PDF - UN-Habitat

Page 1

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
Table of Contents
Foreword
Acknowledgements
Executive summary
I. Introduction
I.A. Urbanization, globalization and the shelter challenge
I.B. Shelter needs at the national scale
I.C. Shelter policy and its links with the overall economy
I.D. Effectiveness of policies, strategies and programmes in addressing the needs of the
poor and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
II. Background to and evolution of enabling shelter strategies
II.A. Background to the enabling approach in the shelter sector and the GSS
o
o
o
II.A.1. Habitat: United Nations Conference on Human Settlements
II.A.2. International Year of Shelter for the Homeless (IYSH)
II.A.3. Global Strategy for Shelter to the Year 2000 (GSS)
II.B. Evolution of housing policies and strategies and basic changes since the adoption of
the GSS
o
o
o
II.B.1. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
II.B.2. The Second United Nations Conference on Human Settlements
II.B.3. The Millennium Declaration
o II.B.4. Istanbul +5
II.C. II.C. Specific effects of enabling shelter strategies on national housing policies
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
Page 2

III.A. Governments’ and public bodies’ attitudes to informal settlements
III.B. Changes in the institutional arrangements responsible for shelter issues
o
o
o
III.B.1. Decentralization
III.B.2. Participation
III.B.3. Partnerships
III.C. Promoting public participation in decision-making in the shelter sector
III.D. Reviewing the legal and regulatory framework governing the shelter sector
o
o
o
III.D.1. Price controls
III.D.2. Property rights
III.D.3. Land use and building regulations
III.E. NGO/CBO involvement in shelter delivery
III.F. Specific effects on women and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
o
o
o
III.F.1. Poverty, vulnerability, disadvantage and discrimination
III.F.2. Women
III.F.3. Vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
IV.A. Mobilizing human resources in the shelter sector
o
o
o
o
o
IV.A.1. Public awareness of shelter issues
IV.A.2. Availability of information on capacities of government agencies, the private
sector and NGOs
IV.A.3. Training in alternative shelter provision options
IV.A.4. Training programmes for government agencies and the private sector
IV.A.5. The involvement of women and their organizations
IV.B. Housing finance
o
IV.B.1. Government and formal sector initiatives to increase housing finance
• a). Government banks and state-owned housing finance institutions
• b). Commercial banks and housing finance institutions
Page 3

• c). Lowering interest rates
• d). Easing regulations on collateral
• e). Flexible repayment schemes
• f). Earmarking of funds for low income groups
• g). Involvement of informal settlements in formal housing finance
• h). Community mortgage programmes
o
IV.B.2. Community initiatives in housing finance
• a). Community savings and loans schemes
• b). Daily savings schemes
o
o
IV.B.3. NGO programmes
IV.B.4. Microfinance
IV.C. Spatial planning and provision of urban land for housing
o
o
o
IV.C.1. Planning procedures, role of local authorities and increasing public
participation in decision-making
IV.C.2. Formulation and enforcement of urban planning standards
IV.C.3. Provision of urban land for housing, particularly for low-income households
• a). Serviced and unserviced land
• b). Land sharing
• c). Land readjustment
• d). Land expropriation and banking
• e). Resettlement and transfer of titles
o
IV.C.4. Recognition and use of informal land markets: Integrating them into formal
procedures
IV.D. Provision and operation of infrastructure and services
o
IV.D.1. Changes in service providers and operators
• a). Changing role of government
• b). Privatization
• c). Partnerships and community involvement
Page 4

o
IV.D.2. Mobilization of financial resources from infrastructure and services users
• a). Cost recovery
• b). Targeted subsidies, cross-subsidies and other support mechanisms
IV.E. Shelter production and improvement
o
o
o
o
IV.E.1. Shelter production by public organizations
IV.E.2. Support to informal sector and small-scale housing producers
IV.E.3. Support to the development of appropriate building materials and
construction technologies
IV.E.4. Support to self-help efforts by community groups and housing
co-operatives
• a). Community groups
• b). Co-operatives
o
IV.E.5. The role of NGOs in supporting shelter development
• a). Organization and representation
• b). Mediation and facilitation
• c). Participation in policy and decision-making
• d). Demonstration projects
• e). Shelter delivery
o
o
IV.E.6. Contributions of the formal private sector to stimulating low-income housing
development
IV.E.7. Rental housing
V. Assessing the implementation of enabling shelter strategies
V.A. Inner-city rehabilitation
V.B. Access to land
o
o
o
V.B.1. Shelter improvement without de jure security of tenure
V.B.2. Land sharing
V.B.3. Resettlement
V.C. Basic infrastructure and services
V.D. Slum upgrading
Page 5

V.E. Shelter production
V.F. National policy and strategy formulation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
VI.A. Observations and conclusions
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
VI.A.1. Overall progress
VI.A.2. Intervention v. liberalization
VI.A.3. Operationalizing the right to adequate housing
VI.A.4. The changing role and capacity of government
VI.A.5. Participation and partnerships
VI.A.6. Gender
VI.A.7. Reaching the poorest and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
VI.A.8. Rehabilitation of the existing housing stock
VI.A.9. Access to land
VI.A.10. Basic infrastructure and services
VI.A.11. Slum upgrading
VI.A.12. Housing finance
VI.A.13. Monitoring, evaluation, knowledge and information-sharing
VI.A.14. Scaling-up and sustainability
VI.A.15. The importance of political will
VI.B. Recommendations
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
VI.B.1. Intervention v. liberalization
VI.B.2. Operationalizing the right to adequate housing
VI.B.3. Role and capacity of the state
VI.B.4. Participation and partnerships
VI.B.5. Gender
VI.B.6. Reaching the poorest and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
VI.B.7. Rehabilitation of the existing housing stock
Page 6

o
o
o
o
o
o
o
VI.B.8. Access to land
VI.B.9. Basic infrastructure and services
VI.B.10. Slum upgrading
VI.B.11. Housing finance
VI.B.12. Monitoring, evaluation, knowledge and information-sharing
VI.B.13. Scaling-up and sustainability
VI.B.14. Political will
VI.C. Directions for future research
List of references and relevant documents
List of references
International legal instruments (and related interpretations), and declarations/programmes
of actions of United Nations conferences
o
o
o
International Covenants, Conventions and Declarations
Interpretative texts of international covenants/conventions
Declarations and programmes of action of United Nations Conferences
United Nations resolutions and other documents (UN-Doc …)
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
General Assembly (A/…)
Commission on Human Rights (E/CN.4/…)
Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights under the
Commission on Human Rights (until 1999 the Sub-Commission on Prevention of
Discrimination and Protection of Minorities) (E/CN.4/Sub.2/…)
Commission on the Status of Women (E/CN.6/…)
Commission on Sustainable Development (E/CN.17/…)
Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (E/ESCWA/…)
Commission on Human Settlements (HS/C/…)
Governing Council of the United Nations Human Settlements Programme
(HSP/GC/…)
World Urban Forum (HSP/WUF/…)
Page 7

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of Boxes
Box 1.
Box 2.
Box 3.
Box 4.
Box 5.
Box 6.
Box 7.
Box 8.
Box 9.
Capital spending on housing
The full and progressive realization of the right to adequate housing
The Cities Alliance
Changes in governments’ attitudes towards informal settlements in Africa
The gecekondus of Turkey
Adoption of decentralization policies in various countries
Sustainable urban development and good governance, Nigeria
The Community Action Planning (CAP) methodology
UN-HABITAT’s Global Urban Observatory (GUO) and Best Practices and Local Leadership
Programme (BLP)
Box 10. Gender and housing: the Pachacutec experience
Box 11. The Government Housing Bank of Thailand (GHB)
Box 12. The Urban Community Development Office (UCDO), Thailand
Box 13. The Community Mortgage Programme, the Philippines
Box 14. Examples of urban poor federation funds
Box 15. Development of land markets
Box 16. Small-scale independent services providers
Box 17. Cost recovery
Box 18. Transforming the lives of slum dwellers in Brazil
Box 19. Mexico’s National Fund for Popular Housing (FONHAPO)
Box 20. The People’s Housing Process and the People’s Housing Partnership Trust, South Africa
Box 21. The Build Together Programme, Namibia
Page 8

Box 22. Co-operative housing in transition countries
Box 23. NGOs involvement in the policy formulation process in Zimbabwe
Box 24. Promotion of rental housing by public and private sectors
Box 25. Perceived or de facto security of tenure
Box 26. Land proclamations in the Philippines
Box 27. Bolivia's anticrético system
Box 28. The community land trust in Tanzania-Bondeni, Voi, Kenya
Box 29. The experience of Pom Mahakan, Bangkok, Thailand
Box 30. ‘Due process’ in case of forced evictions and resettlement
Box 31. Sanitation for slum dwellers, Pune, India
Box 32. Slum Networking of Indore City, Indore, India
Box 33. The Community-Led Infrastructure Finance Facility (CLIFF)
Box 34. Components of slum upgrading
Box 35. The Kampung Improvement Programme (KIP), Indonesia
Box 36. The Luanda Sul Self-financed Urban Infrastructure Programme, Angola
Box 37. Popular Habitat Programme, San José, Costa Rica
Box 38. Justiciable elements of the right to adequate housing
Page 9

Box 1. Capital spending on housing
In general, capital spending on housing contributes between two and eight per cent of GDP, and 10 to 30
per cent of gross fixed capital formation (GFCF).a Housing services typically account for five to 10 per
cent of the GNP.b In the Middle East, for example, housing construction typically accounts for three per
cent of GDP,c and in Tunisia housing investment has averaged four per cent of GDP since 1990.d Housing
expenditure in Indonesia is only some 1.5 per cent of GDP, compared with two to eight per cent in
comparable neighbouring Asian countries.e However, in Latin America, housing is an especially important
sector in the urban economy, typically contributing between 15 and 20 per cent of GNP.f In South
Africa, government expenditure on housing increased by 150 per cent from R3.6 billion to R9.1 billion
between 1998 and 2003 because of the Housing Subsidy Scheme.g On the other hand, in Kenya, central
government expenditure on housing decreased by 38 per cent in fiscal year 1999,h owing to the poor
performance of the national economy, and it has since remained low.
Sources: a). UNCHS and ILO, 1995. b). Angel, 2000:24. c). Dhonte and others, 2000. d). Erbaş an
d Nothaft, 2002. e). Hoek-Smit, 2002. f). Mayo, 1999. g). Vuyo, n.d. h). Majale and Albu, 2001.
Page 10

Box 2. The full and progressive realization of the right to adequate housing
The Habitat Agenda outlines various ways in which governments can bring about the full and progressive
realization of the right to adequate housing. One of these is:“Effective monitoring and evaluation of
housing conditions, including the extent of homelessness and inadequate housing, and, in
consultation with the affected population, formulating and adopting appropriate housing policies
and implementing effective strategies and plans to address those problems.”a
In particular, there is need to “provide detailed information about those groups within …
society that are vulnerable and disadvantaged with regard to housing”. These groups include, in
particular, homeless persons and families, those inadequately housed and without ready access to basic
amenities, those living in ‘illegal’ settlements, those subject to forced evictions and low-income groups.b
The Habitat Agenda further recommends that all the actors in the shelter process should regularly
monitor and evaluate their own performances in the implementation of the Habitat Agenda. This applies
to local authorities, the private sector and communities. It proposes that they do this through comparable
human settlements and shelter indicators and documented best practices. And indeed, since “the
adoption of the Habitat Agenda, a systematic effort has also been made to document these
initiatives and innovations, providing a wealth of knowledge, experience and lessons for further
reflection, action and consolidation.”b
Sources: a). Habitat Agenda: paragraph 61. b). Amnesty International, 2003:59. c). Allen and
You, 2002.
Page 11

Box 3. The Cities Alliance
The World Bank and UN-HABITAT launched the Cities Alliance in May 1999 as a global coalition of
cities and their developmental partners. All were committed to making unprecedented improvements in
the living conditions of the growing urban poor majority in developing countries. The creation of the Cities
Alliance reflects innovative approaches to urban policy and management by four principal constituencies:
The urban poor themselves.
Local authorities and their associations, such as the International Union of Local Authorities
(IULA), the United Towns Organization (UTO), and the World Assembly of Cities and
Local Authorities Coordination (WACLAC).
National governments.
Bilateral aid agencies (10 countries), and multilateral agencies (the World Bank,
UN-HABITAT and UNEP).
In joining the Cities Alliance, all partners commit themselves to new ways of working together
towards improving the efficiency and impact of urban development co-operation in two critical areas:
Supporting inclusive and participatory approaches through which local stakeholders define
their vision for their city and establish priorities for action to tackle urban poverty and growing
inequality as an integral part of a City Development Strategy.
Strengthening partnerships with local authorities and CBOs to support city-wide slum
upgrading and nationwide scales of action.
The ‘Cities without Slums Action Plan’, sets an agenda that challenges “donors, governments
and slum communities to improve the lives of 5–10 million slum dwellers by 2005 and 100 million
by 2020.”
Sources: UN-HABITAT, 2003g:139; Cities Alliance, 1999:6.
Page 12

Box 4. Changes in governments’ attitudes towards informal settlements in Africa
A number of African countries provide good examples of the changes in government attitudes towards
informal settlements over the years:
In Kenya, the evolution of official attitudes toward informal settlements can be traced in
pronouncements in the nation’s first housing policy document and subsequent national
development plans.a They have changed from intolerance, whereby informal settlements were
regularly demolished, to acceptance. Currently, the government (in collaboration with
UN-HABITAT) is implementing the Kenya Slum Upgrading Programme (KENSUP). The
objective is “to improve the overall livelihoods of people living and working in slums
through targeted interventions to address shelter, infrastructure services, land tenure
and employment issues, as well as the impact of HIV/AIDS in slum settlements.”b
In Mali, the authorities’ policy towards informal settlements has long been one of
laissez-faire. In the 1980s, a few informal settlements were regularized and upgraded as part
of a World Bank-financed urban development programme; others were intermittently
threatened with demolition though largely left alone. In 1992 Mali devised a comprehensive
policy of legalization and upgrading.c
In Gabon, the government introduced new legislation aimed at regulating the construction of
informal settlements in the late 1990s.d
Burkina Faso launched a National Urban Upgrading Programme in 1983, following the
revolution. The programme, which was based on the government-executed urban land
restructuring policy of lotissements, was implemented between 1983 and 1990.e,f
In Senegal, a new policy on urban upgrading and land was launched in 1987, with the focus
on land reform and regularization of informal settlements.e
In Ghana, the Government tacitly overlooked informal settlements for many years owing to
its inability to provide acceptable alternatives. However, in its Shelter Strategy 2001, the
Government acknowledged that “Conventional approaches to the delivery of shelter in
both the public and private sector have had limited impact on solving the housing
problem … Only a fraction of housing delivery has been able to filter to the low-income
population where the need is greatest.”g The strategy document also recognized the critical
need to adopt ‘non-conventional strategies’ if the housing situation of the urban poor was to
be improved significantly. However, the document also demonstrates the difficulty of defining
just what those ‘non-conventional strategies’ should be.g
In South Africa, authorities have responded positively to informal settlements in recent
years, deferring to the locational choices of the households living there.h However, it took four
years up to 1999 to build a broad consensus among politicians and local authorities to
support the in situ upgrading of informal settlements in Cape Town. The triggering factor
behind the shift was a study showing that informal settlements were growing more quickly
than the supply of formal housing, a situation that was unlikely to be reversed in the
foreseeable future.i This underscores the important role of research in influencing policy. City
and settlement surveys, mapping and enumerations exercises can be instrumental in this
respect and open up agenda-defining opportunities for community organizations.
Sources: a). Majale, 1998; Warah, 2001c:12. b). UN-HABITAT, 2005c:51. c). Vaa, 2000. d).
UN-DESA and UN-HABITAT, 2004. e). Gulyani and Connors, 2002; f). World Bank, 2002. g).
Page 13

