promotes the exchange of best practices in urban water management in support of the implementation of the Habitat Agenda.
Key Clients and Countries Covered: The Programme is intended for the benefit of all African cities and is being demonstrated in seven African cities, namely: Abidjan (Cote d'Ivoire), Accra (Ghana), Addis Ababa (Ethiopia), Dakar (Senegal), Johannesburg (South Africa), Lusaka (Zambia) and Nairobi (Kenya). Targeted beneficiaries include policy makers on water and the environment, city managers of water utilities, water consumers, school children for water education, and the mass media for awareness promotion.
Working Methods: A Programme management team of UNEP and UN-HABITAT staff guides and backstops city projects and co-ordinates region-wide activities from Nairobi. A website and listserve provide electronic bilingual English/French communication services for the entire Programme, while periodic city managers' meetings and resource centres provide networking and pooling of Programme experiences. Publications, especially a hardcopy newsletter, augment information exchange.
Flagship Products and Activities: Awareness building and public information; public communication and outreach; water conservation flyers; seminars and workshops; training of city managers including study visits are produced to promote a demand- side perspective of water management including water pollution control methods, gender mainstreaming and improvement of water access to the urban poor and peri-urban areas.
Contact: The Co-ordinator Water for African Cities Programme UN-HABITAT P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: 254-20-623039Fax: 254-20-623588 E-mail: [email protected] Web-site: www.un-urbanwater.net
32 5.9 Risk and Disaster Management Unit
The damage caused by disasters and conflicts is staggering. In the first half of this year alone the cost accrued by natural disasters has been US$ 24 billion, with over 60 million civilians affected by some 30 conflicts. The UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has called for a more unified response to these growing global threats.
The Risk and Disaster Management Unit (RDMU) was created to marshal the resources of UNCHS (Habitat) to provide local government, communities and business organisations with practical strategies for mitigating and recovering from conflicts and natural disasters.
With the largest operational budget of the Centre, RDMU field activities cover several disaster and conflict affected countries. These activities inform on-going tool and network development for vulnerability reduction in human settlements.
Specific areas for attention include:
Protection and rehabilitation of housing, infrastructure & public facilities. Resettlement of displaced persons and returnees. Restoration of local social structures through settlement development. Land and settlements planning and management for disaster prevention. Creation of coordination mechanisms for improved disaster management.
Dealing with the rehabilitation of social and economic conditions after a disaster or conflict offers a unique opportunity to rethink past development practices and improve the sustainability of human settlements against future threats and risks.
Mission
To support national governments, local authorities and communities in strengthening their capacity in managing human-made and natural disasters. This applies both to the prevention and mitigation of disasters as well as the rehabilitation of Human Settlements.
To create awareness among decision makers and communities on mitigation and adequate rehabilitation in human settlements.
To bridge the gap between relief and development by combining the technical expertise and on-the-ground know-how of UNCHS (Habitat).
Strategy
There is a simultaneous need for hands on experience to develop both understanding and credibility, and hands off approach for promoting sustainability and self-reliance.
The Risk and Disaster Management Unit provides support to national governments, local authorities and communities by:
33 Fielding assessment and technical advisory missions to disaster- prone countries. Assessing global and regional demands for support on disaster management and human settlement Designing, implementation and backstopping projects at national, regional and global level in collaboration with other countries and external support agences. Strengthening co-ordination and networking among communities, NGOs, governments and external support organisations in performing disaster-related activities. Developing techniques and tools for the management of disaster prevention, mitigation and rehabilitation. Designing and implementating training programmes, as well as supporting training activities executed by other agencies and field projects. Promoting horizontal co-operation by networking institutions, experts and experience on disaster related activities in human settlements.
Daniel Lewis, Chris Hutton Coordinator, a.i. Disaster Management Specialist Tel: +254 20 623826 Tel: +254 20 623982 e-mail: [email protected] Email: [email protected]
Jaana Mioch Meredith Preston Human Settlements Officer Disaster Management Specialist Tel: +254 20 624062 Tel: +254 20 623876 e-mail: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Esteban León Disaster Management Specialist Tel: +254 20 624191 Email: [email protected]
5.10 Safer Cities Approach
Some Facts About Urban Crime
Increase in Crime
Over the last 20 years, the increase in crime has become a problem in the majority of the world’s largest cities both in the North and the South. In the North, crime, and in particular petty crime, has risen by 3% to 5 % annually between the 1970s and the 1990s in cities with more than 100,000 inhabitants. From the beginning of the 90s, thanks to initiatives taken in the field of prevention and law enforcement, crime rates stabilised in most countries, with the exception of youth crime (youth aged between 12 - 25 years) and crime by minors (12 - 18 years) which continued to increase. The latter type of crime has become increasingly violent and it
34 has entrenched itself even in the schools, while the age of entrance into delinquency has decreased to 12 years.
In the South, beginning in the 80s, crime increased considerably and continues to increase up to today, while youth crime and crime by minors have witnessed an exponential increase. Phenomena such as street children, school drop-outs, widespread social exclusion, civil wars and the small arms trafficking that goes with it, served only to aggravate the situation.
This increase in crime has developed in a context characterised on the one hand, by the growth of drug trafficking and abuse and, on the other by the globalisation of organised crime. The growth of organised crime contributes to the destabilisation of political order and increases the effects of economic crises through housing market speculation. Organised crime also tends to draw in some young delinquents as a source of cheap labour.
Causes of the Increase in Delinquency
The causes of delinquency are manifold. All research undertaken at the international level showed that there is not single cause of delinquency, but rather a combination of causes. Three major causes can be identified: social, institutional and those related to the physical urban environment. Social exclusion due to long periods of unemployment or marginalisation, dropping out of school or illiteracy, and the lack of socialisation within the family seem to be the most recurring factors amongst the social causes of delinquency. None of these factors on their own can be regarded as sufficient explanation.
In the case of the family, the traditional approach which blames juvenile crime as the lack of parental authority is not sufficient. It fails to take into account the changes in the traditional family and of the multiple family forms of today. Half a century ago, a new model of the family began to develop, moving away from a patriarchal economic unit with strong links to an extended family into a nuclear family based on affectionate relationships that often separate sexuality and reproduction.
Subsequently, this has led to the development of multiple forms of family relations: traditional marriages, single-parent families, families without legal ties, families of divorced or separated parents and homosexual couples. The evolution of the traditional family into this multiplicity of forms results in the need for a variety of social responses. It is not possible to impose a "one-size-fit-all" policy.
In addition the families are confronted with varying scenarios shaped by the labour market, rapid social changes and the requirements of childhood education. Many families and social educators are not prepared to face these changes. A causal link also exists between domestic violence and urban violence. Changes in social controls, in particular the breakdown of social bonds at neighbourhood level, seem to be prevalent causes in most situations.
35 It is worth remembering that, contrary to the myth rooted in our minds, poverty is not a direct cause of crime.
With respect to institutional causes, it is necessary to mention the inability of the criminal justice system (police, justice and prisons) to handle cases of minor delinquency. Indeed, since the 60s, the majority of the police around the world have placed more emphasis on the fight against major crime and the technologies and approaches linked to this objective. In many countries, the use of foot or bicycle patrols has been rendered obsolete for the use of non-targeted motorised patrols. These priority police objectives have distanced the police from the citizens who have subsequently lost their confidence in them.
With regard to the judiciary, it is not capable of facing the increase in the overall number of minor offences, which damage the quality of life and perpetuate a general perception of insecurity. Justice is slow, ill-suited to developing urban conflicts, overloaded and uses an outdated working methodology. Its language is inaccessible to the majority of the population.
The police force, and even the general public opinion, often regard it as being too tolerant. Court decisions cover less than 10 % of the urban crime (major and minor delinquencies included). The sentences imposed, prisons and fines, are not adapted to responding to minor law breaking.
In addition, an inefficient judiciary and a lack of accountability with respect to offences such as money laundering, organised crime, involvement in the Mafia, corruption and violation of human rights have all led to an increase in crime by generating a feeling of impunity.
Prisons, with the exception of some modern and experimental prisons, constitute technical schools for the training and development of criminal networks. Furthermore, the circulation of drugs and the promiscuity in prisons have contributed to the increase in crime.
Among the causes related to the physical environment, poor management of the urbanisation process, inadequate urban services, failure to incorporate security related issues in urban management policies, apparition of poorly protected semi- public spaces are key issues. Promiscuity and lawlessness of certain districts lead to the development of zones of lawlessness. Finally, the freedom to carry weapons and the illegal trafficking of small weapons resulting from civil wars or conflicts in bordering countries.
Consequences of the Increase in Crime
The primary consequence is the development of a generalised and not often objective feeling of insecurity, common in many urban populations. This perception crystallises all the fears of the population (insecurity with respect to employment, health, the future of children, domestic violence, and the risk of impoverishment etc.). It arises from an impression of abandonment, powerlessness and the incomprehension in the face of shocking crime and the multiplication of minor acts of
36 delinquency or vandalism. Because of its emotional character this perception blows facts out of proportion, encourages rumour and can even causes social conflicts. The feeling of generalised fear can create a climate that may threaten the democratic foundation of a community or society.