COHRE, 2004a:10. h). Irurah and others, 2002. i). Abbot, 2004.
Page 14

Box 5. The gecekondus of Turkey
Turkey has seen noticeable changes in the State's and local authorities' attitudes to gecekondus,a which
have played a complex and unique role in reducing the country’s housing deficit. Gecekondus first
appeared in 1940s. The initial reaction of the State was to demolish them and prohibit future illegal
development. In the 1960s, gecekondus began to be perceived as an inevitable consequence of rapid
urbanization and the country’s level of economic development. Moreover, they served the State's
political and economic interests by meeting the housing needs of a significant constituency without much
financial support from the State.
Options other than demolition were considered for the first time in the first ‘Five Year
Development Plan’ in 1963. Election campaigns in the mid-1960s began to feature gecekondu ‘
amnesties’. These went hand in hand with the gradual extension of some services, especially water
supply, electricity and access roads, to the gecekondus by municipalities and utility companies. This in
turn encouraged the development of new gecekondus for speculative purposes, which displeased the
middle class. Consequently, municipal authorities took action against the development of new
gecekondus, while continuing to provide the existing ones with urban services. In the mid-1990s,
municipalities took to demolishing gecekondus again − a different form of populist policy, albeit a
reactionary one. However, the increase in land ownership and development rights contributed to the
redevelopment of the best located gecekondus into neighbourhoods of modern mid- and high-rise
apartments. To this day, new gecekondus continue to be built.
a. Gecekondus are slum houses or informal settlements; the literal meaning is ‘built in the night.’
Sources: Mahmud and Duyar-Kienast, 2001; Baharoglu and Leitmann, 1998; Erman, 1997; 2001.
Page 15

Box 6. Adoption of decentralization policies in various countries
Brazil: One of the aims of a new, multi-faceted housing policy of the Brasilia Federal District
is to decentralize government action with regard to housing.a
Namibia: The Government decentralized responsibility for housing provision to regional and
local authorities from 1 April 1999 onwards as part of broad-ranging decentralization
policies. This has paved the way for successful implementation of the decentralized ‘Build
Together Programme’, which assists low-income households that are unable to access
housing developed by the National Housing Enterprise (a parastatal body) or the private
sector. b
Tanzania: The success of the Hanna Nassif Community-Based Upgrading project in Dar es
Salaam, has been attributed to “institutional reform that included decentralisation and a
clearer definition of roles, responsibilities and actors to ensure accountability,
transparency and affordability.” c
Kenya: The Government embarked on a major programme of decentralization and
strengthening of local authorities through the Ministry of Local Government in line with the
Habitat Agenda. However, “[l] ocal authorities in Kenya are associated with
administrative as well as professional problems”. This comes on top of a “poor image
of the local government system among citizens.”b
Sources: a). UNCHS, 2001b. b). Ministry of Regional and Local Government and Housing,
Namibia, 2001. c). UNCHS, 2001b:25. d). UN-HABITAT, 2002c:44.
Page 16

Box 7. Sustainable urban development and good governance, Nigeria
Since the election of the civilian leadership, the Government of Nigeria has made notable progress
towards the establishment of good governance at all levels. The country now has a structurally
decentralized system, with 36 states and 774 local authorities. The Federal Constitution, which legitimizes
the structure, is also under review. The aim is further to strengthen the federal units and give them greater
autonomy and fiscal responsibility. Another objective is to increase popular participation. A national
urban development policy has been implemented in various initiatives, even in the absence of a formal
categorization of urban centres. These initiatives include World Bank-funded community-based
upgrading, the Sustainable Cities Programme and the Cities Alliance Karu programme. Community
consultations and citizen participation are integral to several local development programmes.
Source: UN-Doc. A/S-25/3.
Page 17

Box 8. The Community Action Planning (CAP) methodology
The CAP method consisted of a structured series of workshops organised for community members who
had expressed an interest in improving their settlement. These were typically:
an initial two-day workshop for about 30 representatives of the community to identify their
socio-economic and material issues and plan strategies to tackle these;
a variety of one or half-day issue-specific workshops, depending upon the needs of the
community and the stage of implementation;
a workshop to strengthen the function of CDCs;
a land regularization workshop for people to layout a block-out plan;
a building guidelines workshop to formulate community-specific building codes;
a housing information workshop for introduction of National Housing Development Authority
(NHDA) house loan packages;
a community contract workshop familiarizing the community group with procedures to
receive contract awards for minor infrastructure works; and
a women's enterprise support workshop to initiate a group credit programme for income
generating activities.
Source: MOST, n.d.
Page 18

Box 9. UN-HABITAT’s Global Urban Observatory (GUO) and Best Practices and
Local Leadership Programme (BLP)
GUO aims to address the urgent need to improve the local, national and international knowledge and
information base with respect to urban issues, questions and practices. It does so by assisting
governments, local authorities and civil society organizations in the development and application of
policy-oriented urban indicators, statistics and other urban information. GUO works closely with BLP,
which was established in 1997 to support the implementation of the Habitat Agenda.
BLP is a decentralized global network of government agencies, local authorities and their
associations, professional and academic institutions and grassroots organizations. All are committed to
identifying and exchanging innovative and effective approaches to sustainable development. BLP aims to
raise awareness about critical social, economic and environmental issues and to offer sustainable,
workable and viable approaches and policy options for improving the living environment. It does so by
identifying, disseminating and applying lessons learned from ‘Best Practices’, i.e., “actions that have
made a lasting contribution to improving the quality of life and the sustainability of our cities and
communities.” BLP places a premium on describing the processes of policy and legislative formulation,
implementation, monitoring and evaluation. It emphasizes the need for accurate information regarding
stakeholder involvement in these processes and their ability to participate in decision making. Access to
information, especially by disadvantaged and marginalized groups, is given particular importance.
BLP partners have expertise and specialized experience in a wide range of areas. These include
housing and urban development, urban governance, economic development, poverty reduction,
environmental planning and management, municipal finance and management, infrastructure and social
services, architecture and urban design, social inclusion, women, youth, cultural heritage, and crime
prevention.
The ‘Best Practices Database’ website contains Best Practice Briefs selected from more than
2,000 practices and 160 countries. These illustrate how the Habitat Agenda, Agenda 21 and the MDGs
are being implemented.
Source:http://www.bestpractices.org/bpbriefs/; http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/guo/;
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/bestpractices; http://www.blpnet.org/urban/urban1.htm.
Page 19

Box 10. Gender and housing: the Pachacutec experience
Pachacutec settlement is located in Ventanilla District in the north of Lima, the capital of Peru. The
community is inhabited by some 50,000 households who lack access to basic services such as water and
sanitation. Houses are built on poor sandy soil that is a constant problem for the residents.
An NGO known as Estrategia has launched an innovative project to train community residents,
both women and men, to build affordable dwellings for themselves. The project provides training,
materials and equipment for residents to make concrete bricks and beams for self-help construction. The
cost of construction is half that of the state-subsidized Techo Propio programme for the poor (US$
3,500 for a 36 square metre house as compared to US$ 8,000 under the Techo Propio programme).
Beneficiaries are not required to make any payments in advance. They are allowed to pay the cost back
in interest-free monthly instalments of US$ 50 over six years. In the state-subsidised Techo Propio
programme, beneficiaries are required to make a down payment of US$ 875, and then repay the loan
over up to 20 years with interest.
An important feature of the project is its focus on gender equality. Through a conscious effort both
women and men participate in planning, training, local production of materials and housing construction.
Estrategia also provides human rights awareness training to both women and men, to help empower them
when attending meetings with local authorities.
Source: UN-Doc. E/CN. 4/2004/48/Add.1.
Page 20

Box 11. The Government Housing Bank of Thailand (GHB)
GHB was founded in 1953 as a financial institution with the status of a state enterprise. It was created to
provide finance to housing developers and prospective homeowners, particularly those at the lower end
of the market. The GHB operates wholly on a commercial basis, even though it is a public sector
institution.
In 1982, the Ministry of Finance reorganized the GHB and created favourable conditions to enable
it to become the leading housing finance institution in terms of market share and consumer recognition.
The GHB consequently played a significant role in the development of the housing sector in Thailand.
Following its re-organization, the GHB has used attractive deposit instruments to capitalize on the
domestic savings market. It has also accessed funds through debt instrument issues. In 1984, breaking
with traditional practices, the GHB launched a new savings deposit scheme with higher interest rates than
those of the commercial banks. This attracted a substantial inflow of funds.
The GHB has fewer branches than the commercial banks, but this has inadvertently worked in its
favour. Its administrative costs and overheads are significantly lower than those of commercial banks with
larger branch networks. Further re-organization, computerization and outsourcing of many traditional
in-house banking operations, such as property valuation and legal action against defaulters, has greatly
improved the bank’s operational efficiency.
With adequate funding and lower overheads, GHB has been able to offer higher deposit rates and
lower lending rates without any subsidy from the Government. The bank has subsequently expanded its
mortgage lending and developed practices that allow the lowest interest rates in the market. The GHB
has offered re-financing loans to mortgage borrowers with higher interest rates. As a result, the
commercial banks, which until then had considered housing finance as a low priority, were forced to
lower their own rates in order to keep their customers. This marked the beginning of competition in the
home-loan industry.
Lower interest rates and improved loan conditions have led to the targeting of lower-middle
income groups by housing developers, and brought about a down-market trend in private-sector housing
production in Thailand. This radical improvement of the housing finance sector, underpinned by economic
growth, has triggered a boom in Bangkok. As home ownership remains unaffordable to the
lowest-income groups, the GHB also grants loans to developers to construct low-cost rental apartments.
The Government of Thailand recognizes the importance of housing finance as an essential support
system and, therefore, provides policy support to the GHB. It uses the GHB as a key housing policy
instrument to promote an enabling environment for the housing industry. The Government also provides
incentives to encourage commercial banks to grant more housing loans. Borrowers nationwide can
access the extensive commercial bank networks. Mortgage-loan conditions are determined by market
forces, not the Government, and there are no arbitrary directives on interest rate (supposedly to benefit
low-income borrowers, though usually with adverse consequences). In addition, housing finance is fully
integrated into the overall financial system.
Source: GHB, n.d.a., n.d.b.
Page 21

Box 12. The Urban Community Development Office (UCDO), Thailand
The Government of Thailand set up UCDO in 1992 to manage the Urban Community Development
Fund. The initial capital base of the Fund was about US$ 50 million, granted by the Government in that
same year. The revolving fund provides flexible, low-interest loans to communities.
To be eligible for the loans, communities had to demonstrate capacity to manage savings and loans.
The latter could be used to meet the particular needs of each group. Loans were initially available to
community-based savings and loan groups for revolving funds, income generation, housing improvement,
and other housing-related costs (e.g., for land purchases, particularly for communities facing eviction, and
for housing development). Interest rates on the loans were significantly lower than those of the other
sources to which poor households had access. However, rates were high enough to cover administrative
costs and sustain the initial fund. UCDO subsequently developed links with a wide range of community
organizations, savings groups, NGOs, and government organizations through this loan programme.
Source: Boonyabancha, 2001:7; Millennium Project, 2005a.
Page 22

Box 13. The Community Mortgage Programme, the Philippines
The Community Mortgage Programme was launched in 1988 by the National Home Mortgage Finance
Corporation, an agency under the Philippines’ Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council.
Its objective is to address the shelter needs of people living in poor and run-down neighbourhoods in and
around urban centres. The Programme enables the urban poor to secure credit on the basis of an income
which a local authority or recognized community leader confirms. The original loan is provided to the
community rather than individuals, in order to ensure that squatters also benefit. The community is then
responsible for distributing the land and arranging repayment of the loan. The organized community must
be duly registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or with the Home Insurance Guarantee
Corporation, before it can obtain this type of loan.
Initially, all the beneficiaries of the loan own the property in common through the community
association. A lease purchase agreement entered into by the community association and its individual
members, allows individuals legal use of the property. The acquired property is then subdivided and
titled, and drainage systems and pathways installed. Thereafter, existing houses are improved and new
housing units constructed.
Source: Durand-Lasserve and Clerc, 1996:62.
Page 23

Box 14. Examples of urban poor federation funds
In Cambodia, the Urban Poor Development Fund was set up with US$ 103,000
contributed by the federation, the municipal government, the Asian Coalition for
Housing Rights and MISEREOR, a German NGO. It now has US$ 365,000, including
funds from the Prime Minister’s fund.
In Namibia, the Twahangana Fund has US$ 300,000 in member savings and support
from government and international donors.
The Urban Poor Development Fund in the Philippines has US$ 700,000 in federation
members’ savings and US$ 1.7 million in funds from the Philippine government and
international agencies.
The uTshani Fund in South Africa was initially capitalized with a R4 million (US$ 0.7
million) grant from donors, followed by a grant of R10 million (US$ 1.6 million) from
the South African government’s Department of Housing. It currently has R48 million
(US$ 7.8 million) and has generated an estimated R350 million (US$ 56.9 million)
worth of net benefits.
In Zimbabwe, the Gungano Fund has US$ 242,000 in member savings, a loan from a
South Africa federation, and grants from donors.
In India and Thailand, much larger funds support community-driven development. In
Thailand this is a combination of savings and government support (US$ 13.8 million);
in India, it is a combination of savings and international donor support.
Source: Millennium Project, 2005a:79.
Page 24

Box 15. Development of land markets
The orderly development of land markets, the integration of formal and informal land markets, and the
creation of flexible consumer-oriented land management systems are all highly dependent on wider issues
of governance. In this regard, good governance can be defined as a commitment to transparency,
probity, equity and value for money in administrative processes connected with land. The latter include
decentralization and participation in government, transparency and accountability in administration, and
the adoption of an enabling, rather than controlling, role for the public sector in general.
Source: McAuslan and Farvacque, 1991 cited in Dowall and Clarke, 1996:17.
Page 25

Box 16. Small-scale independent services providers
Small-scale independent service providers operate successfully and profitably in developing country cities
all over the world. They are able to do so for a number of reasons, including the following:
They offer a wide variety of services that the poor can afford;
They adapt to local conditions and cultural patterns of water and other service consumption;
They offer alternative water supply and sanitation solutions and other services using
appropriate technologies;
They work round unrealistically high (imported) standards and regulations that would increase
their costs; and
They avoid bureaucratic and administrative red tape.
Source: Linares, 2003.
Page 26

Box 17. Cost recovery
It is often difficult directly to recover the costs of infrastructure through user charges, e.g., in the case of
sanitation, drainage, footpaths or roads. Direct cost recovery is even more problematic where
landowners benefit from the windfall gains arising from increases in land values as a result of the
investment in infrastructure. In theory, land and property values can be adjusted accordingly, or
betterment taxes applied. This happens in Colombia, for example, where investment costs are recouped
through an appreciation tax. In practice, however, these techniques are not easily implemented and/or
rely on outdated land registration and information systems.
Cost recovery is less of a problem where the infrastructure is provided as part of a formal
development scheme. In this case, the developer can pass the costs on to the final customer and apply
user charges. Cross-subsidies can also be incorporated in such schemes, making it easier to assist
low-income households. The area of off-site infrastructure is where progress remains minimal. A few
innovative approaches have involved land ‘trading’. In several developing countries, land developers may
be asked to contribute infrastructure in cash or kind if granted permission to develop or redevelop land.
Alternatively, land readjustment techniques can provide infrastructure at no cost to public authorities.
Source: UN-Doc. A/CONF.165/PC.2/5 and HS/15/3/3/Add.3.
Page 27

Box 18. Transforming the lives of slum dwellers in Brazil
In recent years, the Government of Brazil has demonstrated an exceptional commitment to bringing the
uncontrolled proliferation of informal settlements to an end, and to promoting sustainable development. In
2001, Parliament approved ‘The City Statute’, which is based on many years of local experimentation
and paves the way for a more equitable city. This was followed by the introduction of a Slum Action Plan
by the Secretariat for Housing and Urban Development.
The Slum Action Plan received vital Government support in April 2003, when the President
established a $1.6 billion housing fund to finance slum upgrading and new housing development. The fund
was also to provide direct credit support to individual households looking to invest in home
improvements. Brazil’s middle- and low-income households have access to a variety of financial
instruments, ranging from microcredit to assisted loans.
The Secretariat is upgrading some 30 slums, while approximately 31,000 housing units are in
various stages of rehabilitation or construction. Special zones of interest will receive priority status when it
comes to scaling up these programmes. The new master plan for São Paulo has already identified 600 of
these.
Source: Millennium Project, 2005b:97.
Page 28

Box 19. Mexico’s National Fund for Popular Housing (FONHAPO)
Mexico’s FONHAPO is a national fund for low-income housing. It was established in 1981 to provide
technical assistance and finance to low-income households to enable them to develop their own housing.
Since then it has been merged with another agency. FONHAPO evolved from earlier, small-scale local
experiences in shelter delivery by NGOs, replacing the former INDECO.a FONHAPO looked to
reinforce the principles of equity and social justice by redistributing national government funds in favour of
low-income households with dependants.
FONHAPO granted collective credits to the formally established housing agencies of the federal
states and community groups. Each household is individually responsible to FONHAPO for the loans
and guarantees but the organization participates in recovering the loans. Only once a loan is completely
repaid is individual title to the land granted.
FONHAPO initially received only four per cent of Mexico’s housing budget. Between 1985 and
1991, the body enabled the production of 370,000 dwellings — 18.6 per cent of all housing built by
public agencies. In 1991, it financed about four per cent of all housing loans and was responsible for
almost 13 per cent of all completed formal sector dwellings in Mexico.
Unfortunately, FONHAPO had two major problems. It required time-consuming paper-work that
could take from several months to several years to complete. On top of this, it was heavily reliant on
external funding and failed to develop a sufficiently broad-based support system for longer term security.
FONHAPO was subsequently merged into the VIVAHb programme, which provides subsidies to match
household savings, while the state/local government provides land and basic infrastructure.
a: Instituto Nacional para el Desarrollo de la Comunidad.
b: Programa de Ahorro y Subsidios para la Vivienda Progresiva (Savings and Subsidies Program for Progressive
Housing).
Sources: UNCHS, 1993c; 1997b; UN-Doc. HS/C/16/7.
Page 29

Box 20. The People’s Housing Process and the People’s Housing Partnership
Trust, South Africa
The South African housing subsidy programme fully recognises that people need assistance to develop
community identity and activity after the traumatizing effects of apartheid — and they need it as much as
subsidized housing, which has its own role to play in the identity-building process. In order to maximise
the community development aspects of the subsidy process, and to galvanize self-help in favour of
dwelling improvement and infrastructure provision, the People’s Housing Process has been developed as
a major constituent of the subsidy programme. The People’s Housing Process helps groups of
households to access the subsidies and to receive technical, financial, logistical and administrative support
on a basis that is both sustainable and affordable. The PHP usually does this through an NGO.
Experience has demonstrated that, given an opportunity to build or organize the building of
dwellings themselves, urban poor households can achieve better housing for less money. This is because
they can:
Save on labour costs by undertaking some of the construction work themselves, or with
assistance from others;
Avoid builders’ and developers’ profit margins by doing the work themselves or organizing
for it to be done; and
Make trade-offs to optimize their decisions.
Technical assistance and support is critical to the success of the People’s Housing Process.
Consequently, the involvement of a support organization (usually an NGO) is crucial.
The South African Government established the People’s Housing Partnership Trust (PHPT) in
1997 with a broad mandate to support the People’s Housing Process through capacity building and
engaging with national, provincial and local governments, and civil society. Since its inception, PHPT has
trained people in construction skills, housing design and safety and community facilitation; and established
project implementation systems and housing support centres.
Source: Republic of South Africa, National Department of Housing, n.d.
Page 30

Box 21. The Build Together Programme, Namibia
The overall aim of Namibia’s Build Together Programme is to meet large-scale housing needs through an
enabling approach. It offers financial support to low- and lower middle-income households who use
self-help efforts to construct their own housing and who have no access to loans from commercial
financial institutions. The programme provides loans for land purchase, housing construction as well as
infrastructure and services. Started in 1991, by 1995 the Programme had benefited 3,300 households.
There has been a high degree of participation of women, with over 45 per cent of the beneficiaries being
women-headed households. Implementation has recently been decentralized to local authorities, and local
committees with multi-stakeholder membership, including beneficiary representatives, oversee the
process. Housing produced through this programme is significantly cheaper than what the Government
could achieve acting on its own. The Programme represents a notable effort by the Government to
demonstrate how the enabling approach can be put into practice.
Source: Helao, 2004; BSHF, n.d.a.
Page 31

Box 22. Co-operative housing in transition countries
Warsaw, Poland
A co-operative housing project in Warsaw demonstrates innovative organizational, technical and policy
approaches to the provision of affordable, attractive housing. Eighty households have pooled their
resources to provide themselves with new homes. They have participated in the design of the dwellings,
all of which can be extended in future. They favoured industrialized, labour-intensive over
capital-intensive construction technologies. This created a significant number of jobs, thereby reducing
unemployment in the local construction industry.
The dwelling units, which range from 100 to 120 square metres in size, are built entirely through
private funding. However, the Government provides a small grant towards project infrastructure. An
innovative financial scheme gives the households access to credit which they had been denied before.
The Attic Flats Project in Prague, Czech Republic
The Attic Flats Project in Prague uses a simple, innovative technology that enables the construction of
additional apartments on top of existing low- and medium-rise blocks of flats. This approach provides
new, high-quality and relatively inexpensive accommodation while at the same time rehabilitating and
improving the energy efficiency of the existing housing stock. Because no additional land is required and
the same infrastructure is used, savings on the cost of a dwelling can reach up to 60 per cent. By 1990,
construction co-operatives had used the unskilled labour of their members to build a total of 400 such
“attic” flats.
Source: BSHF, n.d.c.
Page 32

Box 23. NGOs involvement in the policy formulation process in Zimbabwe
A number of NGOs in Zimbabwe are increasingly demanding greater participation in the policy
formulation process. Their rationale is that NGOs play a major role in the implementation of government
policies, in particular those related to sustainable development. Conversely, government policies have
direct effects on the NGO sector and its activities. The NGOs believe that, because of their role, they
can contribute significantly to the formulation of appropriate policies that will enable sustainable
development. Participation in policy-making would give NGOs a better understanding of the policies
while ensuring that they were relevant, feasible and practicable.
NGOs involved in policy work – a very sensitive area in Zimbabwe – must be able to address
policy issues effectively. They must also exercise extreme caution when dealing with the Government.
"There is always a precarious relationship between the NGOs and the governments, especially
when NGOs begin to be influential, taking initiative …" Using radical strategies to influence policy
formulation can likely lead to the Government punishing the blameworthy NGO, and reducing autonomy
and latitude to implement its activities. On the other hand, adopting a ‘soft’ approach can result in an
NGO over-yielding to the Government’s needs at the expense of its target beneficiaries.
Source: Sibanda, 1996.
Page 33

Box 24. Promotion of rental housing by public and private sectors
The development and proliferation of slums and informal settlements in developing country cities are often
attributed to the poverty of large segments of the urban population. This may be true in part. However,
studies have shown that slum dwellers pay significant sums to landlords to protect themselves from
eviction. Moreover, many own household goods which are considered luxuries for even middle-income
groups. This underlines the substantial potential for rental housing.
Large-scale rental housing initiatives linked to slum dwellers’ willingness and ability to pay should
be promoted. The rental payment structure may be designed in such a way that those with higher incomes
have the option of a tenant-purchase scheme. While the public sector has a major role to play in
promoting rental housing, it could also be a requirement that a certain proportion of the output of private
sector developers take the form of rental housing.
Page 34

Box 25. Perceived or de facto security of tenure
Perceived or de facto security of tenure can be based on a number of factors, such as:
The illegal occupation of a dwelling, since a court order is required before inhabited buildings
can be demolished and the backlog of such cases provides effective security of tenure;
The provision of basic services to the area by a local authority, such as access roads, water
and electricity. In situations, such provision later leads to some form of de jure tenure (e.g., in
Karachi) but in some cases residents have been forcibly relocated (e.g., in New Delhi);
Support from a local politician. This can often give sufficient de facto tenure security for
people to invest in housing. However, this generally only happens when a large proportion of
a given population are informal settlers;
Customary rituals, e.g., in Jordan and parts of Africa;
The experience of the community concerned with both legal and informal instruments;
When land is under litigation, settlements are known to remain undisturbed as long as the
court case is not settled, sometimes for decades;
When land is not required for any other purpose, it is often perceived as secure. However,
such land is often unsuitable for human habitation for obvious reasons: steep slopes, railway
margins, etc.;
Where NGOs and grassroots movements have confronted the government repeatedly,
thereby limiting the potential for evictions;
When a religious structure is built in a prominent place in the hope that the authorities will be
reluctant to demolish. Hopes are that the surrounding areas acquire some sort of immunity;
Issuing of ration cards for the public distribution system, identity cards, and letters addressed
to the family, tax receipts, electricity bills.
Source: UN-HABITAT, 2003c:10.
Page 35

Box 26. Land proclamations in the Philippines
One of the major policies launched by president Macapagal-Arroyo, who came to office in 2001,
involves land proclamations that give squatters on public land a formal assurance that they will not be
evicted and that services and amenities will be improved. Between 2000 and 2002, over 645,000
households in 33 informal settlements benefited from these proclamations. These expand on a policy
introduced earlier by a previous president, Corazon Aquino (1986–1992).
The policy does not apply to squatting on private land, which forms the majority of informal
settlements, and therefore does not impinge on private landowner rights. Nonetheless, this is a positive
and pragmatic response, which has encouraged many poor households to improve their neighbourhoods.
Source: UN-HABITAT, 2004g.
Page 36

Box 27. Bolivia’s anticrético system
Bolivia’s anticrético (“against a credit”) system is based on a property rental contract whereby tenants
pay landlords a lump sum of money equal to a mutually agreed period’s rent upfront, in lieu of paying
monthly rent. This gives the tenant the use of the house for a mutually agreed period, normally two
calendar years, the first year being compulsory and the second optional. The tenant’s only responsibilities
vis-à-vis the dwelling are paying for the services and carrying out necessary maintenance. The interesting
element here is that at the end of the tenancy, the landlord returns the initial payment to the tenant.
The anticrético system encourages tenants to keep the dwelling in good repair, all the more so as
the contract typically includes a clause enabling them to purchase the property at the end of the term. This
particular format is known as “ anticrético con opción a compra” (e.g., anticrético with a purchase
option). This usually occurs when both parties have met their mutual obligations under the contract and
when the term is longer than four years. Ultimate purchase may also happen by default, in the event
where the owner cannot repay the money at the end of the term.
It must be noted here that the typical upfront payment by the tenant at the beginning of an
anticrético tenancy, is considerably higher (often three times or more) than what would have been the
normal rent for that period. Thus, if the normal market rent for a property was, for example, US$ 1,000
per month, an anticrético tenancy for a one-year period might cost in the region of US$ 40,000. This
makes it unaffordable for most low-income earners, and altogether keeps out those with irregular
incomes and no savings.
For all the role and impact of anticrético in Bolivia, little research or innovation to develop and
improve it has taken place. Supporters and users of the system see it is an enabling approach for
landlords and tenants. It provides landlords access to interest-free finance without having to go through
cumbersome bureaucratic procedures and requirements. For tenants who can afford the lump sum,
anticrético propels them on the first rung of the property ladder.
Source: Li, 2001.
Page 37

Box 28. The community land trust in Tanzania-Bondeni, Voi, Kenya
The origins of the community land trust (CLT) concept are traceable to African and Islamic tenure
systems. Kenya’s Ministry of Local Government first considered the CLT model as an alternative to land
development in the early 1990s. A primary objective was to mitigate the adverse impacts of the land
market on the poor and make land tenure sustainable. Working in partnership with Voi Municipal
Council, the Commissioner of Lands, GTZ, NGOs and, most importantly, the people themselves, the
Ministry adopted the model for use in Tanzania-Bondeni Village. In 1989, Tanzania-Bondeni had a
population of 4,730 poor people living in 530 structures. About 62 per cent of the structures were built
of temporary materials. This was because the local council prohibited construction of permanent houses
without formal tenure rights.
A baseline survey conducted in 1989 enabled the structure owners to identify security of tenure as
their most urgent priority. This was followed by better housing and water supply, as prioritised by the
tenants along with electricity. After a comprehensive consultative process, the CLT model was favoured
over individual title, primarily because it provided sustainable security of tenure. The CLT model had to
be articulated in such a way as to ensure that its fundamental basis, “collective ownership of land with
specific conditions as to user rights for its members, is fully recognized in law”.
“The basic concept of CLT is that the land belongs to the community, with individual
members owning the development and improvements that they have undertaken in their plots.
This discourages absentee landlords. If a member wants to move out of the settlement, he or she
can sell the development but the land is not included in the price”.
Legal provisions and social guarantees addressed the following concerns:
“control of speculation in land transactions;
restrictions on disposal of the property without prior consent and approval of the
community;
retention within the community of all subsidies of a public nature;
mechanisms for the maintenance of affordability of housing for the poor;
participation, control and empowerment of the community in the process of social
organization”
Partnerships were formed with various organizations, which assisted the community with the design
and implementation of some components. These included facilitating land acquisition, provision of credit,
training, road construction and collection of money. In order to ensure that the target group are not
forced out or displaced by high building standards, existing buildings are recognized. However, the
owners must gradually comply with local authority building by-laws. Preferential access is given to less
privileged members, including the poorest, women-headed households and the elderly. Training of
communities on various aspects of the CLT is a major success factor.
Notable changes have occurred in Tanzania-Bondeni since 1992. Half of the structures were
moved in accordance with the layout plan, but all the affected households were resettled in the project
area. Many of the houses have been rehabilitated or newly constructed with alternative, locally produced
building materials (soil blocks). Employment and income-earning opportunities have increased as a result
of the construction. Four housing co-operative societies have been formed to assist in the rehabilitation of
houses under NACHU’s Housing Rehabilitation Programme.
Page 38

The initiative is being sustained largely through funds raised from the community. However,
payment of membership dues remains a problem and mitigation measures have been taken. These include
withholding benefits, withholding approval of building plans and not allowing defaulters to participate in
elections.
Source: Yahya, 2002a:239-240.
Page 39

Box 29. The experience of Pom Mahakan, Bangkok, Thailand
Pom Mahakan is a small community of about 300 residents in central Bangkok. In January 2003, the
Bangkok Metropolitan Administration served the residents with an eviction notice. Residents were
offered relocation to an alternative site, on the outskirts of the city, 45 kilometres away, The residents,
some of whom had lived in Pom Mahakan for up to six generations, had to make way for a public park,
as part of a ‘conservation and development’ plan. Forced eviction would have amounted to a violation of
housing rights. It would also have destroyed a “vibrant, cohesive community with a remarkable
sense of collective responsibility and mutual support”.
The residents subsequently organized themselves in a bid to prevent eviction. They used familiar
methods such as delivering petitions, staging protests, building barricades and organising a night-watch
system to protect the community. However, the most interesting feature of their resistance was that they
supplemented it with a number of pre-emptive activities. In collaboration with a coalition of NGOs,
human rights activists and professionals, they proposed an innovative landsharing plan as an alternative to
eviction and relocation. The Bangkok Metropolitan Administration failed to appreciate the value of this
community-driven initiative, and did not consider the proposals. In August 2003, an administrative court
ruled that eviction was lawful and could proceed. This was despite many calls for dialogue, petitions,
pleas, and public support for the land-sharing plan. Following eviction of some of the residents in
November 2005, it was reported in local newspapers that the remaining residents “are now technically
safe from eviction as the city administration has agreed to their plan to develop the area into a
village of preserved vintage wooden houses.”
The Pom Mahakan experience illustrates how community members, through innovation and action,
have attempted to devise alternatives to their own eviction. Yet, despite efforts to co-operate with the
authorities and to preserve and protect their heritage, the community remain potential victims of forced
eviction. However, it remains up to the authorities to adopt a novel approach and work towards a
situation that would benefit both parties, including the community, and, possibly, other stakeholders.
Source: Du Plessis, n.d.:5-6;
http://www.2bangkok.com/2bangkok/buildings/mahakan/mahakanfort.shtml.
Page 40

Box 30. ‘Due process’ in case of forced evictions and resettlement
Appropriate procedural protection and due process are essential aspects of all human rights but
are especially pertinent in relation to a matter such as forced evictions which directly invokes a
large number of the rights recognized in both the International Covenants on Human Rights. The
Committee [on Economic Social and Cultural Rights] considers that the procedural protections
which should be applied in relation to forced evictions include:
(a) an opportunity for genuine consultation with those affected;
(b) adequate and reasonable notice for all affected persons prior to the scheduled
date of eviction;
(c) information on the proposed evictions, and, where applicable, on the
alternative purpose for which the land or housing is to be used, to be made
available in reasonable time to all those affected;
(d) especially where groups of people are involved, government officials or their
representatives to be present during an eviction;
(e) all persons carrying out the eviction to be properly identified;
(f) evictions not to take place in particularly bad weather or at night unless the
affected persons consent otherwise;
(g) provision of legal remedies; and
(h) provision, where possible, of legal aid to persons who are in need of it to seek
redress from the courts.
Source: CESCR, General Comment No. 7, paragraph 15.
Page 41