At the city level, perception of insecurity has resulted in the abandonment of certain neighbourhoods, the development of an "architecture of fear ", the stigmatisation of districts or communities, the withdrawal or the refusal to invest in some cities, and spontaneous forms of justice leading to lynching. More positively, however, it has also led to the development of forms of self-defence and new social practices.
The second consequence of the increase of crime is the impact of insecurity on the poor. While all social classes are affected by insecurity, research shows that insecurity affects the poor more intensely because they do not have the means to defend themselves. Consequently, due to this vulnerability, urban violence erodes the social capital of the poor, and dismantles their organisations, thus preventing social mobility and particularly that of the youth.
The third consequence is the increase in the overall costs of insecurity which account for 5% to 6 % of the GNP in the North and 8% to 10 % in the South.
Fourthly, there has been a widespread development of private security companies. There has been an annual growth rate of 30% and 8% in the private security sector, in the South and North respectively, in last years of the 20th century. In many countries the number of private security officers has exceeded that of state police officers. It should be noted that in many cases, such as in the United States and in China for example, it is the government itself which proposes private security contracts.
Indeed, several countries that initially gave green light to private security now increasingly tend to legislate in this area in order to prevent abuse and corruption. One of the problems of this widespread development of private security system is the relationship between the police and the companies, both in terms of action and responsibility and the recruitment of police officers. In many instances private security officers are ex-police or ex-army officers.
Indeed, a second problem is how to define the boundaries of private security: for example, should more private prisons be created?
The majority of countries have begun, albeit reluctantly, to accept private security not for political but economic reasons. The costs of the private security appear, in the short-term, to be less than that of the public sector but so far no analysis has shown the sudden appearance of this private sector security to be responsible for a decrease in crime. In certain cases, the opposite has occurred. Indeed, countries such as Colombia, the United States or South Africa where the private security sector is predominant have witnessed a marked increase in crime and a growth of prison populations. It is not evident that the cost of private sector security guarantees its accessibility to all in society, nor that its costs are, in the long run, less than those of public security. What is certain is that private security is neither accessible to all: in the European Union it is financially accessible to only 5% of the population.
37 Nor is it accountable to the society or to the local community. The private security companies are driven by profit, which means, for example, that the more prisoners there are in the private prisons the more benefits the security company reaps. In addition we are witnessing today a tendency towards the internationalisation of private security companies, which act in parallel as private security agencies, industrial espionage services, protectors of corrupt political systems and even, in certain cases, peculiar to Africa, as new forms of mercenaries.
The fifth consequence are the attempts made by the public to address the increase in delinquency. Two general approaches have been observed. On one hand central governments have attempted to reinforce security through repression. These repressive measures include increasing police manpower, increasing the term of prison sentences, and applying repressive measures, which are difficult to administer and at the same time questionable, e.g. "zero tolerance". Such measures can also include curfews for minors or the lowering of the age of legal responsibility.
The second approach favours prevention in addition to repression. This can be undertaken in two ways. One way involves the centralisation of the fight against insecurity by making police officers the key players in the matter. The other tends to decentralise the fight through the delegation of police responsibility either to local authorities or civil associations or both. The latter is obviously easier to implement in countries such as the United States or Canada, where the local police depend on the municipalities.
Often the choice between the two options involves rivalry between governments and the municipal authorities. This is the case in several European, African and Latin American countries. It should be noted that in the two approaches, one often sees police reform applied in parallel to the implementation of preventive actions. Several governments adopt either one of these options depending on the type of crime that is being targeted. For example, in the United States the government tends to adopt repression for all cases of minor delinquency.
However, with respect to drug consumption, it has gradually developed a policy that favours prevention. In addition it is not rare within a country to see some cities or regions stress repression while others advocate the use of prevention. The most significant case is that of the United States, where certain cities have developed excellent prevention policies while others emphasise only repression.
The repressive approach has the advantage of having immediate effects, which can satisfy the short-term demands of public opinion and the needs for effectiveness of the political class. Voters are increasingly demanding more security measures such as more police manpower and more repression, and naively think that the increase in prison populations constitutes an effective neutralisation of the serious offenders. It is clearly evident, however, that the cost of repression is much higher than that of prevention and that repression only has a short term and limited range of effects.
The preventive approach faces many challenges. First and foremost among these challenges is the reluctance of governments to invest in it. Another major obstacle is the absence of a legal framework to facilitate preventive actions that exceed the
38 framework of NGO activities. Cities wishing to use a preventive approach often do not have the legal or financial capacity to do so.
CONTACTS
Disaster, Post-conflict and safety Ms. Laura Petrella section/Urban Development Branch Urban Safety Expert UN-HABITAT Room P-318 Room P-310 Tel. +254-20-623706 UN Compound, Gigiri Fax: +254-20-623536 Nairobi, Kenya [email protected] Phone: +254-20-623706 Fax: +254-20-623536 Ms. Cecilia Andersson E-mail: [email protected] Urban Safety Expert Room P-308 Ms. Soraya Smaoun Tel. +254-20-624570 Urban Safety Expert Fax: +254-20-623536 Room P-312 [email protected] Tel: +254-20-623500 Fax: +254-20-623536 Ms. Sabine Ravestijn [email protected] Consultant - Urban Safety Room P-308 Mr. Juma Assiago Phone: +254-20-624599 Consultant -Youth [email protected] Room P-310 Phone: +254-20-623771 [email protected]
39 5.11 The Sustainable Cities Programme (SCP)
The Sustainable Cities Programme (SCP) is a joint UN-HABITAT/UNEP facility for building capacities in urban environmental planning and management. The programme is founded on broad-based cross-sectoral and stakeholder participatory approaches. It contributes to promoting urban environmental governance processes, as a basis for achieveing sustainable urban growth and development. Currently the SCP operates in 20 main demonstration and 25 replicating cities around the world, including cities in China, Chile, Egypt, Ghana, India, Kenya, Korea, Malawi, Nigeria, the Philippines, Poland, Russia, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Tunisia and Zambia. Preparatory activities are underway in Lesotho, South Africa, Thailand and Vietnam, whilst countries such as Bahrein,Cameroon, Iran, Kenya and Rwanda have shown interest
The SCP Promotes
Sharing environment-development information and expertise Understanding and accepting environment-development interaction Building environmental planning and management capacities Promoting system wide decision-making Stakeholder based development prioritisation, strategy and action planning Managing environmental resources and risks for achieving sustainable development Leveraging resources for lasting change
Building inter-agency partnerships, facilitating global exchange of experiences and know-how
SCP Core Team Contacts Mr. Ole Lyse Coordinator Anglophone Africa, Tel: +254 20 623565 Environmental Arab States [email protected] Management Advisor Mr. Jean-Christophe Tel: +254 20 623228 Francophone Africa, Adrian jean- Latin America, Europe Advisor [email protected] SCP Human Tel: +254 20 623209 Mr. Kibe Muigai Settlements Advisor [email protected] Mr. Bakary Kante Tel: +254 20 624065 Director Focal Point, UNEP DEPDL, UNEP and Law [email protected]
Mr. Hassane Bendahmane Tel: +254 20 623479 Focal Point, UNEP Chief, [email protected] Joint UNEP/UNCHS Unit
40 Mr. Rob de Jong Tel: +254 20 624184 Special Assistant to the UNEP Liaison Director DEPDL, UNEP [email protected]
Ms. Bridget Oballa Tel: +254 20 623263 In-house Resource Air Quality Expert [email protected] Persons Mr.Joshua Mulandi Tel: +254 20 623191
EMIS Expert [email protected]
Ms. Jane Kimata(OL) Secretarial Staff Tel: +254 20 623225
Ms. Jane Maina (CR) Tel: +254 20 623227
Ms. Lydia Bosire (JCA) Tel: +254 20 623291 UN-HABITAT Regional Offices Mr. Eric Verschuur Tel: +254 20 623213 Programme Fund Management [email protected] Management Officer Mr. Fuad Alkizim Tel: +254 20 623984 Asst. Prog. Management Fund Management [email protected] Officer Tel: +254 20 623075 Mr. Alioune Badiane Co-ordinator [email protected] Human Settlements Tel: +254 20 623219 Mr. Mohammed El-Sioufi Advisor [email protected] Human Settlements Tel: +254 20 623574 Mr. Joseph Guiébo Advisor [email protected] Human Settlements Tel: +254 20 623220 Mr. David Kithakye Advisor [email protected] Human Settlements Tel: +254 20 623220 Ms. Mariam Yanusa Advisor [email protected]
5.12 Training and Capacity Building Branch
"Learning for better cities"
With over half the world's population now living in cities, the demands placed upon communities and their local governments to sustainably manage their growth has never been greater. Yet, may communities are not prepared to meet the myriad of economic, environmental, social and structural challenges.