Box 31. Sanitation for slum dwellers, Pune, India
Objectives and strategies
The primary objective of the initiative was to provide community sanitation blocks in all the city’s slums
through community participation. NGOs were invited to bid for the design, construction and maintenance
of the sanitation blocks, through monthly user charges, in close collaboration with local communities.
Pune Municipal Corporation was to bear the capital costs for construction and the provision of water and
electricity. Costs were significantly reduced as NGOs — which, unlike private sector contractors, are
non-profit bodies — were required to bid within the estimated cost.
The Municipal Corporation surveyed all slums in the city and categorized them into three groups
depending on sanitation facilities. Top priority was given to those 67 slums devoid of any sanitation
facilities. Next came another 452 slums where existing blocks were unusable or dilapidated, requiring
major repair or demolition and reconstruction. The third category included areas with functioning though
inadequat, toilet blocks.
Resource mobilisation
The Municipal Commissioner personally ensured that the initiative received the budgetary support
needed. He further mobilised all of the Municipal Corporation’s available human and technical resources.
Private sector architects and engineers were contracted by the NGOs to help local communities finalize
the designs. The stronger CBOs, where available, undertook construction and maintenance.
Process
The emphasis on community participation was precedent-setting, and the Municipal Corporation had no
prior experience in dealing with NGOs and CBOs. The Commissioner personally promoted a
partnership approach. Some elected municipal councillors initially opposed the initiative, partly in fear of
losing control and patronage. However, constituents pressured them into implementing the programme.
Communities, and women in particular, were encouraged to work with architects and engineers. As a
result, they gained technical know-how, experience and confidence. Women can now undertake other
construction programmes, visit government offices to negotiate entitlements, and are more respected by
their families and communities.
Achievements
Launching the programme on a city-wide scale has made it possible to reach 500,000 people out of a
slum population of 600,000. A total of 418 toilet blocks with 6,958 toilet seats have been constructed in
Pune slums through community participation. This includes child-friendly facilities in many locations. The
provision of a caretaker’s room is an added incentive to households to oversee cleanliness of the blocks.
Hygiene and health have improved significantly as a result. The poor – a majority of slum dwellers
– are the main beneficiaries. The Municipal Corporation will save on maintenance costs, as in the blocks
now are under the responsibility of local communities. However, maintenance is proving problematic in
the few cases where the number of users fails to cover costs. Some NGOs envisage the feasibility of a
city-wide maintenance system.
In the process, Pune Municipal Corporation has become more familiar with NGOs and CBOs,
who in turn can more confidently engage with government at the local level. The communities’ new-found
self-assurance extends to those other areas of their lives where they interact with public authorities.
The State Government has endorsed the Pune model, and other municipal authorities have been
encouraged to follow suit. Some cities have tried to incorporate the main principles into their own
programmes. The Indian Government has launched the National Sanitation Programme (Nirmal Bharat
Page 42

Abhiyan) based on the Pune model, and offers state State governments/local authorities a 50 per cent
subsidy on construction costs. Although Pune Municipal Corporation has adequate budgetary resources
to fund the entire sanitation programme, this may not always be the case for other municipal bodies.
These, however, will be able to take advantage of the above- mentioned subsidy. The increased attention
being paid to urban sanitation signals a greater focus on the needs of the poor. The national programme
launch has brought increased resource allocation to the sector. In turn, this will result in better servicing of
the slums, with the attendant health and environmental benefits.
Source: Best Practices Database.
Page 43

Box 32. Slum Networking of Indore City, India
Slum Networking is a community-based sanitation and environmental improvement programme in Indore,
India. The programme seeks to transform its 183 slums and integrate the poor into the urban population
as a whole. The city had a total population of about 1.4 million in 1995. Some 28 percent of these lived
in slums, all of which were facing the banks of Indore's two small rivers. As a result, the rivers were filled
with untreated sewage and solid waste.
The programme included new government-built sewers, storm drainage and fresh water services,
to be built along the natural courses of the two rivers near the heart of the city. A supportive state
government granted the slum dwellers long-term land leases. As a further incentive, the residents paid for
and built their own private toilets and washrooms. Today, the two rivers are clean, the streets paved,
street lighting added, community halls built, and the housing upgraded. The slums are no longer slums.
One of the most important aspects of this initiative is that the regularization and upgrading exercise
was part of a larger upgrading plan for the entire city. “The application of this approach to other
similar conditions would go a long way in overcoming the weakness of conventional urban
upgrading projects, which seldom attempt to integrate slums into the urban fabric.”
Source: Aga Khan Development Network, (n.d.).
Page 44

Box 33. The Community-Led Infrastructure Finance Facility (CLIFF)
CLIFF is an alternative financing facility that emerged in India from the findings of a research project
called ‘Bridging the Finance Gap.’ This study was undertaken jointly by SPARC, other members of SDI
and the Homeless International, an NGO from the United Kingdom. The aim was to investigate how
various organizations of the poor had managed to develop and finance projects through their own
initiatives. The project also sought to find out why incentives designed to encourage formal and
commercial financial institutions into pro-poor lending had been largely unsuccessful.
The findings were that mainstream institutions understand very little about housing and infrastructure
investment and finance for the poor. However, the urban poor have both the entrepreneurial aspirations
and capacity to undertake such projects, and do so despite the risk — which they themselves have to
bear. When these initiatives meet with success, other institutions and organizations are keen to learn from
them.
CLIFF provides funding in such a way as to recover the original costs, which it reinvests or uses to
leverage funds from other sources. CLIFF financial assistance takes the following forms:
Technical assistance grants, which help communities devise bankable projects;
Capital loans to leverage public and private resources; and
Knowledge grants to share lessons learned.
In addition, Homeless International sometimes complements CLIFF by providing financial
guarantees to banks.
In Mumbai, CLIFF has been able to focus on two specific challenges that condition any scaled up
delivery of effective and quality infrastructure services. These are:
“Working with municipal and state authorities to improve the use of state subsidies to
municipalities to support community-driven and other initiatives.”
“Engaging the commercial banking sector to identify ways in which finance and credit
could be made available to support and enhance slum upgrading and other activities.”
Sources: Nirman, n.d.; Cities Alliance, 2004.
Page 45

Box 34. Components of slum upgrading
Slum upgrading typically involves physical, social, economic, organizational and environmental
improvements to existing slums and informal settlements. It is usually carried out by residents, community
groups, local authorities and external agencies working in partnership. Actions carried out typically
include:
“Installing or improving basic infrastructure, e.g., water reticulation, sanitation/waste
collection, rehabilitation of circulation, storm drainage and flood prevention,
electricity, security lighting, and public telephones;
removal or mitigation of environmental hazards;
providing incentives for community management and maintenance;
constructing or rehabilitating community facilities such as nurseries, health posts,
community open space;
regularizing security of tenure;
home improvement;
relocation/compensation for the small number of residents dislocated by the
improvements;
improving access to health care and education as well as social support programs to
address issues of security, violence, substance abuse, etc.;
enhancement of income-earning opportunities through training and micro-credit;
building social capital and the institutional framework to sustain improvements”.
Source: Cities Alliance, 1999:2.
Page 46

Box 35. The Kampung Improvement Programme (KIP), Indonesia
Indonesia’s world-renowned KIP was first implemented in the two cities of Surabaya and Semarang in
1924. Initially, the scheme focused on sanitation. In the late 1990s, KIP was remodelled and
reintroduced in the two largest cities of Jakarta (the capital) and Surabaya. The aim was “to bring
urban development closer to low-income people.” KIP was subsequently implemented as a
nation-wide programme in all urban areas of the country in the late 1970s.
The KIP approach is, essentially, to provide urban services as a complement to the housing
process initiated and implemented by the people themselves. KIP has five main objectives:
To strengthen and recognize the kampungs, which house 60 per cent of Indonesia's urban
population;
To integrate the kampungs with urban housing and services systems;
To increase kampung community participation and empowerment;
To stimulate the social and economic mobility of the residents; and
To ensure the sustained improvement of the quality of life in kampungs.
Several models of KIP have been developed in Surabaya, in particular, including participatory
approaches in the inner-city and peripheral areas.
An evaluation of KIP conducted in the early 1990s concluded that the upgrading of kampungs was
not keeping pace with city-scale development. The Comprehensive KIP (C-KIP) was consequently
introduced in the mid-1990s. The emphasis in C-KIP is both on infrastructure improvement and
institution building, including the promotion of revolving credit schemes, as a means to enhance
community participation in the upgrading process. The C-KIP approach can conceivably strengthen and
promote the role of kampungs, thereby harnessing “the potential of the lower income urban
population to make the city more competitive in relation to the demands and challenges of
globalization”.
Source: Silas, 2001.
Page 47

Box 36. The Luanda Sul Self-financed Urban Infrastructure Programme, Angola
The Luanda Sul Self-financed Urban Infrastructure Programme was launched in 1995. The programme
addresses the housing shortage in the capital city by mobilising private sector investment. Private sector
investment was enlisted to develop three new residential areas. The aim was to reduce the pressure on
the old city centre and provide housing for refugees and other city residents. Refugees are included in
vulnerable and disadventaged groups in the Habitat Agenda. The programme operates through an ‘
Achievement and Management Fund’ that enables the government to amass funds for social investment.
The primary source of funding is the sale of land titles to private companies as well as the collection of
taxes and tariffs in formal residential neighbourhoods.
The city authorities launched the process by identifying and purchasing suitable land for
development. However, inadequate land legislation under the former socialist regime (i.e., until 1990) led
to confusion over legal ownership of much of the identified land. This came as a major challenge, resulting
in protracted conflict with the occupants of the land and those who owned it prior to the socialist regime.
Once this was resolved, the next step was to mobilize private businesses to undertake the
development. Title deeds to serviced land within the newly developed areas were offered to the private
companies as an incentive. In 1995, two companies that urgently needed to provide good quality housing
for their workers pledged a total of US$30 million. Another US$ 14 million went to water treatment.
So far, private capital expenditure in the programme totals US$96 million, including US$16 million
for social infrastructure. As a result, over 800 hectares of land have been serviced with water, sewerage,
drainage and electricity, and over 2,200 houses built. Community facilities, schools, a hospital,
commercial establishments and an industrial estate have also been built. The new housing is designed for
a wide range of income groups, from those able to spend their savings on housing to the poorest and
those less well-off and disadvantaged.
As a result, some 2,700 households have been resettled. In addition, the programme has benefited
emerging construction and real estate industries in Luanda, creating an estimated 4,000 new jobs. The
city is in urgent need of new economic opportunities of this nature.
Source: DPU, 2001.
Page 48

Box 37. Popular Habitat Programme, San José, Costa Rica
Costa Rica’s Popular Habitat Programme views housing development not as an end in itself, but rather as
a means to achieve community development. This is why households are involved in the programming,
implementation and management of the programme. It started in 1988 as a bilateral assistance project to
build new housing for low-income households and to tackle the housing shortage in the country’s capital
city. The community has become increasingly involved in all aspects of the programme. Alternative
methods of financing are pursued and enacted to scale up and sustain the project; resulting in the creation
of a revolving fund managed under a trusteeship.
The scheme has given over 17,000 households access to decent housing, reducing the housing
shortage in the city. The participatory nature and a strong emphasis on community capacity building have
enabled over 30,000 of the newly housed people to get training in various fields related to operations and
maintenance, project management and administration. This has created employment and improved
incomes. Community participation and capacity building have considerably strengthened community spirit
and involvement in civic affairs, on top of improving the overall living environment. Another spin-off of the
participatory process is the unique approach whereby each neighbourhood designs its own housing
projects. This shows that there can be no single response to housing needs and demand. The needs of
the poor vary at least as much as those of other segments of the population. Moreover, housing
conditions also vary according to the situation, aspirations and necessities of individual households.
Several international bodies and institutions have studied the model of the Popular Habitat
Programme. Projects in Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala and South Africa have adopted similar
principles. The experience of this programme has been taken into account for NGO training in the field of
housing and of human settlements in general.
Source: Best Practices Database, n.d.a.
Page 49

Box 38. Justiciable elements of the right to adequate housing
Based on a detailed analysis of the human right to adequate housing and on developments in this area, the
Special Rapporteur on promoting the right to adequate housing, Rajindar Sachar, has identified the
following elements of this right as being inherently justiciable:
(a) protection against arbitrary, unreasonable, punitive or unlawful forced evictions
and/or demolitions;
(b) security of tenure;
(c) non-discrimination and equality of access in housing;
(d) housing affordability and accessibility;
(e) tenants’ rights;
(f) the right to equality and equal protection and benefit of the law;
(g) equality of access to land, basic civic services, building materials and amenities;
(h) equitable access to credit, subsidies and financing on reasonable terms for
disadvantaged groups;
(i) the right to special measures to ensure adequate housing for households with special
needs or lacking necessary resources;
(j) the right to the provision of appropriate emergency housing to the poorest sections
of society;
(k) the right to participation in all aspects of the housing sphere; and
(l) the right to a clean environment and safe and secure habitable housing.
Source: UN-Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1995/12: paragraph 95.
Page 50

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of Figures
Figure 1.
Continuum of land rights
Page 51

Figure 1. Continuum of land rights
Source: Based on UN-HABITAT, 2004d.
Page 52

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of Tables
Table 1. The various aspects of urban poverty
Table 2. The scale of urban poverty in low- and middle-income countries in 2000/2001
Table 3. Dimensions of housing poverty
Table 4. Population living in slums
Table 5. The evolution of housing policies
Table 6. Millennium Development goals and targets most directly relevant to enabling shelter strategies
Table 7. The Dos and Don’ts of enabling housing markets to work
Table 8. Details of the federations, their support NGOs and funds
Table 9. Loan comparison: Mortgage finance, microenterprise finance and housing microfinance
Table 10. Housing tenure in selected countries, per cent (1994–2002)
Table 11.
Table 12.
Programme for Integral Urban Renewal, El Salvador
Taxonomy of scaling up
Page 53

Table 1. The various aspects of urban poverty
1. Inadequate income (and inadequate consumption of necessities including food and, often, safe and sufficient
water; indebtedness, with debt repayments significantly reducing income available for necessities).
2. Inadequate, unstable or risky asset base (non-material and material, including educational attainment and
housing), for individuals, households or communities.
3. Inadequate shelter (typically poor quality, overcrowded and insecure).
4. Inadequate provision of ‘public’ infrastructure (piped water, sanitation, drainage, roads, footpaths, etc.), which
increases the health burden and often the work burden.
5. Inadequate provision of basic services such as day care/schools/vocational training, health care, emergency
services, public transport, communications, law enforcement.
6. Limited safety nets, if any, to maintain basic consumption whenever income falls; also to ensure access to shelter
and health care when these can no longer be paid for.
7. Inadequate protection of poorer groups’ rights by the legal system: including laws and regulations regarding civil
and political rights, occupational health and safety, pollution control, environmental health, protection from violence
and other crimes, protection from discrimination and exploitation.
8. Poorer groups’ voiceless and powerless status/ within political systems and bureaucratic structures, leading to
little if any possibility to receive entitlements, get organized, make demands and receive a fair response, or receive
support for developing their own initiatives. No means of ensuring accountability from aid agencies, NGOs, public
agencies and private utilities, and inability to participate in the definition and implementation of urban poverty
programmes.
Source: Satterthwaite, 2002:3.
Page 54

Table 2. The scale of urban poverty in low- and middle-income countries in 2000/2001
Type of poverty Urban population in poverty Notes
Millions Per cent
Inadequate income for basic needs 700–1,000 36–51 No accurate figures are available on this and the total
varies, depending on the criteria used to set ‘the income level’ required for ‘basic needs’.
Inadequate or no provision for safe, sufficient water680+ 35+ No reliable figures for the extent of provision
for ‘adequate’ or ‘safe and sufficient’ water or on the extent of provision for ‘adequate’ sanitation for urban areas in
most countries.
Inadequate or no provision for sanitation in the home 850+ 43+
Under-nutrition 150–200 8–10 No reliable figures available; in many Asian and Sub-Saharan
African countries 25–40 per cent of urban children are underweight.
Living in housing that is overcrowded, insecure and/or of poor quality 870 43 No accurate figures
available in most countries; these are based on UN-HABITAT estimates of the ‘slum’ population in developing
countries.
Source: Based on Satterthwaite and others, 2005:5 and UN-HABITAT, 2003f.
Page 55