In an increasingly globalising world, the greatest resource a city has is its people. Developing the managerial, and technical and policy-making capacity of local leaders, employees, NGOs/CBOs and communities is a key component to over-coming seemingly endemic urban problems such as:
41 environmental degradation, poverty, homelessness, informal settlements, and under-performing municipal services.
Mission Statement "To improve the living environment for all, on a sustainable basis, by promoting effective human resource development and institutional capacity-building for the management and development of human settlements, and to ensure the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals of Cities without Slums and Good Governance."
Contact
Tomasz Sudra Chief, Training and Capacity Building Branch UN-HABITAT PO Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: (254 20) 623034 Fax: (254 20) 624265 Email: [email protected]
5.13 The Urban Economy and Finance Branch
"The central challenge we face today is to ensure that globalization becomes a positive force for all the world's people, instead of leaving billions of them behind in squalor." Kofi Annan.
The Urban Economy and Finance Branch was established in May 2001 as one of the organizational units of the Research, Monitoring and Coordination Division. The main mandate of the Branch is to provide substantive analytical focus on the urban economy, its relationship with the national and global economy, and focus on policies and strategies aimed at employment generation and creation of opportunities for social mobility. Within these broad mandate the Branch supports the worldwide implementation of the Habitat Agenda, with specific focus on one of its two main goals: "adequate shelter for all" and "sustainable urban development". The activities of the Branch focus on conceptualization, formulation and development of research, capacity-building and on the provision of advisory services on issues of urban economic development and finance, including housing finance. Broadly, it seeks to provide economic analysis perspective to human settlements programmes by focusing attention on the operation of the urban economy, and how these affect or are affected by the quality of local governance and national economic management. The Branch covers four substantive areas, namely:
Enhancing productivity and employment in the urban informal sector Financing municipal services in a decentralized environment Impact of macro-economic factors on urban economic development Development and strengthening of housing finance systems and institutions
42 Urban and Regional Economy
The objective of this sub programme is to promote local economic development, by raising the awareness and enhancing the capacity of central and local government policy makers with respect to rural-urban linkages development. The programme is based on the premises that urbanization should be accepted as inevitable, therefore, emphasis should be placed on how to address problems created by rapid rural-to- urban migration both within cities and rural areas.
The focus of the branch has recently been on urban-rural linkages to strengthen the balanced development of rural and urban areas. In this context it has studied peri- urban agriculture as strategies for survival of the urban poor and at the same time as a contribution to the issue of food security.
At present, the programme is implementing two projects, namely: "Urban Policy Implications of Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture and Rural-to-Urban Food Flows: A Case Study of Nairobi"; and "Guidelines for the Integration of Urban-Rural Linkage Issues into National and Sub-National Development Planning Processes (January 2002-December 2003)." Our partners in this programme are:
- the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO); - International Development Research Centre (IDRC) of Canada; - the Strategic Initiative on Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture (SIUPA) and; - the Coalition of African Organizations for Food Security and Sustainable Development (COSAD).
Recent publications are:
"Food Security in English-Speaking African Countries, Report of the proceedings of a joint COASAD/UN-HABITAT Workshop on Food Security for Parliamentarians from English-Speaking African Countries" and; "Urban Policy Implications of Food Security in African Cities - Report on a Workshop organized by UN-HABITAT in cooperation with FAO, IDRC and SIUPA; Perspectives on Urban-Rural Synergies, HS/576/99E, 1999; Studies on Credit and Investment for Urban Agriculture Initiatives are expected to be published in 2003.
Housing Finance Programme
The objective of the Housing Finance Programme is to support and foster the development of housing finance mechanisms for low-income households in developing countries. Building or buying a house is the biggest single investment a person does in his lifetime. To pay for such a big investment (usually several times the annual income) requires credit. Therefore, housing finance is one of the central issues to be addressed in developing shelter delivery systems.
In practically all countries, private banks and housing finance institutions provide financing for house building and buying. Under stable economic conditions banks
43 work well for the middle and higher income groups. The micro-finance sector, often community-based savings and loan operations had grown over the past decade. This vibrant new sector needs to be tested as an approach to the housing finance problem. Therefore, the programme undertakes research and development activities on finance mechanisms for the poor, such as community-based credit mechanisms and provide support to micro-finance institutions, which can expand their activities to housing finance. In view of the Goal of "adequate shelter for all", the focus of the programme is on activities, which will benefit the poor. Technical advisory services are provided as requested.
Contact
Ag. Chief, Urban Economy and Finance Branch Tel: (254-2) 623041 Fax: (254-2) 624266/67 E-mail: [email protected]
5.14 The Urban Environment Forum
This section of the Urban Environment Forum website is drawn from the Environmental Planning and Management (EPM) Source Book. The EPM Source Book was published in three volumes by the United Nations Human Settlements Programme UN-HABITAT and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in 1997, and provides the theoretical basis for much of the work of the Forum.
Why Improve the Urban Environment?
Sustainable cities are fundamental to social and economic development, but their contribution is increasingly threatened by environmental degradation.
The urban environment has received unparalleled attention in the recent international debate on development. The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, 1992 (the 'Earth Summit') is now recognised as the landmark occasion when the world as a whole acknowledged - clearly and emphatically - the importance of the environment for social and economic development.
This was articulated in Agenda 21, the Conference's global agenda for action which highlighted the importance of sustainable human settlements and emphasised cross- sectoral coordination, decentralisation of decision-making, and broad-based participatory approaches to development management.
The Second United Nations World Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II - the 'City Summit') in Istanbul in 1996, took this point further in a global agenda for cooperation by acknowledging the direct and vital contribution that productive and sustainable cities can make to social and economic advancement. This understanding has been widely accepted among those concerned with the management of cities around the world, and has become the basis of new concepts and approaches to urban environment-development relationships. In brief, the argument has three points; found in the EPM Source Book.
44 Sustainable Cities are Fundamental to Social and Economic Development (Chapter 1.1) Environmental Degradation Obstructs the Development Contribution of Cities (Chapter 1.2) Environmental Deterioration is Not Inevitable (Chapter 1.3)
Sustainable Cities are Fundamental to Social and Economic Development It is now widely recognized that cities play a vital role in social and economic development in all countries. Urbanization builds diversified and dynamic economies which raise productivity, create jobs and wealth, provide essential services, absorb population growth, and become the key engines of economic and social advancement.
Thus, efficient and productive cities and towns are essential for national economic growth and welfare; equally, at the local level, strong urban economies generate the resources needed for public and private investments in infrastructure, education, health, and improved living conditions.
Environmental Degradation Obstructs the Development Contribution of Cities The development potential of cities is increasingly threatened by environmental deterioration.
Aside from its obvious effects on human health and well-being, environmental degradation directly impedes socio-economic development. Water, air and soil pollution, for example, impose extra costs on business and industry, and on households as well as public services. Inefficient use and depletion of natural resources raises input prices and operating costs throughout the economy, and also deters new investment.
Heightened risk from environmental hazards has the same effect. In terms of impact, it is usually the poor who suffer most cruelly and directly from environmental degradation, although the lives and health of all urban residents are also affected. Failing to deal with the problem today, moreover, leads to much greater problems (and cost) in the future.
For development achievements to be truly "sustainable", cities must find better ways of balancing the needs and pressures of urban growth and change with the opportunities and constraints of the environment.
Environmental Deterioration is Not Inevitable: Although many cities seem to have difficulties in coming to grips with the requirements of sustainability and are suffering severe environmental and economic damage as a result, there are many encouraging signs, however, that environmental deterioration is not a necessary or inescapable result of urbanization and economic change. Some cities seem to have made progress in striking the right balance - in finding development paths which are more effectively attuned to environmental opportunities and constraints.
Indeed, mounting evidence from cities around the world shows that the fundamental challenge has to do with urban governance: learning how to better plan and more
45 effectively manage the process of urban development, avoiding or alleviating problems while realizing the positive potentials of city growth and change. New and more positive approaches to urban management can help to mobilize and effectively apply local resources - of all kinds.
How do Cities Improve the Urban Environment?
In this section, cities present their experiences in developing sustainable and effective solutions, illustrated by a wide range of practical examples. A common focus of many innovative and effective ideas and approaches being worked out in cities today is a central concern with the actual process of urban environmental planning and management.
Experiences in cities and towns from countries all over the globe - despite their vast differences in physical, economic, social and political situations - increasingly converge on this same viewpoint, this same framework for action.
Based on information from a wide variety of cities, a number of "guidelines" can be suggested, each of which reflects the knowledge and insights - the "lessons" - gained through many different city experiences. These guidelines identify and describe ways which cities have found to be effective in moving towards sustainable development and thus comprise a useful framework for a global approach to implementing the urban environmental agenda.
For convenience, these various guidelines can be grouped under five main headings, although individual guidelines may well be relevant under more than the one heading. Find these under the EPM Source Book.
Cities Improve Environmental Information and Technical Expertise Cities Improve Environmental Strategies and Decision-Making (Chapter 2.2) Cities Improve Implementation of Environmental Strategies (Chapter 2.3) Cities Institutionalise Environmental Planning and Management (Chapter 2.4) Cities Make More Efficient Use of Resources for Effective Change (Chapter 2.5)
Cities Improve Environmental Information and Technical Expertise: How cities identify, assess, clarify, and prioritise environmental issues and mobilise the active participation of the various actors or stakeholders who need to be involved in the different activities of environmental planning and management. The Istanbul Manifesto recommends: As a starting point, organise environmental information into a city environmental profile, involving all those whose cooperation is required in environmental planning and management. This will identify stakeholders, and stimulate their interest and participation. The profile, an evolving document, is the first step in an ongoing process. Systematically identify stakeholders in the private, public, NGO, CBO and popular sectors so that there is full participation of all interest groups. Set priorities among environmental issues through broad agreement among the stakeholders so that issues affecting quality of life, especially of
46 disadvantaged groups, can be addressed expeditiously. Address cross-sectoral and cross-institutional implications and responsibilities squarely when elaborating and clarifying agreed priority issues. (Istanbul Manifesto, adopted on the eve of Habitat II, June 1996)
Preparing Basic Overview Information: Many cities have found it very useful to identify and clarify systematically their environment/development issues, thereby giving a better understanding of the complexities of the city's environmental problems, of their inter-linkages, and of the relationship between environmental and developmental factors.
One effective way to do this is through the process of developing a City Environmental Profile, which is a compilation and synthesis of existing knowledge and data, focused on environmental and development management factors, especially in relation to the interests and roles of different stakeholders.
The process of formulating and revising a City Environmental Profile is fundamentally concerned with establishing the overall context for urban environmental management, with a particular emphasis on inter-relationships among issues and actors. Although based upon the best available scientific and technical information, it is primarily a non-technical process which should involve extensive dialogue among the "stakeholders" of the city. Successfully done, the process of working out a City Environmental Profile will provide a valuable starting point and common information base (which is normally updated regularly as new information becomes available) as well as promoting a wider mutual understanding among the key actors and institutions to be involved.
Involving Stakeholders: Most cities have found that successful environmental planning and management requires understanding, agreement, and coordinated action by the full range of public, private and popular sector groups and organisations (stakeholders) at neighbourhood, community, city and regional levels. Cities recognise that this process involves groups which may be outside the formal planning and management systems, such as women, private sector groups and interests, and the marginalised and disadvantaged groups, especially the urban poor, at both city and neighbourhood levels.
A variety of methods for constructively involving stakeholders in different aspects of environmental planning and management can be used (for example, Participatory Rapid Appraisal or similar techniques), helping to empower stakeholders and give them a sense of ownership and commitment. To identify relevant stakeholders for specific issues, many cities around the world apply the following simple test:
Whose interests are affected by the environment-development issues at hand - or by environmental management strategies and actions that may be decided? Who possesses information and expertise needed for strategy formulation and implementation? Who controls relevant implementation instruments or has the means to significantly influence environment-developmental interactions?
47 Setting Priorities:
Clearly, no city can realistically expect to successfully tackle all of its environmental and development issues at once.
Accordingly, experience has shown the value of being selective and establishing an agreed process for setting priorities, so that attention and action may be focused on a limited array of problems and tasks in a strategic sequence. It appears appropriate to look at priority natural resources issues and priority environmental hazard issues in parallel.
Once local environmental issues have been identified and key stakeholders are committed to participate in their resolution, it is possible to work out with them which issues should receive priority attention.
The criteria for prioritisation have, in many cases, been worked out through a participatory process and typically derive from consideration both of the impacts associated with each environmental problem and of the local capacities to respond. Criteria for prioritising issues are numerous and have included the following:
(a) the magnitude of health impacts associated with the problem; (b) the size of urban productivity loss caused by the problem; (c) the potential for local capacity-building; (d) the potential for local resource mobilisation; (e) the relative impact of the problem on the urban poor; (f) the degree to which the consequences are short- or long-term; (g) whether or not the problem leads to an irreversible outcome; (h) whether special circumstances offer special opportunities; (i) the degree of social/political consensus on the nature or severity of problems; and (j) whether the problem is significantly affected by local responses and actions.
Clarifying Selected Priority Issues:
Environmental issues - and their ramifications - are almost always more complex than at first thought, especially when the inherent conflicts of interest among different stakeholders are taken into account. It has often proved valuable to follow a careful and deliberate process for developing a broad-based understanding of the full nature of environmental questions. By doing this in an open and participatory way, for instance using public meetings and documentation, it is possible to systematically clarify environment-development relationships, cause and effect linkages, development needs and impacts, productivity and sensitivity of natural systems, environmental hazard risks, etc. Such clarification, supported by thematic maps and technical analysis, has proved to be an important prerequisite for effective environmental planning and management.
Cities Improve Environmental Strategies and Decision-Making: How cities prepare, assess, build consensus for and reconcile issue-specific strategies and incorporate them into overall and sectoral development policies and strategies.
48 The Istanbul Manifesto recommends: 'Through a broad-based process, focus strategies and decision-making on clearly defined issues. Consider available implementation options, including their financial, economic, technical, legal, social, and physical dimensions during strategy formulation.
Involve all relevant stakeholders in analysing issues and policy options, and developing strategies. This consensus building across technical, political, social, and economic interests will help develop a sense of ownership and commitment amongst the stakeholders, leading to better implementation and follow-up. Consider EPM strategies within the existing framework for urban development and plan implementation, to foster inter-agency collaboration for joint action.' (Istanbul Manifesto, June 1996)
Clarifying Issue-Specific Policy Options: Political, administrative and technical activities appear to take place most effectively in relation to well-identified and relatively narrowly specified issues, for which the relevant policy options can be most effectively prepared. In particular, clarification of issue-specific policy options brings a clearer understanding of costs and benefits for different stakeholders and of "trade-offs" for the city as a whole.
This approach not only mobilises the involvement of relevant stakeholders but also provides a more realistic basis for reaching consensus on which to build implementable strategies. As part of this process it is helpful for strategies to be articulated and publicised in the form of both technical and non-technical presentations and reports, to facilitate the continued participation of relevant stakeholders in the ongoing process of clarifying policy options and agreeing strategies.
Presentations and reports typically cover aspects such as: (a) a review of the environment/development issue, with a description of the environmental system from which it originates, the development concerns that are affected and the stakeholders that have been involved; (b) a summary of the options considered, the pros and cons of each option for various stakeholders, and the assumptions and procedures that led to agreement on the selected option; (c) a summary of the analytical results comparing alternative approaches in terms of social, economic and environmental costs and benefits; (d) both detailed and summary mapping information, to securely place the information and the proposals in a clear geographical context; (e) the agreed long-term environmental objectives and targets as well as a set of interim goals to guide phased interventions (such as preliminary outline of project profiles, initial identification of priority geographic areas and development sectors); (f) the associated policy reforms and institutional strengthening that have been agreed upon to support the implementation of the strategy; and (g) discussion of the indicators and statistics which could be used to track the progress of actions and their impacts.
Considering Implementation Options and Resources:
49 Experiences have shown that to be realistic and robust, strategy formulation is best if integrated - from the very beginning - with the consideration of implementation options and resources. In this way, the strategies which are evolved will have a better relationship with likely available constraints and resources (such as financial, economic, technical, administrative, physical).
Building in these considerations from the beginning also allows a consistent use of social cost-benefit analysis (and similar techniques), which is crucial for helping all stakeholders to understand the overall limits and the trade-off of the EPM process, as well as the distribution of gains and costs among different groups.
This has proved to be important by helping to ensure that strategic agreements which are reached will be reliable, in the sense that the agreeing stakeholders understand from the beginning the implementation and resource implications of the chosen strategies. This helps avoid the wasted effort of developing a technically ideal strategy which cannot subsequently be implemented.
Building Broad-Based Consensus on Issue-Specific Objectives and Strategies: To succeed with preparation and implementation of urban environmental management strategies, experience has shown the importance of effective processes for consensus-building. Just as it is vital to involve relevant stakeholders in the identification and prioritisation of issues, it is equally vital to involve them in the process of analysing issues and policy options and working towards agreed environmental planning and management strategies.
This approach recognises that strategy-building is not simply a technical exercise, but is an activity of consensus-building and compromise across a range of technical, political, social, and economic factors and interests. This point is especially important for environmental issues, which cut across sectors, across geographical boundaries, and across time.
Approaches which acknowledge the existence of differences of interest have generally been more successful, whereas attempts to avoid conflict, for example through a forced consensus or a so-called neutral technical solution, have generally been less successful, especially in the long run. In addition, this consensus-building approach can help diverse stakeholders acquire a sense of ownership and commitment, leading to constructive engagement in implementation and follow-up.
Coordinating Environmental and Other Development Strategies: With a focus on issue-specific strategies, it became important for many cities to consistently coordinate strategies.
The primary need was to coordinate across the separate issue-specific strategies, in order to understand and incorporate the important inter-relationships among different environmental issues and strategies.