Table 3. Dimensions of housing poverty
Housing as a factor of poverty Quality of life affected by crowding, noise, dirt, pollution, refuse,
inadequate facilities
Health affected by lack of sanitation, unsafe water supply
Future prospects affected by restricted access to education
Even households capable of coping at present may be thrown into emergency by evictions (loss of assets,
inaccessibility of income sources) — vulnerability
Housing as an indicator of poverty Reliability: only poor households can be expected to accept the above
conditions
But: research shows that not all residents of informal settlements are poor
Housing as a cause of poverty Lack of infrastructure (electricity, water, accessibility), is a liability for
enterprises
Bad reputation may put off potential customers
Investments, particularly in immobile assets and environmental upgrading, are prevented by the risk of
demolition
Source: Based on Berner, 2002:229.
Page 56

Table 4. Population living in slums
Total urban population (millions) Urban population in per cent of total
population Urban slum population (millions) Slum population in per cent of total urban
population
WORLD 2,923 47.7 924 31.6
Advanced economies 643 82.1 29 4.5
Transition economies 259 62.9 25 9.6
Developing countries 2,022 40.9 870 43.0
Northern Africa 76 52.0 21 28.2
Sub-Saharan Africa 231 34.6 166 71.9
Latin America and the Caribbean 399 75.8 128 31.9
Eastern Asia 533 39.1 194 36.4
China 472 36.7 178 37.8
Other Eastern Asia 61 77.1 16 25.4
South-Central Asia 452 30.0 262 58.0
India 286 27.9 158 55.5
Other South-Central Asia 166 34.5 104 62.7
South-Eastern Asia 203 38.3 57 28.0
Western Asia 125 64.9 41 33.1
Oceania 2 26.7 0 24.1
Source: Based on UN-HABITAT, 2003g :14.
Page 57

Table 5. The evolution of housing policies
Phase and approximate dates Focus of attention Major instruments used Key
documents
Modernization and urban growth: 1960s-early 1970s
Physical planning and production of
shelter by public agencies
Blueprint planning: direct construction (apartment blocks, core
houses);
Eradication of informal settlements
Redistribution with growth/needs: mid 1970s-mid 1980s
State support to self-help ownership on a
project-by-project basis
Recognition of informal sector;
Squatter upgrading and sites-and-services;
Subsidies to land and housing; Vancouver Declaration and Plan of Action (1976);
Shelter, poverty and basic needs (World Bank, 1980);
World Bank evaluations of sites-and-services (Bamberger and others, 1982a, 1982b; Keare and Parris, 1982; Mayo and
others, 1986; Mayo and Gross, 1987);
UNICEF urban basic services (UNICEF, 1984).
The enabling approach/ urban management: late 1980s-early 1990s Securing an enabling framework for action
by people, the private sector and markets Public/private partnership;
Community participation;
Land assembly and housing finance; capacity-building GSS (1988);
Urban policy and economic development (World Bank, 1991);
Cities, poverty and people (UNDP, 1991);
Agenda 21 (1992);
Enabling housing markets to work (World Bank, 1993).
Sustainable urban development: mid 1990s onwards
Holistic planning to balance efficiency,
equity and sustainability
As above, with more emphasis on environmental management and
poverty-alleviation Sustainable Human Settlements Development: Implementing Agenda 21 (UNCHS, 1994c).
Habitat II: 1996 ‘Adequate shelter for all’ and ‘Sustainable human settlements development’
Culmination and integration of all previous policy improvements The Habitat Agenda (1996);
Global report on human settlements (UNCHS, 1996a).
Millennium Summit: 2000 8 Millennium Development Goals and 18 targets, including target 11
on slums Millennium Development Project United Nations Millennium Declaration
(2000);
MDG (2000).
Istanbul +5: 2001 Review of the Habitat Agenda process Renew Habitat Agenda commitments and
develop more effective strategies
Declaration on cities and other human settlements in the new
millennium (2001);
Global report on human settlements (UNCHS, 2001a; UN-HABITAT, 2003g; 2005b);
The state of the world’s cities (UNCHS, 2001d; UN-HABITAT, 2004f);
Implementing the Habitat Agenda: The 1996–2001 experience (UNCHS, 2001b).
Source: Based on UNCHS, 1997b:22-23; and Ergüden, 2001:11.
Page 58

Table 6. Millennium Development goals and targets most directly relevant to enabling shelter
strategies
Goal: Ensure environmental sustainability
Target
Indicators
Target 10: Halve, by 2015, the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and sanitation
Indicator 30: Proportion of population with sustainable access to improved water source
Indicator 31: Proportion of people with access to improved sanitation
Target 11: By 2020, to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers
Indicator 32: Proportion of people with access to secure tenure
Source of indicators: United Nations, 2005.
Page 59

Table 7. The Dos and Don’ts of enabling housing markets to work
Instrument Do Don’t
Developing property rights √ Regularize land tenure
√ Expand land registration
√ Privatize public housing stock
√ Establish property taxation
x Engage in mass evictions
x Institute costly titling systems
x Nationalize land
x Discourage land transactions
Developing mortgage finance √ Allow private sector to lend
√ Lend at positive/market rates
√ Enforce foreclosure laws
√ Ensure prudential regulation
√ Introduce better loan instruments
x Allow interest-rate subsidies
x Discriminate against rental housing investment
x Neglect resource mobilization
x Allow high default rates
Rationalizing subsidies √ Make subsidies transparent
√ Target subsidies to the poor
√ Subsidize people, not houses
√ Subject subsidies to review
x Build subsidized public housing
x Allow for hidden subsidies
x Let subsidies distort prices
x Use rent control as subsidy
Providing infrastructure for residential land development √ Coordinate land development
√ Emphasize cost recovery
√ Base provision on demand
√ Improve slum infrastructure
x Allow bias against infrastructure improvements
x Use environmental concerns as reasons for slum clearance
Regulating land and housing development √ Reduce regulatory complexity
√ Assess costs of regulation
√ Remove price distortions
√ Remove artificial shortages
x Impose unaffordable standards
x Maintain unenforceable rules
x Design projects without link to regulatory/institutional reform
Organizing the building industry √ Eliminate monopoly practices
√ Encourage small firm entry
√ Reduce import controls
√ Support building research
x Allow long permit delays
x Institute regulations inhibiting competition
x Continue public monopolies
Page 60

Developing a policy and institutional framework √ Balance public/private sector roles
√ Create a forum for managing the housing sector as a whole
√ Develop enabling strategies
√ Monitor sector performance
x Engage in direct housing delivery
x Neglect local government role
x Retain financially unsustainable institutions
Source: World Bank, 1993:46-47.
Page 61

Table 8. Details of the federations, their support NGOs and funds
Federation Year founded Membership Support NGO
/Federation-managed funds
Cambodia: Squatter and Urban Poor Federation 1994 Active in 200 slums Asian Coalition for
Housing Rights
Urban Poor Development Fund
India: National Slum Dwellers Federation and Mahila Milan 1974 and 1986 More than 2 million
members SPARC (1984)
Community-Led Infrastructure Finance Facility (CLIFF)
Kenya: Muungano wa Wanvijiji 2000 25,000 members Pamoja Trust (2000)
Akiba Mashinani
Malawi: Malawi Federation 2003 3,000 members CCODE (Centre for Community
Organization and Development)
Namibia: Shack Dwellers Federation of Namibia 1992 9,700 members Namibian Housing Action
Group (1997)
Nepal: Nepal Mahila Ekta Samaj and Nepal Mahila Ekata Samaj (women’s federation of savings groups)
1998 LUMANTI
Nepal Urban Poor Fund
Philippines: Philippines Homeless People's Federation 2003 50,000 members Vincentian
Missionaries Social Development Foundation Inc.
Urban Poor Development Fund
South Africa: uMfelanda Wonye (South African Homeless People’s Federation) 1991 100,000 members
People’s Dialogue on Land and Shelter;
The uTshani Fund (for housing),
Inqolobane (The Granary) funds for employment/enterprise
Sri Lanka: Women’s Development Bank 1998 31,000 households JANARULAKA
Women’s Devpt. Bank Federation
Swaziland 2001 Peoples Dialogue, Swaziland
Thailand: Various regional and city-based federations 1990 * CODI ( Community Organiza
tions Development Institute) – Fund set up by the Government of Thailand
Zimbabwe: The Zimbabwe Homeless People’s Federation 1993 45,000 members Dialogue on
Shelter
Gungano Fund
Note: Federations are also forming in Zambia and savings groups that have the potential to form federations are
forming in many other nations including Uganda, Ghana, Lesotho, Tanzania and Madagascar.
*: Thousands of savings groups, many regional and city federations.
Source: D’Cruz and Mitlin, 2005.
Page 62

Table 9. Loan comparison: Mortgage finance, microenterprise finance and housing microfinance
Mortgage finance Microenterprise finance Housing microfinance
Borrowers Middle and upper income households Low and moderate income
households Low and moderate income households
Originator Savings and loans; commercial banks; housing finance institutions; building societies; housing
co-operatives; Credit unions and NGOs traditionally; regulated financial institutions; equipment suppliers
Credit unions and NGOs traditionally; also building suppliers and subdividers
Use of loan funds Purchase of new, commercially developed single-family unit For microenterprise, but also for
emergency expenditures
Home improvement; some new construction
Amount $5,000 and above $50 to $1,000 $250 to $5,000
Term 15 to 30 years Under 1 year Usually under 3 years
Interest rate Prime plus thin margin Prime rate plus a large margin No standard
Collateral Lien on property Available goods; personal guarantees Para legal liens on property
Savings requirements and importance From none to contract savings Savings is often as important as
loans
No standard
Underwriting Evaluation of individual household income and credit-worthiness and of property title and value
Building of relationship with individual borrower or with solidarity group, which commits to guarantee repayment of
loans to individual members
Evaluation of current income; borrower household income; building
plans; and cost estimates
Technical assistance to borrower None Minimal Often required
Source: Goldberg and Motta, 2003:58.
Page 63

Table 10. Housing tenure in selected countries, per cent (1994–2002)
Country Year Ownership Renting Other
Africa
Benin 1994 63 37 –
Egypt 1996 69 31 –
Niger 1998 93 7 –
South Africa 1996 77 22 2
Asia
India 2001 87 11 3
Iran 1996 81 19 –
Republic of Korea 1995 75 25 –
Singapore 1995 91 10 1
Thailand 1996 87 13 –
Latin America
Bolivia 1997 60 18 22
Brazil 1998 74 25 1
Chile 2002 73 20 8
Colombia 1997 61 35 5
Mexico 1998 78 22 –
Note: “Countries have been selected where results look relatively reliable and are for 1994 or later. Informal
owners, including squatters have been included as owners. Both tenants with formal contracts and those renting
with a verbal contract in informal housing areas have been included as tenants. Many countries have failed to
separate out non-rental forms of non-ownership, e.g., sharing. The data have many flaws and this table should not
be regarded as much more than an approximation of the tenure mix. Figures may not add to 100 per cent due to
rounding.”
Source: UN-HABITAT, 2003e:9.
Page 64

Table 11. Programme for Integral Urban Renewal, El Salvador
Components of the Programme
Basic principles
Legalization of land
Improvement of infrastructure
Social services
Improvement and construction of houses
Increasing income and promoting employment
Social organization Participation of the targeted groups
Co-operation with other organizations
Standards in accordance with the beneficiaries
Minimum subsidies
Integration
Source: De López and Castillo, 1997.
Page 65

Table 12. Taxonomy of scaling up
Quantitative scaling up (or scaling out)
Spread
Increasing numbers of people spontaneously adhere to the organization and its programmes,
perceiving them as beneficial to their interests/preferences.
Replication A successful programme (methodology and organizational mode) is repeated elsewhere.
Nurturing A well-staffed and well-funded external agency, using a specific incentive-based methodology,
nurtures local initiatives on an increasingly large scale.
Integration A programme is integrated into existing structures and systems and, in particular, government
structures, once it has demonstrated its potential.
Functional scaling up
Horizontal Unrelated new activities are added to existing programmes, or the same organization undertakes
new programmes.
Vertical
Other activities related to the same chain of activities as the original one are added to an existing
programme (i.e., upward or downward linkages are made).
Political scaling up
First generation Essentially service delivery.
Second generation Community capacity development for self-reliant action. Through better information and
mobilization, an organization’s members or local communities are stimulated to participate in the body politic.
Third generation Beyond the community, influence policy reform to foster an enabling environment. This may
involve networking and aggregation of organizations into federative structures designed to influence policy.
Fourth generation Beyond specific policies, catalyze social movements, and/or direct entry of grassroots
organizations (or their leaders) into politics (either through creating or joining a political party).
Organizational scaling up
Internal management Increasing organizational capacity and improved management processes (links to effectiveness
and efficiency).
Financial viability Increasing financial viability/autonomy, including self-financing, through sub-contracting,
consultancy or fees for service.
Institutional diversification Both internally and externally (including diversification of donors) and linkages
with other actors/organizations.
Source: IFPRI, 2004:8.
Page 66

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of Acronyms
BLP
Best Practices and Local Leadership Programme, UN-HABITAT
CAP
Community action planning
CBO
Community-based organization
CDC
Community Development Council
CDF
Comprehensive Development Framework
CESCR Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
CLIFF Community-Led Infrastructure Finance Facility
CLT
Community land trust
COHRE Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions
DDA
Delhi Development Authority, India
DFID Department for International Development, United Kingdom
FONHAPO National Fund for Popular Housing (Fondo Nacional de Habitaciones Populares),
Mexico
Forced eviction “[T]he permanent or temporary removal against their will of individuals,
families and/or communities from the homes and/or land which they occupy, without the provision
of, and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection.” (CESCR, General Comment No.
7, Paragraph 3).
GDP
Gross domestic product
GHB
Government Housing Bank, Thailand
GIS
Geographical Information Systems
GNP
Gross national product
GSS Global Strategy for Shelter to the Year 2000
GTZ
German technical co-operation agency
GUO
Global Urban Observatory, UN-HABITAT
Habitat II Second United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Istanbul, 1996)
HIC
Habitat International Coalition
HIC-WAS Habitat International Coalition Women and Shelter Group
HPFP Homeless People's Federation, Philippines
HUDCO Housing and Urban Development Corporation, India
ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
ILO
International Labour Organization
IMF
International Monetary Fund
ITDG Intermediate Technology Development Group
IYSH International Year of Shelter for the Homeless
KIP
Kampung Improvement Programme, Indonesia
MDG Millennium Development Goal
MDG 7, Target 11Millennium Development Goal 7, Target 11: “By 2020, to have achieved a
significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers”
MHP
Million Houses Programme, Sri Lanka
NACHU National Co-operative Housing Union, Kenya
Page 67

NGO
Non-governmental organization
NHA
National Housing Authority, Thailand and the Philippines
OHCHR Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
OPP
Orangi Pilot Project, Pakistan
Perumnas (or Perum Perumnas) National Urban Housing Development Corporation (Perusahaan
Umum Perumahan Nasional), Indonesia
PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
ROSCA Rotating savings and credit organization
SACCO Savings and credit co-operative
SDI
Slum/Shack Dwellers International
Secure tenure “[T]he right of all individuals and groups to effective protection by the state
against forced evictions.” (UN-HABITAT, 2004c:31)
SPARC Society for the Promotion of Area Resource Centres, India
UCDO Urban Community Development Office, Thailand
UDA
Urban Development Authority, Sri Lanka
UNCHS United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat)
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNEP United Nations Environmental Programme
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
UN-HABITAT United Nations Human Settlements Programme
Page 68