A second need was to coordinate with existing plans and strategies which were likely to originate from a different approach and therefore might not readily relate to the EPM issue-specific strategy approach. A basic requirement was a framework - an organised process - for cooperation and collaboration.
50 This did not require the preparation of a "comprehensive" overall strategy - especially not in the old-fashioned Master Plan sense of comprehensive planning. On the contrary, an effective coordination framework concentrates on the inter-linkages between issue-specific strategies and focuses especially on the needs for, and benefits of, inter-agency collaboration and mutually supportive joint action.
The concern in cities is increasing for "connectedness" rather than "comprehensiveness", in order to maximise potential complementarities, such as shared budget allocations, co-ordinated instruments of implementation, and overlapping geographic scope.
Cities Improve Effective Implementation of Environmental Strategies: How cities develop, agree and implement issue-specific as well as organisation- specific environmental action plans to operationalise their agreed environmental management and urban development strategies.
The Istanbul Manifesto recommends: "Improve effective implementation of environmental strategies through measures such as the following: Application of the full range of implementation capabilities (e.g. regulations, economic incentives, investment programmes, and public information campaigns); through packages of mutually supportive interventions; continuing involvement and consensus of all stakeholders; Main streaming of environmental responsibilities; agreement on action plans for implementation within a coherent strategic framework that has wide acceptance and political support; and through regular monitoring, evaluation and feedback of implementation results. (Istanbul Manifesto, June 1996)
Applying the Full Range of Implementation Capabilities: Implementation is very often a weak point: cities all over the world, but especially those in lower-income and transitional countries, have chronic difficulties with implementing strategies and plans.
With a firm foundation of broad-based stakeholder involvement and support, however, cities find it easier to mobilise diverse and complementary resources and capabilities for effective implementation.
In particular, the active involvement of a wide variety of public and private, formal and informal stakeholders can provide valuable implementation resources - for example, local knowledge and manpower, untapped human resources, in-kind economic and financial inputs, previously-unused private sector or household sector finance, public agencies not previously involved. With a multi-actor approach to implementation, it becomes possible to utilise, in a coordinated and mutually-reinforcing way, a very wide variety of implementation instruments and techniques, including the following:
laws and regulations fiscal and economic incentives strategic capital investments public information and education campaigns
Agreeing on Action Plans for Implementation:
51 Experience has shown the value of an integrated process leading from strategies directly into action plans, utilising the same participatory and consultative mechanisms in a continuous process.
This approach helps reduce the conflicts which commonly arise when strategy- formulation and plan-implementation activities are separated and dealt with in different institutions.
Action Plans have been most successful when formulated as clear and detailed agreements for co-ordinated action, including agency-specific and stakeholder- specific agreements which describe each agency's or stakeholder's commitments for priority actions, within a well-defined timetable, typically including:
Allocation of staff time and resources, Use of financial resources and, for both investment and for operation and maintenance, Detailed geographic focus, Application of other relevant instruments for implementation, and use of a common system for monitoring the observance of commitments and achievement of action plan objectives.
Formulated in this way, action plans are much more effective, and far more likely to be implemented successfully, than old-fashioned Master Plans or independent annual budgeting exercises by separate agencies.
Developing Packages of Mutually Supportive Interventions: As part of developing action plans, a variety of interventions will usually be identified and elaborated. Cities have found that interventions become more effective when formulated into sets of mutually supportive actions. Interventions, for example, are generally much more effective - and sustainable - if they are planned and implemented in combination with a variety of other, complementary activities, such as community involvement, private sector involvement, or changes in laws or regulations.
By inter-linking planned intervention, the overall impact can be greatly increased - and this is precisely the advantage of developing interventions through multi-actor and multi-disciplinary working groups. Similar benefits can be gained among capital investment as well, by developing separate investment proposals into mutually reinforcing "packages" of related capital investment and technical assistance projects.
Investments are more likely to succeed when they relate to a strategic framework, when they are part of a mutually supportive package of interventions, and when they have been agreed by all those whose cooperation is required. Such investments are more attractive to potential funders.
Reconfirming Political Support and Mobilizing of Resources: Experience has shown that there are, of course, no foolproof ways to ensure the maintenance of political support for desirable environmental management actions.
52 Nonetheless, a participatory approach which carries the open involvement and public commitment of a wide range of stakeholders, public and private, generally stands a better chance of generating and maintaining the necessary understanding and support.
Of particular importance is the cultivation of organisational support - the support, explicit or tacit, of key administrators and managers in important institutions. Successful maintenance of political and organisational support has also been proven to make it easier to mobilise and effectively apply the necessary technical and financial resources.
Indeed, when investment proposals and packages of interventions come out of an effective participatory and consultative process, with good evidence of broad-based political and organisational support, these investments become much more attractive to potential sources of finance.
Cities Institutionalise Environmental Planning and Management: How cities incorporate EPM activities into their institutional structure and behaviour and establish "system-wide" capacities to maintain the EPM process in the long run. The Istanbul Manifesto recommends: "Build capacities system-wide, involving all sectors of society, through a long-term and continuing process.
Institutionalise broad-based participation in decision-making through a firm legal framework. To this end, strengthen existing institutions and mechanisms for cross- sectoral and inter-institutional coordination, rather than creating new ones. Enhance institutional capabilities through information, education/training and communication efforts at all levels.
Establish measurable and time-based indicators to monitor and evaluate institutional and participatory capacities. Disseminate monitoring results to all concerned, for a transparent review and adjustment of EPM". (Istanbul Manifesto, June 1996)
Strengthening System-Wide Capacities for EPM: Cities have found that, in order for the improved environmental planning and management process to be sustainable, it is crucial to build long-term system-wide EPM capacities. The process needs to become firmly incorporated into the organisations, institutions and activities of the city, and into their daily routines of activity.
Accomplishing this typically involves a wide range of efforts such as structural reforms and legislation, adjustment of recurrent budgets, skill-training, awareness-building and public information, and provision of essential equipment. These system-wise strengthening efforts usually include not just public sector bodies, but the whole array of private and community sector groups which are involved.
Strengthening efforts have also been proven to work better if sustained over a period of time and not treated as "one-off" exercises. In this way they have a better chance of becoming firmly incorporated into the routine operations and expectations of all the various actors.
53 Institutionalising Broad-Based Participatory Approaches to Decision- Making: Experience has shown that to move successfully through the various tasks of issue-identification, strategy-formulation, action-planning, and implementation, the city's "stakeholders" not only need to be identified and mobilised, but also empowered through legislation and with the knowledge, understanding, and capability to effectively participate in an informed, constructive, sustained way.
This has proven to be best supported by a clear commitment to capacity- and institution-building for stakeholder participation, encompassing the full range of stakeholders.
These include public and semi-public entities in a wide range of sectors and roles, at municipal, regional and national levels; the private sector (for example the business community, consultant firms, research institutions, training bodies), both formal and informal, and the community sector (NGOs, CBOs, neighbourhood groups, voluntary associations and women's groups).
Institutionalisation of these participatory capacities is usually aided by a variety of measures, such as:
(a) consistent sharing and systematic dissemination of information; (b) documentation in non-technical and, where appropriate, local language; (c) capacity-building programmes specifically designed for NGOs and CBOs; (d) lower-level skill-training focused on small-scale organisations; (e) direct technical assistance to informal sector groups; and (f) "sensitivity" training for public sector institutions to enhance their understanding of the needs and perspectives of non-public groups and organisations.
Monitoring, Evaluating, and Adjusting the EPM System: Variety of experiences have reinforced the importance of systematic monitoring and evaluation as an integral part of strengthening environmental planning and management. Monitoring and evaluation is vital for understanding how well the EPM process is working and providing appropriate guidance:
Is the information reliable and useable?
What are the gaps or problems in strategy co-ordination?
How effectively are stakeholders being incorporated?
Are action plans being implemented in a cross-sectoral and effective way?
The databases established through work on the City Environmental Profile, and through subsequent work on strategies and action plans, can provide some useful indicators. But cities have found it to be crucial to develop a clear and reliable institutional framework and process, both for monitoring (regular
54 checking of performance indicators) and also for evaluation (periodic analysis and assessment of actions and achievements).
The information from these monitoring and evaluation activities has proven to be essential for policy guidance - to inform the partners and, thereby, to give them a basis on which to adjust and improve the environmental planning and monitoring process.
The more successful monitoring and evaluation systems, therefore, tend to be those which are not given over to isolated technical units but which involve all of the relevant organisations and stakeholders, especially key decision- makers, backed up by specialist skills in a co-ordinating capacity. It is also important to stress that monitoring and evaluation here is not concerned with final outputs, such as statistical measurement of the physical environment, but most crucially is focused directly on the effectiveness of the EPM process itself.
Cities Make More Efficient Use of Resources for Effecting Change: How cities mobilise and use resources (of all kinds) in a focused way, to effect significant changes in urban environmental management, seize special opportunities, leverage, and make strategic use of resources, in order to maximise their impact; and to strategically use external resources to complement local resources.
The Istanbul Manifesto recommends:
"Make optimal use of existing local and international resources through an approach that is participatory, transparent, and intersectoral. Focus on local, community based activities that are replicable. Share experiences through demonstration projects and through appropriate networking at the local, regional and national levels. Improve cooperation between existing programmes and projects
Utilising Special Opportunities: In many city experiences, "special" opportunities have been capitalised upon, to give a powerful push forward for particular environmental planning and management initiatives.
This creative use of strategic opportunities has often helped to "kick-start" an EPM process or to give it a new impetus or direction. For example, the radical changes in institutional and political structures which have swept Central/Eastern Europe or South Africa have provided important opportunities to move forwards in ways not previously possible.
Reconstruction after a major disaster has often provided a major opening, both because of the investment and construction taking place and because of the urgency of action and the accompanying political support. Other relevant opportunities might include updating of an urban development plan, a major new investment programme, or a change in the local political balance.
55 Applying Specific Leveraging Strategies: When seeking to maximise the impact of existing resources and capabilities for improving environmental planning and management, cities have found it helpful to develop and apply specific strategies for "leveraging" their activities.
For example, a strategy of "demonstration-replication" is often an effective approach: using limited resources to demonstrate - on a small scale - an initiative that is so designed that it can then be up-scaled repeated subsequently on a broader scale. This can be particularly useful when administrative and technical resources are limited. This type of leveraging of effort can also be used to apply the "demonstrated" approach to other topics/issues as well as to other places.
Carefully selected efforts or investments, even on a small scale, can sometimes "show the way" and call forth large-scale matching and supplementary resources from other sources. Seriously adopting and actively promoting the "facilitator role" of government is another effective strategy, which can expand and mobilise non-public and non-traditional resources when the public sector faces severe constraints on financial and technical resources.
Making Strategic Use of External Support: Although the vast majority of technical and financial resources for environmental planning and management comes from local sources, external aid and technical know-how can play a valuable supporting role.
Thus, it is important for cities to work out appropriate roles for external assistance, to most effectively link a city's EPM process with the relevant external capabilities and support. A key strategy here has been to focus limited external resources within a narrow framework of linked activities, so that they can build (not substitutes for) local capacities - and so they are directed specifically to the most critical points in the EPM process.
Cities have also found, however, that care must be taken that external resources are of a type and scale that matches the "absorptive capacity" of local institutions.
CONTACT
The Urban Environment Forum (UEF) Tel: (254-20) 623225/623565 Fax: (254-20) 623715/624264 E-mail: [email protected]
5.15 The Urban Management Programme (UMP)
The Urban Management Programme (UMP) was launched in 1986 as an initiative of UNDP, UN-HABITAT, the World Bank and several bilateral partners (currently the UK, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Germany). It is one of the largest urban global technical assistance programmes of the UN system.
56 Phase 3 of the programme (1996 - 2001) saw concrete activities in 120 cities in 57 developing countries in Africa, the Arab States, Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean. This was achieved through the programmes' six regional and sub- regional offices, 19 regional anchor institutions and over 40 national and local institutions and other networks of community-based organizations, NGOs and municipal associations.
Now in Phase 4 (2001 - 2006), the programme is working to institutionalize UMP participatory processes, consolidate experiences and deepen knowledge and understanding on urban management. UMP has an explicit focus on activities that impact the living conditions of the poor in cities and towns. The programme continues to develop and apply urban management knowledge in the fields of participatory urban governance, alleviation of urban poverty, urban environmental management and HIV/AIDS. Gender is a cross-cutting theme throughout.
What is the Urban Management Programme?
Introduction and Strategy
The UMP is one of the largest global technical assistance programmes in the urban sector. It is a joint undertaking of UNDP, UN-HABITAT and the World Bank. The programme develops and applies urban management knowledge in the fields of participatory urban governance, alleviation of urban poverty and urban environmental management, and facilitates the dissemination of this knowledge at the city, country, regional and global levels.
The development objective of the UMP is to strengthen the contribution that cities and towns in developing countries make towards human development, including poverty reduction, improvement of local participatory governance, improvement of environmental conditions and the management of economic growth.
The main strategies of the Urban Management Programme in Phase 3 were the City Consultation Methodology and the Institutional Anchoring Process. It is through the city consultation that participatory decision-making and governance is achieved, and through institutional anchoring that sustainability is ensured.
The global Urban Management Programme Office is located within UN-HABITAT in Nairobi, Kenya.
There are four Regional Office and two sub-regional offices as follows: The Regional Office for Africa in Abidjan, Ivory Coast and the East and Southern Africa Sub- Regional Office in Johannesburg, South Africa; The Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific in Bangkok, Thailand, and the South Asia Sub-Regional Office in New Delhi, India, the Regional Office for Arab States in Cairo, Egypt, and the Regional Office for Latin America and the Caribbean in Quito, Ecuador.
City Consultation and Institutional Anchoring activities are undertaken by these Regional and Sub-Regional Offices.
57 Initiated in 1986 with Phase 1 (1986 - 1991), the UMP took a global perspective and focused on the development of urban management frameworks and tools on the issues of land management, municipal finance and administration, infrastructure and urban environment. Lessons were synthesized and key information concerning support to national and regional capacity-building was widely disseminated.
Phase 2 (1992 - 1996) used the frameworks and lessons learned to build capacity at the regional level, using mechanisms such as regional panels of experts and workshops and consultations to introduce new policies and tools. During Phase 2, the Programme was decentralised and Regional UMP Offices were established to carry out programme activities.
Following the Habitat II Conference in Istanbul in 1996, Phase 3 (1997 - 2001) was initiated. It built on and re-focused the work of the first two phases to the local level, emphasizing city consultations and institutional anchoring. Phase 3 had three themes: urban poverty alleviation, urban environmental sustainability and participatory urban governance, with gender as a cross-cutting issue. During this Phase, 120 city consultations have been carried out through 19 regional anchor institutions and 40 national and local institutions.
Phase 4 (2001 - 2006) is currently underway. It continues with the themes from Phase 3 and a new focus area has been added: HIV/AIDS. This is a critical area and an urgent priority, especially in terms of urban management to address the spread and treatment of the disease.
Phase 4 brings a stronger focus on pro-poor governance and knowledge management activities that have direct impacts on the living conditions of the urban poor. It is focused on synthesizing the experiences of the first three Phases and further institutionalizing the participatory process. Greater emphasis will be placed on the consolidation of experiences, the integration of UMP activities with other initiatives and a stronger knowledge base on urban management.
City Consultation Methodology: 120 city consultations have been undertaken during Phase 3, and these consultations represent a major achievement of the programme at the country and city level. The underlying premise of a UMP City Consultation (CC) is that poor city administration is often the result of weak rapport with civil society, particularly where bureaucratic and unresponsive modes of administration are the norm. The UMP City Consultation approach has been designed to bridge this gap so that city administration and key stakeholders in the civil society can participate in decision- making. The aim of a city consultation is to institutionalise the participatory decision making process.
City consultations bring together local authorities, the private sector, community representatives and other stakeholders within a city to discuss specific issues and solutions to key urban problems. They are a continuous process of dialogue among stakeholders and the city government. While there are differences in the city consultation process from region to region and even from city to city, an important outcome of this dialogue is an action plan that has citywide support.
58 From the 120 UMP City Consultations underway during the current Programme Phase 3, some key lessons have also emerged, despite different circumstances under which local governments operate. Strong leadership was part of every successful city consultation, and the sustainability of the process was directly linked to the existence of well-organised stakeholder groups. A strong sense of ownership in the process is also required – and given the relatively short tenure of local governments it is critical to ensure there is ownership at various levels of government and civil society.
Capacity-building at both the local and higher levels of government and the capacity of civil society organisations and the private sector needs to be strengthened. There is now a perceived need to scale-up the efforts initiated at the city level to the national level, involving many more cities and influencing national decentralisation policies.
A synthesis of these city consultation experiences and lessons learned is being prepared by the Urban Management Programme.
Anchor Institutions - UMP Partnership in the Regions: Institutional Anchoring Process A key to the sustainability of the Urban Management Programme is institutional anchoring, or partnerships with selected urban management institutes in the region. There are 20 key Anchor Institutions in the Urban Management Programme.