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of references and relevant documents
List of references
Abbot, J., (2002), “An analysis of informal settlement upgrading and critique of existing methodological
approaches”, Habitat International, vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 303-315.
——, (2003), “The use of GIS in informal settlement upgrading: its role and impact on the community
and on local government”, Habitat International, vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 575-593.
——, (2004), “Upgrading an informal settlement in Cape Town, South Africa”, in: Hansen, K.T. and
Vaa, M., (eds.), Reconsidering informality: Perspectives from urban Africa, Nordiska
Afrikainstitutet, Uppsala, pp. 193-209.
Abrams, C., (1964), Man's struggle for shelter in an urbanizing world, MIT Press Cambridge.
ACHR (Asian Coalition for Housing Rights), (2001), “New tool for poor communities”, Housing by
people in Asia, No. 13,
http://www.achr.net/ACHR%20Newsletter%20No%2013%20without%20photos.pdf.
——, (2003), “Causes of eviction: why evictions are on the up and up in Asian cities”, Housing by
people in Asia, No. 15. Available at http://www.achr.net/ACHR%2015%20with%20photos.pdf.
—— and SDI (2003), Community-driven water, sanitation and infrastructure, ACHR, Bangkok.
ADB (Asian Development Bank), (1998), “1997 NGO Report”, Social Development Division, Office of
Environment and Social Development. http://www.adb.org/NGOs/docs/ 1997report.pdf.
——, (2000), “Finance for the poor: Microfinance development strategy”
http://adb.org/Documents/Policies/Microfinance/financepolicy.pdf.
——, (2004), City development strategies to reduce poverty. Asian Development Bank, Manila.
Available at http://www.adb.org/Documents/Books/City_Devt_Strategies/content.pdf.
Adebayo, A. and Adebayo, P.W., (2000), “Sustainable housing policy and practice - Reducing
constraints and expanding horizons within housing delivery”, in Proceedings: Strategies for a
sustainable built environment, Pretoria, 23-25 August 2000. Available at
http://www.sustainablesettlement.co.za/event/SSBE/Proceedings/proceedings.html.
Aga Khan Development Network, (n.d.), “Slum networking of Indore City, Indore, India”, Aga Khan
Award for Architecture 1998, The Seventh Award Cycle, 1996-1998.
http://www.akdn.org/agency/akaa/seventhcycle/slum.html.
Agbola, T., (1994), “NGOs and community development in urban areas: A Nigerian case study”, Cities,
vol. 11, Issue 1, pp. 59-67.
Page 69

—— and Jinadu, A.M., (1997). “Forced eviction and forced relocation in Nigeria: the experience of
those evicted from Maroko in 1990”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 9, No. 2, pp.
271-288.
Akrofi, E.O., (1991), “ Upgrading tenure for the poor in Africa”, Habitat Debate, vol. 7, No. 3.
Alder, G. and Munene, P., (2001), Shelter co-operatives in Kenya: Contributions of the
co-operative sector to shelter development, report prepared for UN-HABITAT and ICA
Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/publications_cooperative.asp.
Allen, A., and You, N., (2002), Sustainable urbanisation: Bridging the green and brown agendas,
Development Planning Unit, University College, London.
Alonzo, A., (1994), “The development of housing finance for the urban poor in the Phillipines: the
experience of the home development mutual fund”, Cities, vol. 11, Issue 6, pp. 398-401.
Amnesty International, (2003), “Angola: Mass forced evictions in Luanda — a call for a human
rights-based housing policy”.
http://web.amnesty.org/library/pdf/AFR120072003ENGLISH/$File/AFR1200703.pdf.
Amole, B., D. Korboe and A. G. Tipple, (1993), “The family house in West Africa: a forgotten resource
for policy makers?” Third World Planning Review, vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 355-72.
ANC (African National Congress), (1992), “Ready to govern”, ANC policy guidelines for a democratic
South Africa adopted at the National Conference 28-31 May 1992.
http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/history/readyto.html.
Angel, S., (1983), “Land tenure for the urban poor,” in Angel, S. and others (eds.), Land for housing
the poor, Select Books, Singapore, pp. 110-142.
——, (2000), Housing policy matters: A global analysis, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
—— and Mayo, S.K., (1996), “Enabling policies and their effects on housing sector performance: A
global comparison”. Paper presented to the Habitat II Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, June 1996.
Aristizabal, N. and Gomez, A.O., (2002), “Are services more important than titles in Bogotá?”, in
Payne, G., (ed.), Land, rights and innovation: Improving security of tenure for the urban
poor, ITDG Publishing, London, pp. 100-113.
Arnott, R., (1995), “Time for Revisionism on Rent Control?”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol.
9, No. 1, pp. 99-120.
Assefa, T., (2002), “Urban development and housing for the low-income groups in Ethiopia”, Paper
submitted to Conference on Housing and Urban Development for Low-Income Groups in
Sub-Saharan Africa, Accra, Ghana, 22-26 July 2002. http://www.auhf.co.za/accra/gana2.doc.
Awotona, A., Briggs, M. and Grange, L. le, (1995), “Approaches to human settlement development:
implications for research into the upgrading of South African townships.” Working Paper No. 3.
The integration and urbanisation of existing townships in the Republic of South Africa (ODA
Research Scheme Number R6266). CARDO, University of Newcastle upon Tyne and School of
Architecture and Planning, University of Cape Town.
Baharoglu, D., (2002), “World Bank experience in land management and the debate on tenure security”,
Page 70

Housing and Land Background Series, No. 16, Draft. Available at
http://www.worldbank.org/urban/publicat/land_final.pdf.
——, and Leitmann, J., (1998), “Coping strategies for infrastructure: how Turkey's spontaneous
settlements operate in the absence of formal rules”, Habitat International, vol. 22, No. 2, pp.
115-135.
Baksh, S., (2001), “Statement,” at the 25th Special Session Of The United Nations General Assembly
on the Review and Appraisal of the Implementation of the Habitat Agenda, June 6, 2001,
http://www.unhabitat.org/istanbul+5/docs/tritobE.html.
Balbo, M., (2001), “Shelter: emerging trends and policies”, Habitat Debate, vol. 7, No. 9, pp. 6-7.
Bamberger, M., Gonzalez, E, and Sae-Hau, U., (1982a), Evaluation of sites and services projects:
the evidence from El Salvador, World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Bamberger, M., Sanyal, B. and Valverde, N., (1982b), Evaluation of sites and services projects: the
experience from Lusaka, Zambia, World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Banerjee, B., (2002), “Security of tenure in Indian cities”, in Durand-Lasserve, A. and Royston, L.,
(eds), Holding their ground: Secure land tenure for the urban poor in developing countries,
Earthscan, London, pp. 37-58.
—— and Srilakshmi, A., (2002), “Housing – no more for rich only”.
http://www.karvy.com/articles/planning16042002.htm.
Barcelo, J., (1998), “Financing the Habitat Agenda”, Habitat Debate, vol. 4, No. 3.
Barreto, T.B., (2001), “Obstacles to legalization of squatter settlements in Venezuela”, Land Lines, vol.
13, No. 3. http://www.lincolninst.edu/pubs/pub-detail.asp?id=240.
Basu, K. and Emerson, P.M., (2000), “The economics of tenancy control”, The Economic Journal,
vol. 110, No. 466, pp. 939 - 962.
Baumann, T. and Bolnick J., (2001), “Out of the frying pan into the fire: the limits of loan finance in a
capital subsidy context,” Environment and Urbanization, vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 103-115.
Baumann, T. and Mitlin, D., (2003), “The South African Homeless Peoples’ Federation: investing in the
poor”, Small Enterprise Development, vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 32-41.
Beall, J., (1996), “Urban governance: why gender matters”.
——, (2000), “From the culture of poverty to inclusive cities: re-framing urban policy and politics”,
Journal of International Development, vol. 12, Issue 6, pp. 843-856.
——, (2003), “City-Community Challenge Fund (C3): Interim external evaluation report”,
Commissioned by Infrastructure and Urban Development Division (IUDD), Department for
International Development (DFID). Available at
http://hq.unhabitat.org/cdrom/ump/CD/global.html#2.
——, and Mitlin, D., (2001), “Beyond confrontation”, Insights 38.
Berner, E., (2002), “Learning from informal markets: innovative approaches to land and housing
Page 71

provision”, in Westendorff, D. and Eade, D., (eds), Development and Cities: Essays from
Development in Practice, Oxfam, Oxford, pp. 226-247.
Best Practices Database, http://www.bestpractices.org/database/index.php.
——, (n.d.a.), “Best practices briefs”. http://bestpractices.org/bpbriefs/housing.html.
——, (n.d.b.), “Botswana's Enabling Development Control Code (1995)”.
http://www.bestpractices.org/database/bp_display_best_practice.php?best_practice_id=1514.
Black, R., Jaszczolt, K. and Lee, M., (2000), “Solving the housing problem: lessons from Poland and
Hungary in creating a new housing finance system”, USAID/Warsaw, Regional Urban
Development Office, Central Europe.
http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/html/FinancialSectorWeb.nsf/(attachmentweb)/NewCEEHFSyste
msLessonsPoland&HungaryUSAIDJune00/$FILE/New+CEE+HF+Systems+Lessons+Poland+
&+Hungary+USAID+June00.pdf.
Bolnick J., (1996), “uTshani Buyakhuluma (The grass speaks): Peoples Dialogue and the South African
Homeless Peoples Federation (1994-6)”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 8, No. 2, pp.
153-170.
Boonyabancha, S., (1997), “Community enablement, poverty alleviation and integrated savings and
credit schemes in Bangkok”, in Burgess, R., Carmona, M. and Kolstee, T., (eds.), The challenge
of sustainable cities: Neoliberalism and urban strategies in developing countries, Zed Books,
London, pp. 215-229.
——, (2001), “Savings and loans; drawing lessons from some experiences in Asia”, Environment and
Urbanization, vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 9-21.
——, (2003), “A decade of change: from the Urban Community Development Office (UDCO), to the
Community Organizations Development Institutue (CODI), in Thailand”, IIED Working Paper 12
in Poverty Reduction in Urban Areas Series, IIED, London.
Bretas, P.R.P., (1996), “Participative budgeting in Belo Horizonte: democratization and citizenship”,
Environment and Urbanization, vol. 8, No. 1, 213-222.
BRIDGE, (2001), “Briefing paper on the ‘feminisation of poverty’”,
http://www.bridge.ids.ac.uk/reports/femofpov.pdf.
BSHF (Building and Social Housing Foundation), (n.d.a), “Projects. Build Together Programme”
http://www.bshf.org/en/to.php/about/dih/projects.php?pID=80.
——, (n.d.b), “Projects. Co-operative housing in a market economy”
http://www.bshf.org/en/to.php/about/dih/projects.php?pID=81.
——, (n.d.c), “Projects. Attic Flats Project”
http://www.bshf.org/en/to.php/about/dih/projects.php?pID=115.
Buckley, R.M. and Kalarickal, J., (2004), “Shelter strategies for the urban poor: idiosyncratic and
successful, but hardly mysterious”, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3427, October
2004. http://econ.worldbank.org/files/39291_wps3427.pdf.
Budds, J. and McGranahan, G., (2003), “Are the debates on water privatization missing the point?
Page 72

Experiences from Africa, Asia and Latin America”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 15, No.
2 , pp. 87-113.
Burgess, R., (1992), Helping some to help themselves: Third World housing and development strategies,
in Mathéy, K., (ed.), Beyond self-help housing, Mansell, London.
Burra, S., (1999a), “Co-operative housing in Pune”, Working Paper No. 100.
——, (1999b), “Resettlement and rehabilitation of the urban poor: the story of Kanjur Marg”, Working
Paper No. 99.
—— and Patel, S., (2002), “Community toilets in Pune and other Indian Cities”, PLA Notes 44: Special
Issue on Local Government and Participation, IIED, London, pp. 43-45.
——, —— and Kerr, T., (2003), “Community-designed, built and managed toilet blocks in Indian
cities”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 11-32.
Butaumocho, R., (2003), “Owning a house: Distant dream for many”, The Herald (Harare), 30
September, 2003.
Cabannes, Y., (2003), “From land occupation to cooperation: story of planned occupation in Curtiba,
Brazil”, Habitat Debate, vol. 9, No. 4, p.16.
——, (2004), “Participatory budgeting: a significant contribution to participatory democracy”,
Environment and Urbanization, vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 27-46.
Center for Urban Development Studies, (2000), “Housing microfinance initiatives: Synthesis and regional
summary: Asia, Latin America, and Sub-Saharan Africa with selected case studies.
Microenterprise Best Practices”, The Center for Urban Development Studies, Harvard University
Graduate School of Design.
http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/research/research_centers/cuds/microf/cuds_microf.pdf.
Chitekwe B. and Mitlin D., (2001), The urban poor under threat and in struggle: options for urban
development in Zimbabwe, 1995-2000, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 13, No. 2, pp.
85-101.
Choike, (n.d.), “The right to adequate housing”. http://www.choike.org/nuevo_eng/informes/1162.html.
Chowdhury, A.M.R. and Bhuiya, M., (2004), “The wider impacts of BRAC poverty alleviation
programme in Bangladesh”, Journal of International Development, pp. 369-386.
Cities Alliance, (1999), Cities without slums: Action plan for moving slum upgrading to scale,
Washington, D.C. Available at http://web.mit.edu/urbanupgrading/sponsor/.
——, (2001), Cities without slums: 2001 Annual report, Washington, D.C. Available at
http://www.citiesalliance.org/citiesalliancehomepage.nsf/6FF87B591473087C0625687E0058053
D/DD77364CB92960A786256BF90052A701?OpenDocument.
——, (2002), “SEWA Bank: Housing finance in India”, CIVIS Issue 4iii: Shelter finance for the poor
series.
http://www.citiesalliance.org/citiesalliancehomepage.nsf/Attachments/civis4iii/$File/SEWA+CIVIS
+Nov02.pdf.
Page 73

——, (2003a), Cities without slums: 2003 Annual report, Washington, D.C. Available at
http://www.citiesalliance.org/citiesalliancehomepage.nsf/6FF87B591473087C0625687E0058053
D/DD77364CB92960A786256BF90052A701?OpenDocument.
——, (2003b), “Shelter finance for the poor series synthesis”, CIVIS Shelter Finance for the Poor
Series, Issue 4v, April, 2003. Available from http://www.citiesalliance.org/publications/civis.html.
——, (2004), Cities without slums: 2004 Annual report, Washington, D.C. Available at
http://www.citiesalliance.org/citiesalliancehomepage.nsf/6FF87B591473087C0625687E0058053
D/DD77364CB92960A786256BF90052A701?OpenDocument.
CityNet, (1995), Municipal land management in Asia: A comparative study, United Nations, New
York.
Cohen, M.A., (1983), ‘The challenge of replicability: towards a new paradigm for urban shelter in
developing countries’, Regional Development Dialogue, vol. 4, Pt 1, pp 90-99.
——, (1990), “Macro-economic adjustment and the city”, Cities, 7, pp. 49-60.
COHRE (Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions), (2000a), Women and housing rights, Sources No.
5. Available at http://www.cohre.org/hrframe.htm.
——, (2000b), The human right to adequate housing: 1945 to 1999 — Chronology of United
Nations activity, Geneva.
——, (2003), Forced evictions: Violations of human rights, Global Survey on Forced Evictions No.
9, Geneva. http://www.cohre.org/downloads/survey9.pdf.
——, (2004a), “A precarious future: the informal settlement of Agbogbloshie, Accra, Ghana”,
http://www.cohre.org/downloads/FFMagbogbloshie.pdf.
——, (2004b), “Nigeria: decades of mass forced evictions” Evictions Monitor, The Newsletter of the
COHRE Global Forced Evictions Programme, vol. 1, No. 2, p. 3.
http://www.cohre.org/downloads/Evictions-Monitor-No2-Vol1-Dec2004.pdf.
——, (2005), A place to live: Women’s inheritance rights in Africa.
http://www.cohre.org/library/lbb04-a-place-to-live.pdf.
Committee on Ways and Means, (2004), “Statement of why the United States-Morocco free trade
agreement is in the interests of U.S. commerce”.
http://waysandmeans.house.gov/media/pdf/morocco/interestsofuscommerce.pdf.
Cosgrove, S., (1999), “Engendering finance: a comparison of two micro-finance models in El Salvador”,
in: Datta, K. and Jones, G.A., (eds), Housing and finance in developing countries, Routledge,
London, pp. 213-226.
CRS (Catholic Relief Services), (2003), “Social accountability mechanisms: citizen engagement for
pro-poor policies and reduced corruption”,
http://www.interaction.org/files.cgi/1199_social_accountability_final.doc.
Cummings H. and Bhanjee, T., (2002), “The role of community participation in urban poverty
alleviation”. Prepared for presentation at the PD Forum conference on “Participation for Global
Action and Change: Connecting Practitioners, Communities, Networks, Organizations”, University
Page 74