AFRICA Bureau National d'Etudes Techniques pour le Développement (BNETD) Abidjan, Cote d' Ivoire Email:[email protected]
Graduate School of Public and Development Management (P&DM), Johannesburg, South Africa. Email:[email protected]
Municipal Development Programme (MDP) Eastern and Southern Africa Regional Office, Harare, Zimbabwe. Email: [email protected]
Development Policy Centre (DPC), Ibadan, Nigeria. Email:[email protected]
Institut Africain de Gestion Urbaine (IAGU) Email: [email protected]
ASIA PACIFIC Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Bangkok, Thailand. Email: [email protected]
All India Institute of Local Self Government (AIILSG), Mumbai, India Email:[email protected]
Local Government Development Foundation (LOGODEF), Pasay City, Philippines Email: [email protected]
Urban Experts Network, Hanoi, Vietnam. Email: [email protected]
59 SEVANATHA, Colombo, Sri Lanka. Email:[email protected]
ARAB STATES REGION Environmental Quality International (EQI), Cairo, Egypt. Email: [email protected]
Centre for Environment and Development for Arab Region and Europe (CEDARE), Cairo, Egypt. Email:[email protected]
Fédération Nationale des Villes Tunisiennes (FNVT), Tunis, Tunisia. Email: [email protected]
Housing and Urban Development Corporation (HUDC), Amman, Jordan. Email: [email protected]
LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN Centro de Capacitación y Desarrollo de los Gobiernos Locales (IULA-CELCADEL) Email:[email protected]
Centro de Investigaciones (CIUDAD), Quito, Ecuador Email: [email protected]
CEARAH PERIFERIA, Fortaleza Brazil. Email:[email protected]
FEDEVIVIENDA, Santa fé de Bogota, Colombia
Instituto de Promocion de la Economica Social (IPES)
Centro Operacional de Vivienda y Poblamiento (COPEVI), Mexico Agora XXI Email: [email protected]
Through these partnerships, city consultations and other UMP activities have been jointly undertaken in Phase 3. In Phase 4 of the programme, Anchor Institutions are taking on more and more of the UMP work and knowledge management. With these 20 regional anchor institutions, the UMP has created a global network of institutions that are established leaders in the field of urban governance. The result is a considerable resource base for future urban management activities at the regional and global level.
City Development Strategies
The Urban Management Programme, as an extension of the city consultation methodology, has implemented City Development Strategies in seven cities to further improve the capacity of municipal authorities to implement participatory management mechanisms. Those cities are Bamako, Mali, Cuenca, Ecuador, Colombo, Sri Lanka, Johannesburg, South Africa, Santo Andre, Brazil, Shenyang, China and Tunis, Tunisia.
UMP CITY CONTACTS Johannesburg, South Africa www.joburg.org.za Bamako, Mali Mayur Maganal
60 Boukary Diarra, Bamako City Hall Corporate Planning Unit District de Bamako, BP 256 Johannesburg Metropolitan Council Bamako, Mali Email: [email protected] Tel: ( 223) 22 19 17 Fax: (223) 22 55 40 Housing Component: Seydou Diakité Spadework Consortium, M Stewart Alphalog, Bp 1881 Bamako Tel: 011-6467923 Tel/Fax: (223) 22 84 40 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Water and sanitation component: Cuenca, Ecuador Johannesburg Water, Wallace Mayne Carmen Balarezo Tel: 011-6881605 Municipality of Cuenca Email: [email protected] Sucre y Benigno Malo, Cuenca, Ecuador Santo Andre, Brazil Tel: 593-7 831 353 Executive Agency: The Greater ABC Fax: 593-7 834 359 Economic E-mail: [email protected] Development Agency Rua Laura, 543 – Vila Bastos, 0940-240, Juan Fernando Cordero, Alcalde Santo Municipality of Cuenca André, SP Sucre y Benigno Malo, Cuenca, E-mail: [email protected] Ecuador Tel: 593 7 840 674 / 593 7 839 299 Executive agency team Fax: 593-7 834 359 Executive director: Engineer Celso Augusto E-mail: [email protected], Daniel [email protected] Executive Secretary: José Carlos Paim Vieira Research Coordination: João Bastista Gustavo Muñoz Gonzalez, Gerente Pamplona Agencia Cuencana de Desorrollo e Executive Board of Directors Advisors: Intergracion Nadia Somekh/Jeroen Klink Regional (ACUDIR) José Carlos Paim Vieira Edificio "Camara de Industrias de Secretário Executivo da Agência Cuenca" Oficina Tel: (11) 4992-7352 907 Fax: (11) 4437-2036 Tel: 593 7 838 598 / 843 852 E-mail: [email protected] Fax: 593 7 838 598 / 843 852 Email: [email protected] João Batista Pamplona Coordenador de Pesquisa da Agência Colombo, Sri Lanka Tel: (11) 4992-7352 Mr. Herath Mudiyanselage Udeni Fax: (11) 4437-2036 Chularathna E-mail: [email protected] Executive Director, SEVANATHA – Urban Resource Centre 14, School Lane, Nawala, Rajagiriya, Sri Lanka Tel: 94-1 879710 / 94 74 404259 Fax: 94-1 878 893 Email: [email protected]
61 Mr. N.S. Jayasundera Deputy Municipal Commissioner (Professional Services), Colombo Municipal Council, Town Hall
Colombo 07 Sri Lanka. Tel: 94-1-681198 Fax: 94-1-671282 E-mail: [email protected]
The City Development Strategy (CDS) is one of the two key approaches within the Cities Alliance. The Cities Alliance was conceived in 1999 as a coalition of cities and their development partners, committed to address urban poverty reduction as a global public policy issue. Consultative Group Members are UN-HABITAT and the World Bank, Associations of Local Authorities, and Governments.
A CDS is seen as an instrument to develop pro-poor urban governance in cities. Ultimately, it is about participatory decision-making. For cities facing the challenges of urbanizing poverty, increasing competitiveness and emerging pressures on economic and environmental sustainability, the CDS provides a framework for economic growth, making it sustainable and equitable through pro-poor policies, strategies and actions. These CDS exercises have provided an opportunity for UMP partner institutions to scale up the UMP city consultations in seven cities, and to include the dimension of economic growth. The experience also provided important lessons for adopting participatory processes involving all stakeholders in a CDS exercise.
The UMP CDS approach is based on three important principles of enablement, participation and capacity building. Empowering local authorities and other partners, through enabling legal and institutional frameworks, is a necessary condition for the CDS exercise. Without the participation of those at the local level - local authorities and the urban poor - sustainable citywide strategies cannot be achieved. This participation must be genuine, resulting in local ownership of the process. For that participation to be meaningful, civil society organizations and city government institutions need solid institutional and technical capacity.
The goals of a CDS process include a collective city vision and strategy, improved urban governance and management, increased investment and systematic and sustained reductions in urban poverty. The most important product of a CDS is a citywide strategy that turns the city into an engine of equitable economic development and has a direct impact on poverty reduction, local economic growth and improved governance.
HIV/AIDS has become part of the permanent condition in human settlements around the world especially in Africa and Asia. The highest incidence of HIV/AIDS is in cities and towns. There is growing consensus that strategies to reduce HIV/AIDS must go beyond health interventions because of its severe social consequences. The disease
62 exacerbates poverty, creates orphans, marginalises people and stigmatises those afflicted and their families. It has also weakened the ability of local urban institutions to deliver services because so many employees are affected at every level of society.
It is for this reason that last year, UN-HABITAT established a new initiative to involve local governments in the struggle. Local governments are the authorities best placed to lead, mobilise and co-ordinate a wider response at the local level in the fight against HIV/AIDS. The initiative forms part of the Urban Management Programme (UMP). The UMP’s overall aim is to develop and apply urban management knowledge and to promote inclusive urban governance to alleviate poverty, improve environmental conditions and enhance economic growth in urban areas.
UN-HABITAT, through its urban mandate, is ideally placed in the UN system to take on HIV/AIDS using its wide network of partners, particularly at the municipal level in towns and cities around the world. City administrations are often ill-equipped to manage local strategies because of fragmentation of services, weak administrative processes and poor dialogue between civil society, local and national government.
5.16 Regional Offices and Activities The global Urban Management Programme Office is located within UN-HABITAT in Nairobi, Kenya. There are four Regional Office and two sub-regional offices as follows: The Regional Office for Africa in Abidjan, Ivory Coast and the East and Southern Africa Sub-Regional Office in Johannesburg, South Africa, The Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific in New Delhi, India, and the South Asia Sub-Regional Office in New Delhi, India, the Regional Office for Arab States in Cairo, Egypt, and the Regional Office for Latin America and the Caribbean in Quito, Ecuador.
Regional Offices
63 UN-HABITAT Headquarters - Nairobi, ROAAS, UN-HABITAT - Nairobi, Kenya Kenya P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: (254-2) 623221 Tel: (254-2) 621234 Fax: (254-2) 623904 Fax: (254-2) 624266/624267 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] www.unhabitat.org/roaas/ www.unhabitat.org/ UN-HABITAT Regional Office for Asia UN-HABITAT Regional Office for Latin and the Pacific - Fukuoka, Japan America and the Caribbean - Rio De ACROS Fukuoka Building, 8th Floor Janeiro, Brazil 1-1-1 Tenjin, Chuo-ku Edificio Teleporto Fukuoka 810, Japan Av.PresidenteVargas,3131/1304 Tel: (81-92) 724-7121 20210-030 - Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Fax: (81-92) 724-7124 Tel: (55-21) 2515-1700 E-mail: [email protected] Fax: (55-21) 2515 1701 www.fukuoka.unhabitat.org E-mail: [email protected] www.habitat-lac.org Liaison & Information Office: Geneva, Switzerland Liaison & Information Office: New UN-HABITAT Office at Geneva/ Bureau York, United States du CNUEH(Habitat) à Genève UN-HABITAT International Environment House/ Room DC2-0943, Two UN Plaza Maison Internationale de New York, N.Y. 10017, U.S.A. l'Environnement Tel: (1-212) 963 4200 11-13 chemin des Anémones Fax: (1-212) 963 8721 CH 1219 Chatelaine/ Genève E-mail: [email protected] Tel: +(41 22) 917 86 46/48 Fax: +(41 22) 917 80 46 Liaison & Information Office: E-mail: [email protected] Budapest, Hungary UN-HABITAT Office Liaison & Information Office: Brussels, H-1124 Budapest Belgium Németvölgyi út 41.2.Ép.1.1., Hungary UN-HABITAT Tel: (36-1)-202-2490 14 rue Montoyer Fax: (36-1) 356-0602 or 1000-Brussels
64 Tel/Fax: (36-1) 316-4604 Belgium E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]
Liaison & Information Office: Moscow, Liaison & Information Office: Chennai, Russian Federation India Habitat Executive Bureau UN-HABITAT 8 Stroitelei St., 2 Building ChennaiOffice,Thalamuthu 117987GSP-1, Moscow Natarjan Building Russian Federation Egmore, Chennai 600 008, India Tel: (7-095) 930-62-64 Tel:(91-44)8530802 Fax: (7-095) 930-03-79 Fax: (91-44) 8572673 Telex: 411013 STROJ SU E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]
Liaison & Information Office: Beijing, China UN-HABITAT, Beijing Office No.9 Sanlihe Road, Beijing 100835 People’s Republic of China Tel: (86-10) 6839 4750 Fax: (86-10) 6839 4749 E-mail: [email protected] www.cin.gov.cn/habitat
Africa Region In the recent wave of decentralisation in Africa, local authorities and other stakeholders are working together to find ways to manage new responsibilities. This process has been facilitated by UMP activities through the Regional Office for Africa and city consultation activities have been completed or are underway in 39 cities through the engagement of regional anchor institutions and local partners. Follow up support to the city consultation has taken many forms depending on local government resources and funding opportunities.
Arab States Region The UMP Arab States Office is working in 21 cities in the region and has been successful in improving the living conditions of the poor in many cities through the city consultation process. These successes have been made possible by the sustained collaboration between local UMP partners and the concerned municipalities and by an advocacy approach that goes beyond the provision of technical advice. UMP Arab States has also made a concerted effort to include gender concerns into all its activities. This effort has resulted in modified city consultation guidelines to include the gender dimension, and improved awareness and coverage of the issue by the local media.
Asia and the Pacific Region
65 In Asia and the Pacific, decentralisation and local autonomy are gaining momentum and with this the interest in capacity-building of local governments is growing. The most recent experiences of UMP city consultations in Asia have shown that the participatory urban governance approach is essential for achieving improvements in existing urban conditions, processes and institutions. The UMP Asia Regional Office has undertaken 20 city consultations during Phase 3 and the outcome of these have indicated the acceptance of participatory urban governance in Asian cities. Many cities have been able to achieve significant success, which can be built upon and replicated.
Latin America and the Caribbean Region The city consultation methodology is well suited to the current situation in the Latin America and Caribbean region. Given the high rate of urbanisation in the region (73%), urban areas in LAC have important lessons for other regions in the world in meeting the challenges of urbanisation. The UMP LAC Regional Office has been active in 40 city consultations and has been successful in contributing to institutionalising and formalising participatory governance in the region, as well as having a positive impact on improving life and conditions for poor and excluded communities. Mainstreaming a gender perspective has been an important component of UMP activities.
6.0 Media & Events
Media Contacts
If you wish to get further information, please contact:
Sharad Shankardass, Spokesperson Media & Press Relations Unit, UN-HABITAT Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254 20 623153/3151 Fax: +254 20 624060 E-mail: [email protected] or Ms. Zahra A. Hassan Media Liaison UN-HABITAT Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254 20 623151,Fax: +254 20 624060, E-mail: [email protected]
Events
66 September 2003 29/9/2003 2/10/2003 Sustainable Cities Alexandria, For further information, please Programme / Local Egypt contact: Agenda 21 Global Meeting 2003 Chief, Urban Environment Section P.O. Box 30030 theme : Nairobi, Kenya “ENVIRONMENTALLY Tel: +254-20-62 3263/3164 SUSTAINABLE Fax: +254-20-62 3715 URBANISATION” E-mail: [email protected] Developing Environmental Planning and Management Capacities for Poverty Reduction October 2003 5/10/2003 8/10/2003 IFHP 47th World Vienna, International Federation for Housing Congress Austria and Planning (IFHP) Theme: Cities and Markets, Shifts in Joke Bierhuys Urban Development IFHP Secretariat Tel: +31 70 324 4557 Fax: +31 70 328 2085 Email: [email protected] Website: www.ifhp2003.at
6/10/2003 6/10/2003 World Habitat Day Rio de UN-HABITAT Theme: Water for Janeiro, Cities Brazil Mr. Amrik Kalsi UN-HABITAT Nairobi, Kenya Email: [email protected] www.unhabitat.org 17/10/2003 22/10/2003 The 39th International Cairo, ISoCaRP Planning Congress Egypt International Society of City and Regional Planners
Judy van Hemert - Executive Director Willem Witsenplein 6, Rm 459a 2595 BK The Hague The Netherlands Tel: +(31-70) 346-2654 Fax: +(31-70) 361-7909 Email: [email protected] http://www.isocarp.org 19/10/2003 22/10/2003 2003 International Waterfront City of Belfast and WHO European
67 Healthy Cities Hall, Healthy Cities Network. Conference Belfast Belfast, Northern World Health Organization Regional Ireland Office for Europe 8 Scherfigsvej, Copenhagen DK- 2100 Tel: +45 3917 1479 Fax +45 3917 1860 email:[email protected]
Belfast Healthy Cities 22-24 Lombard Street, Belfast BT1 1RD, N Ireland Tel: +44 28 9032 8811 Fax: +44 28 9032 8333 email: [email protected]
Happening 9 Wellington Park Belfast BT9 6DJ N Ireland Tel: +44 28 9066 4020 Fax: +44 28 9038 1257 email: [email protected]
For more information go to: www.healthycitiesbelfast2003.com 24/10/2003 26/10/2003 Mordern Earth BuildingBerlin, “Die Wille” gGmbH 2003 Germany “Die Wille” gGmbH Kohlfurter Str, 41-43 D-10999, Berlin tel:++49-30-617762-43 fax:++49-30-26476299 email: info@moderner- lehmbau.com www.moderner-lehmbau.com November 2003 3/11/2003 5/11/2003 International Weihai, UN-HABITAT Conference on China Ministry of Construction, China; Sustainable Weihai Municipality, Urbanization Strategies Mr Jianguo Shen Inter-Regional Adviser UN-HABITAT P.O.Box 30030, Nairobi Tel:00254-2-623541 Fax:00254-2-624264e-
68 mail:[email protected]
7/11/2003 9/11/2003 Asian Conference on New Delhi, Indian Environmental Society (IES) Environmental India Education Dr. Desh Bandhu President Theme of Conference: Indian Environmental Society (IES) "Environmental U-112, Vidhata House, Education and Civil Vikas Marg, Shakarpur, Society" Delhi - 110092 Phone: (011) 22046823/22046824/22450749 Fax: (011) 22523311 Email: [email protected]
23/11/2003 26/11/2003 World Wind Energy Cape For any enquiries contact: Conference - Town, The Registrar Renewable Energy South Strategic Business Services (Pty) Exhibition 2003 Africa Ltd P O Box 1059, Bellville 7535 Tel: +27 21 914 2888,
Fax: +27 21 914 2890 Email: [email protected]
Annexe 1 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS
69 The eight Millennium Development Goals constitute an ambitious agenda to significantly improve the human condition by 2015. The Goals set clear targets for reducing poverty, hunger, disease, illiteracy, environmental degradation, and discrimination against women. For each Goal a set of Targets and Indicators have been defined and are used to track the progress in meeting the Goals.
Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education Goal 3: Promote gender equality and empower women Goal 4: Reduce child mortality Goal 5: Improve maternal health Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development
Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
Target 1 Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people whose income is less than one dollar a day
Indicator 1 Proportion of population below $1 per day (PPP values) Indicator 2 Poverty gap ratio [incidence x depth of poverty] Indicator 3 Share of poorest quintile in national consumption Target 2 Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger
Indicator 4 Prevalence of underweight children under five years of age Indicator 5 Proportion of population below minimum level of dietary energy consumption
Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education
Target 3 Ensure that, by 2015, children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling
Indicator 6 Net enrolment ratio in primary education Indicator 7 Proportion of pupils starting grade 1 who reach grade 5 Indicator 8 Literacy rate of 15-24 year olds
Goal 3: Promote gender equality and empower women
70 71