of Guelph, Canada, July 29-August 2, 2002. Available from
http://www.pdforum.org/webapps/archivus/.
D’Cruz, C. and Mitlin, D., (2005), “Slum Dwellers International: One experience of the contribution of
an urban poor movement to pro-poor urban development”.
http://www.iied.org/docs/urban/SDI_membership_orgs05.pdf.
D’Cruz, C. and Satterthwaite, D., (2005), “Meeting the Millennium Development Goals for urban
dwellers: The current and potential role of community-driven initiatives to significantly improve the
lives of slum dwellers at local, city-wide and national levels”.
http://www.iied.org/docs/urban/urbpov_wp16.pdf.
Dahiya, B., (1999), “The impact of decentralization policies in India”, Habitat Debate, vol. 5, No. 4.
Datta, D., (2002), The role of local institutions in Bangladesh, PRA Promoters’ Society, Bangladesh.
De Koe, L., (2002), “The housing challenge in Windhoek, Namibia: review of the implementation of the
Build-Together Programme”.
http://www.hdm.lth.se/TRAINING/Postgrad/HD/papers/2002/HD2002-15.pdf.
De López, E.M. and Castillo, L., (1997), “El Salvador: a case of urban renovation and rehabilitation of
mesones”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 161-179.
De Visser, J., (2001). “From the courts: Grootboom v Oostenberg Municipality”, Local Government
Law Bulletin (South Africa), vol. 3, No. 1.
Department of Housing, (1994), White paper: A new housing policy and strategy for South Africa,
Department of Housing, Government of South Africa, Johannesburg.
http://www.housing.gov.za/content/planned/Docs/Housing%20White%20Paper.pdf.
Der-Petrossian, B., (1999), “The role of the private sector in housing supply”, in UNCHS (Habitat),
Report of the Regional Workshop on Housing and the Environment, Vienna International Center,
22-23 November 1999. pp. 29-46.Available at
http://hq.unhabitat.org/publication/hs59600e/hs59600e_pt1.pdf.
Devas, N., (2004), “Urban governance and poverty: lessons from a study of ten cities”, Local
Governance and Pro-Poor Service Delivery, Regional Seminar and Learning Event, 10-12
February 2004., ADB Headquarters, Manila, Philippines,
http://www.adb.org/Governance/Pro_poor/Urban_case/PDF/ten_cities.pdf.
DFID (Department for International Development, United Kingdom), (2000a), Disability, poverty and
development, DFID, London. http://www.dfid.gov.uk/Pubs/files/disability.pdf.
——, (2000b), “Realising human rights for poor people. Strategies for achieving the international
development targets”.
——, (2002), “Better livelihoods for poor people: The role of land policy.” Consultation document.
——, (2003), “Putting disability on the development agenda”, Developments, Issue 24, Fourth Quarter
2003.
——, (2004), “Gender and participatory budgeting”,
http://www.cipfa.org.uk/international/download/gender_booklet.pdf.
Page 75

Dhonte, P., Bhattacharya, R. and Yousef, T., (2000), “Demographic transition in the Middle East:
implications for growth, employment and housing”, International Monetary Fund Working Paper
(WP/00/41), (March).
Dowall, D.E., (1991). The land market assessment(UMP4), World Bank/UNDP/UNCHS,
Washington, D.C.
DPU, (Development Planning Unit), (2001), Implementing the Habitat Agenda. In Search of Urban
Sustainability, the Development Planning Unit, University College London, London.
Drakakis-Smith, D., (1996), “Third World cities: sustainable urban development, 1”, in Paddison, R.,
Lever, B. and Money, J., (eds.), International perspectives in urban studies 4, Jessica Kingsley
Publishers, London, pp. 25-45.
Du Plessis, C., (2002), “Agenda 21 for sustainable construction in developing countries: A Discussiion
document”, CSIR, UNEP and CIB, Pretoria.
http://www.unep.or.jp/ietc/Focus/Agenda%2021%20BOOK.pdf.
Du Plessis, J., (n.d.), “The problem of forced evictions and the need to develop community-based,
locally appropriate alternatives: lessons and challenges from Agbogbloshie, Ghana and Pom
Mahakan , Thailand”, http://www.wits.ac.za/informalsettlements/Jean%20du%20Plessis.pdf.
Dube, C., (2004), “Housing coops frustrated over land”, The Independent, Friday, 1 October 2004.
Duffy, K., (1998), “Final report of the HDSE Project: ‘Opportunity and risk: trends of social exclusion in
Europe’”,
http://www.coe.int/T/E/Social_cohesion/HDSE/2_HDSE_Reports/3_Final_Report/default.asp#To
pOfPage.
Durand-Lasserve, A., (1999), “Benefits of regularizing informal settlements”, Habitat International, vol.
5, No. 3.
——, (2003), “Land for housing the poor in African cities. Are neo-customary processes an effective
alternative to formal systems?”, Paper presented at the Urban Research Symposium 2003: Urban
Development for Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction, World Bank, Washington, D.C.,
December 15-17, 2003.
http://www.worldbank.org/urban/symposium2003/docs/papers/durand-lasserve.pdf.
—— and Clerc, V., (1996), “Regularization and integration of irregular settlements: lessons from
experience”, Urban Management Programme, Working Paper Series 6, UNDP/UNCHS
(Habitat)/World Bank, Nairobi.
—— and ——, (eds), (2002b), Holding their ground: Secure land tenure for the urban poor in
developing countries, Earthscan, London.
——, Fernandes, E., Payne, G. and Smolka, M., (2002), “Secure tenure for the urban poor”, Civis,
Issue 3.
El Araby, M.M., (2003), “The role of the state in managing urban land supply and prices in Egypt”,
Habitat International, vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 429-458.
Engle, P.L., (2000), “Urban women: balancing work and childcare”, in Garet, J.L. and Ruel, M.T.,
(eds.). Achieving urban food and nutrition security in the developing world, IFPRI 2020
Page 76

Vision Focus 3, Brief 8 of 10, August 2000.
Environment and Urbanization, (2000), “Editorial”, Environment and Urbanization, vol 12, No 1 April
2000.
Erbaş, S.N. and Nothaft, F.E., (2002), “The role of mortgages in improving living standards and st
imulating growth: a survey of selected MENA countries”, International Monetary Fund Working
Paper (WP/02/17), (January).
Ergüden, S., (2001), “Low-cost housing: policies and constraints in developing countries”, paper
presented at International Conference on Spatial Information for Sustainable Development,
Nairobi, Kenya, 2-5 October 2001.
http://www.fig.net/pub/proceedings/nairobi/erguden-CMTS1-1.pdf.
Erman, T., (1997), “Squatter (gecekondu), housing versus apartment housing: Turkish rural-to-urban
migrant residents’ perspectives”, Habitat International, vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 91-106.
——, (2001), “The politics of squatter (gecekondu), studies in Turkey: the changing representations of
rural migrants in the academic discourse”, Urban Studies, vol. 38, No. 7, pp. 983-1002.
Etemadi, F.U., (2000), “Civil society participation in city governance in Cebu City”, Environment and
Urbanization, vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 57-72.
Farooqi, M., (2005), “Housing needs turning into serious problem,” The Nation, Friday, March 18,
2005, http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/mar-2005/18/bnews2.php.
Farvacque, C. and McAuslan, P., (1992), Reforming Urban land policies and institutions in
developing countries. The World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Ferguson, B., (1999), “Micro-finance of housing: a key to housing the low or moderate-income
majority?” Environment and Urbanization, vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 185-199.
——,(2001) “Process, policy, and public-private partnerships in housing in developing countries: What
can the United States learn?” in Wachter, S.M. and Penne, R.L., (eds.), Housing Policy in the
New Millennium: Conference Proceedings, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Washington, D.C. http://www.huduser.org/publications/pdf/brd/07Ferguson.pdf.
Ferguson, B. and Haider, E. (2000) “Mainstreaming microfinance of housing”, Inter American
Development Bank, Sept 2000, Housing Finance International.
http://www.iadb.org/sds/doc/IFM-FergusonandHaider-E.pdf.
Ferguson, B. and Navarette, J. (2003) “New approaches to progressive housing in Latin America: a key
to habitat programs and policy”, Habitat International, vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 309-323.
Fernandes, E., and Varley, A., (1998), “Law, the city and citizenship in developing countries: an
introduction”, in Fernandes, E. and Varley, A., (eds), Illegal Cities: Law and Urban Change in
Developing Countries, Zen Books Ltd, London.
Fiori, J., Riley, L. and Ramirez, R., (2000), “Urban poverty alleviation through environmental upgrading
in Rio De Janeiro: Favela Bairro”, Draft research report,
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu/research/housing/Favela%20Bairro%20Report.pdf.
Firstbroker Network, (n.d.), Firstbroker Network - Project Archive.
Page 77

http://www.firstbroker.net/index.phpmodule/Site/action/ArchivedProjects/si/location/sf/Mexico/ob/
id/obs/asc/id/8754.
Foghweh, G., (2001), “Cameroon: on the road to sustainable development”, Habitat Debate, vol. 7,
No. 1, p. 16.
Fourie, C., (1999), “Conclusions from a research study based on best practices analysis on access to
land and security of tenure”, Paper presented at International Forum on Urban Poverty (IFUP),
Third International Conference on Social Integration and Security for the Urban Poor, Towards
Cities for All, Nairobi, Kenya, 12-14 October 1999, organized by UNCHS (Habitat).
http://users.iafrica.com/a/au/augusart/online_ifup.html.
——, (2001), “ The use of new forms of spatial information, not the cadastre, to provide tenure security
in informal settlements”, in International Conference on Spatial Information for Sustainable
Development, Nairobi, Kenya 2-5 October 2001: Proceedings.
http://www.fig.net/pub/proceedings/nairobi/program.htm.
Frank, D., (2004), “A market-based housing improvement system for low-income families - the Housing
Incentive System (SIV), in Ecuador”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 16, No. 1, pp.
171-184.
Frankel, L. and others, (1999), “Bridging the gap: cooperative development organizations and private
and voluntary organizations in microfinance”, http://www.dec.org/pdf_docs/PNACG553.pdf.
Friedmann, J., “Globalization and the emerging culture of planning”
http://www.scarp.ubc.ca/faculty%20profiles/friedmann-paper2.htm.
Frost, B., (2000), “Disability and development: an overview and ideas on best practice”.
http://www.disability.dk/images/docpics/1043929065_disability_report_from_British_Council.pdf.
FSF (South Africa Financial Sector Forum), (n.d.), “Housing development institutions”
http://www.finforum.co.za/institut/1hdihist.htm#author.
Gatabaki-Kamau, R. and Karirah-Gitau, S., (2004), “Actors and interests: the development of an
informal settlement in Nairobi, Kenya”, in Hansen, K.T. and Vaa, M., (eds.), Reconsidering
informality: Perspectives from urban Africa, Nordiska Afrikainstitutet, Uppsala, pp. 158-175.
Ghatate, S., (1999), “The development of HUDCO’s housing loan scheme to NGOs,” Development
Planning Unit (DPU) Working Pare Series, No. 98. Available from
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu/publications/working_papers.htm.
Gilbert, A., (2004), “Helping the poor through housing subsidies: lessons from Chile, Colombia and
South Africa”, Habitat International, vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 13-40.
Gilbert, R. and others, (1996), Making cities work: The role of local authorities in the urban
environment, Earthscan, London.
Goldberg, M. and Motta, M., (2003), “Microfinance for housing: the Mexican case”, Journal of
Microfinance, vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 51-76.
Goudsmit I. A. and Blackburn J., (2001), “Participatory municipal planning in Bolivia: an ambiGUOus
experience”, Development in Practice, vol. 11, No. 5, pp. 587-596.
Page 78

GHB (Government Housing Bank, Thailand), (n.d.a.), “The Government Housing Bank of Thailand”.
http://www.serd.ait.ac.th/umc/bestprac/ghb.htm or http://nird.org.in/clic/govt_house.html.
——, (n.d.b), “History of The Government Housing Bank”.
http://www.ghb.co.th/eng/aboutus/ghbhis_eng.htm.
Government of Bangladesh, (2001), “Bangladesh national report”, progress of implementation of the
Habitat Agenda (1996-2001), prepared for Istanbul +5, the United Nations General Assembly
Special Session on Human Settlements. http://www.unhabitat.org/Istanbul+5/Bangladesh1.pdf.
Government of Kenya and UNCHS (United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat)), (2001),
“Nairobi Situation Analysis: Consultative Report”, Nairobi.
Government of Uganda, (1997), The Local Government Act: Laws of the Republic of Uganda.
Ministry of Local Government, Kampala, Uganda.
Greater Nashua Habitat for Humanity, (2004), “Local Habitat tithe helps Ecuador”, Nashua Habitat
News, Spring Issue 2004.
GRi, (2002), “Ya Barimah on efforts to reverse housing deficit”, GRi Newsreel 24 - 07 - 2002.
http://www.mclglobal.com/History/Jul2002/24g2002/24g2n.html.
Grimmet, N., (n.d.), Slums Clearance Project.
http://www.durban.gov.za/eThekwini/Services/housing/slums_project.
Gulyani, S., and Connors, G., (2002), “Urban upgrading in Africa: a summary of rapid assessments in ten
countries”. Africa: Regional Urban Upgrading Initiative Africa Infrastructure Department, The
World Bank.
http://web.mit.edu/urbanupgrading/upgrading/case-examples/overview-africa/country-assessments/
reports/.
Ha, S-K., (2004), “Housing poverty and the role of urban governance in Korea”, Environment and
Urbanization, vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 139-153.
Halder, S.R. and Mosley, P., (2004), “Working with the ultra-poor: learning from BRAC experiences”,
Journal of International Development, vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 387-406.
Hamdi, N. and Majale, M., (2004), Partnerships in urban planning: A guide for municipalities,
DataPrint, Oxford.
Hansen, K.T. and Vaa, M., (2004a), “Introduction”, in Hansen, K.T. and Vaa, M., (eds.),
Reconsidering informality: Perspectives from Urban Africa, Nordiska Afrikainstitutet,
Uppsala, pp. 7-24.
——, (2004b), “Section III: land, housing, and planning”, in Hansen, K.T. and Vaa, M., (eds.),
Reconsidering informality: Perspectives from Urban Africa, Nordiska Afrikainstitutet,
Uppsala, pp. 139-142.
Harare City Council, (2000), “Proceedings of the Harare City Consultation on Poverty Workshop”,
Mount Pleasant Hall, Harare, Zimbabwe, 26th to 28th July 2000,
http://www.mdpafrica.org.zw/Publications/Proceedings%20Report%20Harare%20City%20Cons
ultation.pdf.
Page 79

Hardoy, A. and Schusterman, R., (2000), “New models for the privatization of water and sanitation for
the poor”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 63-75.
Hardoy, J.E., Mitlin, D. and Satterthwaite, D., (2001), Environmental problems in an urbanizing
world: Finding solutions for cities in Africa, Asia and Latin America, Earthscan, London.
Harris, R., (2003), “A double irony: the originality and influence of John F.C. Turner”, Habitat
International, vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 245-269.
Harvard University, (2004), “Assessment of participatory budgeting in Brazil”, Harvard University,
Graduate School of Design, Center for Urban Development Studies.
http://www.iadb.org/sds/doc/ParticipatoryBudget.pdf.
Hasan, A., (2003), “The scaling-up of the OPP’s Low Cost Sanitation Programme through CBO-NGO
-local government partnerships in Pakistan.” Paper prepared for the World Bank 2003 Urban
Research Symposium, Washington, 15-17 December 2003.
http://www.worldbank.org/urban/symposium2003/docs/papers/hasan.pdf.
Haughton, G., (1999), “Environmental justice and the sustainable city”, in Satterthwaite, D., (ed), The
Earthscan Reader in Sustainable Cities, Earthscan, London.
Hegedüs, J., (2002), “Financing of housing in South East Europe”
http://www.polandhousingfinance.org/pdfs/Comparative_Studies_Housing%20Finance_in_SEE.pd
f.
—— and Teller, N., (2004), “Housing subsidies supporting low-income households (A review of
international experiences)”. Prepared for Directorate General III Social Cohesion Social Policy
Department, Metropolitan Research Institute.
Helander, E., (1992), “Prejudice and dignity; an introduction to community based rehabilitation,” UNDP.
Hickey, S. and Mohan, G., (2003), Relocating participation within a radical politics of development:
citizenship and critical modernism”, Draft working paper prepared for conference on ‘Participation:
From Tyranny to Transformation? Exploring new approaches to participation in development’,
27-28 February 2003, University of Manchester.
HIC-WAS (Habitat International Coalition Women and Shelter Network), (1999), Gender and the
Habitat Agenda: Engendering our human settlements, Habitat International Coalition Women
and Shelter Network (HIC-WAS), Dar es Salaam. http://www.hicwas.kabissa.org/bklbody.htm.
——, (n.d.), “Habitat International Coalition. Women and Shelter Network.”
http://www.hicwas.kabissa.org/.
Hobson, J., (2000), “Sustainable sanitation: experiences in Pune with a municipal - NGO - community
partnership”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 53-62.
Hoek-Smit, M.C., (2002), “Implementing Indonesia’s new housing policy: The way forward”, Findings
and recommendations of the technical assistance project ‘Policy development for enabling the
housing market to work in Indonesia’.
http://www.kimpraswil.go.id/Ditjen_mukim/homi/integrated%20homi2.pdf.
——, (2004), “Subsidizing housing or housing finance?”, paper presented at the International Housing
Conference in Hong Kong 2004, Housing in the 21st Century: Challenges and Commitments,
Page 80

Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre, 2-4 February 2004. Available at
http://www.housingauthority.gov.hk/en/ihc/paper.
Home, R. and Lim, H., (2004), “Introduction: demystifying ‘The mystery of capital’”, in Home, R. and
Lim, H., (2004), (eds.), Demystifying the mystery of capital: Land tenure and poverty in
Africa and the Caribbean, Glasshouse Press, London.
Homeless International, (2001), “The Habitat Agenda: Progress since 1996”, Dialogue, June 2001.
——, (2002), “Building on successes”, Dialogue, February 2002.
——, (n.d.), “Istanbul +5 - creating a space for all voices?”
—— with the Urban Poverty Group, (2005), “Good Urban Governance: tackling urban poverty”,
Dialogue, January 2005.
Huchzermeyer M., (2003), “A legacy of control? The capital subsidy for housing, and informal settlement
intervention in South Africa”, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 27,
No. 3, pp. 591-612.
Hughes, D, and Masimba, G., (2004), “Feasibility study for the application of Community-Led
Infrastructure Finance Facility (CLIFF), operations in Zambia”, Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/ump/cliff.asp.
Idasa, (2002), “The Grootboom case and women’s housing rights”, Budget Brief No. 111.
IDB (Inter-American Development Bank), (1999), “Involuntary resettlement in IDB projects: Principles
and guidelines”, http://www.iadb.org/sds/doc/Ind-ADeruytterepgirpe.pdf.
IDRC (International Development Research Centre), (n.d.), “HIPC conditionality: Are PRSPs just the
reincarnation of structural adjustment?” http://web.idrc.ca/en/ev-67837-201-1-do_topic.html.
IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute), (2004), “Scaling up community-driven
development: a synthesis of experience”, FCND Discussion Paper No. 181,
http://www.ifpri.org/divs/fcnd/dp/papers/fcndp181.pdf.
IIED (International Institute for Environment and Development), (2001), “Deep democracy; transforming
opportunities for the urban poor”, Environment and Urbanization Brief 4, Brief of the October
2001 issue of Environment and Urbanization. Available at
http://www.iied.org/urban/pubs/eu_briefs.html.
——, (2004), “Discussing the role of revolving funds within the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers
(PRSPs)”, HiFi News, No. 12. http://www.iied.org/docs/urban/hifi_news12.pdf.
ILO, (2003), Genderinfo No. 19 - April 2003. Available at
http://www.itcilo.org/english/bureau/turin/gender/Archive.htm.
IMF/World Bank, (2002), “Review of the PRSP experience”, an issues paper for the January 2002
Conference”, http://www.imf.org/external/np/PRSPgen/review/2002/conf/issues.pdf.
Imparato, I. and Ruster, J., (2003), Slum Upgrading and Participation: Lessons from Latin America
, The World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Page 81

IPHN (International Poverty and Health Network), (2001), “PRSPs: Should they carry a health
warning?”, Bulletin 6: July 2001. Available from http://www.iphn.org/bulletinlist. html.
Irurah, D.K., Bannister, S., Silverman, M. and Zack, T., (2002), Towards sustainable settlements:
Case studies from South Africa, STE Publishers, Johannesburg.
Islam, N., (1996), “Sustainability issues in urban housing in a low-income country: Bangladesh”, Habitat
International, vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 377-388.
ITDG (Intermediate Technology Development Group), (2003), “The Kenyan RGUU experience;
context, processes and lessons”. Available from http://www.itdg.org/?id=rguu_workshop.
Jack, M. and Braimah, F.R., (2004), “Feasibility study for the application of Community-Led
Infrastructure Finance Facility (CLIFF), operations in Ghana”, Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/ump/cliff.asp.
Jenkins, P., (1999), “Difficulties encountered in community involvement in delivery under the new South
African housing policy”, Habitat International, vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 431-446.
Jones, G.A. and Mitlin, D., (1999), “Housing finance and non-governmental organizations in developing
countries”, in: Datta, K. and Jones, G.A., (eds), Housing and finance in developing countries,
Routledge, London, pp. 26-43.
K’Akumu, O.A., (2002), “Expropriation of land for urban development in Kenya”, in Kreibichand, V.
and Olima, W.H.O., (eds.), Urban Land Management in Africa, University of Dortmund,
Dortmund, pp. 322-334.
Karaos, A.M., (2002), “An assessment of the performance of the Arroyo Administration in housing”.
Available from http://codengo.org/majdocs_bottom.html.
Karirah-Gitau, S., (2002), “Gender perspectives in land and property ownership in Kenya”, in
Kreibichand, V. and Olima, W.H.O., (eds.), Urban land management in Africa, University of
Dortmund, Dortmund, pp. 65-75.
Karki, T.K., (2004), “Implementation experiences of land pooling projects in Kathmandu Valley”,
Habitat International, vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 67-88.
Kasongo, B.A. and Tipple, A.G., (1990), “An analysis of policy towards squatters in Kitwe, Zambia”,
Third World Planning Review, vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 147-165.
Keare, D.H. and Parris, S., (1982), Evaluation of shelter programs for the urban poor: Principle
findings. World Bank Staff Working Papers no. 547. The World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Kellett, P. and Tipple, A.G., (2000), “The home as workplace: a study of income-generating activities
within the domestic setting”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 203-213.
Kessides, C., (1997), “World Bank experience with the provision of infrastructure services for the urban
poor: Preliminary identification and review of best practices”,
http://www.worldbank.org/html/fpd/urban/publicat/service_provision.pdf.
Khan, F. and Thurman, S., (2001), “Setting the stage: Current housing policy and debate in South
Africa”.
http://www.isandla.org.za/papers/20.%20Housing%20Policy%20in%20SA%20(2001).pdf.
Page 82

Kim, Kyung-Hwan, (1997), “Housing finance and urban infrastructure finance”, Urban Studies, vol. 34,
No. 10, pp. 1597-1620.
Kiwala, L., (2004), “Is the Habitat Agenda working for women?”, Habitat Debate, vol. 10, No. 2, p.
13.
Kumar, S., (2001), Social relations, rental housing markets and the poor in urban India. Final
report to the Infrastructure and Urban Development Department, Department for International
Development (DFID).
Kunfaa, E.Y. and Dogbe, T. with MacKay, H.J. and Marshall, C., (2002), “Ghana — Empty Pockets”,
in Narayan, D. and Petesch, P., (eds), Voices of the poor: From many lands, Oxford University
Press for the World Bank, Oxford. Available at
http://www1.worldbank.org/prem/poverty/voices/reports/lands/full.pdf.
Laquian, A.A., (1983), Basic housing: Policies for urban sites, services, and shelter for developing
countries, International Development Research Centre, Ottawa.
Larsson, G., (1997), “Land readjustment: a tool for urban development”, Habitat International, vol.
21, No. 2, pp. 141-152.
Lea, M. J. and Bernstein, S. A., (1996), “Housing finance in an inflationary economy: The experience of
Mexico”, Journal of Housing Economics, vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 87-104.
Lee, M., (1996), “The evolution of housing finance in Indonesia: innovative responses to opportunities”,
Habitat International, vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 583-94.
Li, M., (2001), “La Paz, Bolivia - live in the world's highest capital rent free”,
http://www.escapeartist.com/OREQ3/Rent_Free_Bolivia.html.
Linares, C.A., (2003), “Institutions and the urban environment in developing countries: Challenges,
trends, and transitions”. http://www.yale.edu/hixon/research/pdf/2003_Carlos_Linares.pdf.
Lind, H., (2001), “Rent regulation: A conceptual and comparative analysis”, European Journal of
Housing Policy, vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 41-57.
Lopes, D.M. and Rakodi, C., (2002), “Community empowerment and social sustainability in
Florianópolis, Brazil”, in Romaya, S. and Rakodi, C., (eds.), Building sustainable urban
settlements: Approaches and case studies in the developing world, ITDG Publishing, London.
Lowe, L., (2002), “Modelling demand in order to meet it: can the information and management systems
of the urban poor be understood and strengthened?”, in: Gandelsonas, C., (ed.), Communicating
for development: Experience from the urban environment, ITDG Publishing, London, pp.
25-44.
MacDonald, M. and Mata, F., (1996), “issues and perspectives on human settlements” in Mata, F. and
MacDonald, M., (Eds), in Human settlements: People making a difference.
Magel, H., (2001), “Access to land and security of tenure as a condition for sustainable human
development”, Keynote introduction Habitat Professionals Forum,, Discussion of the Global
Campaign for Secure Tenure, Istanbul +5,
http://www.habitatforum.org/reports/istanbul+5/magel.htm.
Page 83

Mahmud, S. and Duyar-Kienast, U., (2001), “Spontaneous settlements in Turkey and Bangladesh:
preconditions of emergence and environmental quality of gecekondu settlements and bustees”,
Cities, 2001, vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 271-280.
Majale, M., (1998), “Settlement upgrading in Kenya: The case for environmental planning and
management strategies”, PhD Thesis, University of Newcastle upon Tyne (unpublished).
——, (2002), “Tenure regularisation in informal settlements in Nairobi’, in Kreibichand, V. and Olima,
W.H.O., (eds), Urban land management in Africa, University of Dortmund, pp. 267-283.
——, (2004), “Improving access to adequate and affordable housing for the urban poor through an
integrated approach”, Paper presented at Adequate and Affordable Housing for All: Research,
Policy, Practice, International Housing Research Conference, Toronto, June 24 - 27, 2004.
http://www.urbancentre.utoronto.ca/pdfs/housingconference/Majale_Improving_Access.pdf.
——, (2005), “Urban housing and livelihoods: comparative case examples from Kenya and India”, in
Hamdi, N., (ed.), Urban futures: Economic growth and poverty reduction, ITDG Publishing,
London.
——, and Albu, M., (2001), “Livelihoods among the roofing construction subsector in Nakuru, Kenya:
tools for understanding sustainable livelihoods involving micro and small-scale enterprise”.
http://www.livelihoodtechnology.org/ocs/csRoofing/KENYA%20REPORT.PDF.
Mallaby, S., (2004), “NGOs: Fighting poverty, hurting the poor”, Foreign Policy, Sep 2004 Issue 144,
pp. 50-8.
Malpezzi, S., (1991), “Discounted cash flow analysis: present value models of housing programmes and
policies”, in: Tipple, A.G. and Willis, K.G., (eds), Housing in the developing world: methods of
analysis, case studies and policy, Routledge, London.
Mangin, W., (1967), “Latin American squatter settlements: A problem and a solution”, Latin American
Research Review 2, pp. 65-98.
Masser. I., (1987), “Land readjustment: an overview”, Third World Planning Review, vol. 9, No. 3,
pp. 205-210.
Matin, I., Hulme, D. and Rutherford, S., (1999), “Financial services for the poor and poorest: deepening
understanding to improve provision”, Finance and Development Research Programme, Working
Paper Series, Paper No 9.
Max Lock Centre, University of Westminster and WEDC, Loughborough University, (2002), “Report
on Inception Phase – March 2002 Country Report: Brazil Annex D”, DFID Research project
R7963 Localising the Habitat Agenda for urban poverty reduction,” available from
http://www.wmin.ac.uk/builtenv/maxlock/CityPoverty/outputs.htm.
Mayo, S.K., (1994), “The do’s and don’ts of housing policy”,
http://www.worldbank.org/html/fpd/urban/publicat/rd-hs9.htm.
——, (1999), “Subsidies in housing”. Sustainable Development Department Technical Papers Series,
Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, D.C.
http://www.faudi.unc.edu.ar/mgdh/carloslucca/housing_subsidies_idb_point_of_view.pdf.
—— and Gross, D., (1987), “Sites and services - and subsidies: the economics of low-cost housing in
Page 84

developing countries, The World Bank Economic Review, vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 305-335.
——, Malpezzi, S.J. and Gross, D.J., (1986), “Shelter strategies for the urban poor in developing
countries,” The World Bank Research Observer, vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 183-203.
McAuslan, P. and Farvacque, C., (1991), Improving urban land markets: Policy reforms of
institutions and instruments, UMP No. 5, World Bank/UNDP/UNCHS, Washington, D.C.
McCann, J., (2003), “Helping house the poor in Kenya”, Habitat Debate, vol. 9, No.1. p. 8.
McLeod, R., (2001), “Experiences of linking community-based housing finance to formal finance
mechanisms”. Presentation by Ruth McLeod, Homeless International, at the Gävle meeting on
Housing Finance, held in Sweden, March 28, 2001.
http://www.theinclusivecity.org/downloads/risk.PDF.
——, (2004), “Feasibility studies for the application of Community-Led Infrastructure Finance Facility
(CLIFF), operations in Sub-Saharan African countries: Summary Report”. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/ump/cliff.asp.
Mehlomakulu, T. and Marais, L., (1999), “Dweller perceptions of public and self-built houses: some
evidence from Mangaung (Bloemfontein)”, Tydskrif vir Gesinsekologie en
Verbruikerswetenskappe, vol 27, No 2,
http://www.up.ac.za/academic/acadorgs/saafecs/vol27/mehlomakulu.pdf.
Merrill, S. and others, (2000), “Housing and the macro economy: tax reform and alternative subsidy
policies for housing”, Prepared for East European Regional Housing Sector Assistance Project.
http://www.dec.org/pdf_docs/PNACJ658.pdf.
Mgugu, A.T., (2004), “Case A: In Southern Africa, discrimination stands between women, land and
water”, in UNEP, Women and the Environment, UNEP, Nairobi. Available at
http://www.unep.org/Documents.multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=67.
Mika, L., (2004), “The energy gender dimension in small-scale brick making in Zimbabwe”, ADB
Finesse Africa Newsletter 1.6, October 2004.
Millennium Project, (2005a), A home in the city, United Nations Millennium Project, Task Force on
Improving the Lives of Slum Dwellers, Earthscan, London.
http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/documents/Slumdwellers-complete.pdf.
——, (2005b), Investing in development: A practical plan to achieve the Millennium Development
Goals, Earthscan, London. Available at http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/reports/fullreport.htm.
Ministério das Relações Exteriores, (2001), “Brasil: Conjuntura Econômica - 2001”, Brasilia-DF.
http://www2.mre.gov.br/siteunir/publicacao/arquivos/FILE_27.doc.
Ministry of Regional and Local Government and Housing, Namibia, (2001), “Overview of progress on
the implementation of the Habitat Agenda” http://www.unhabitat.org/Istanbul+5/Namibia2.pdf.
Miraftab, F., (2003), “The perils of participatory discourse: Housing policy in postapartheid South
Africa”, Journal of Planning Education and Research, vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 226-239,
Mitlin, D., (1997), “Tenants: addressing needs, increasing options”, Environment and Urbanization,
vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 3-15.
Page 85

—— and Satterthwaite, D., (1992), “Scaling up in urban areas”, in Edwards, M. and Hulme, D., (eds),
Making a difference: NGOs and development in a changing world, Routledge, London.
—— and ——, (1996), “Sustainable development in Cities,” in Pugh, C., (ed.), Sustainability, the
environment and urbanization, Earthscan, London.
Mohit, R.S., (2002), “A level playing field: security of tenure and the urban poor in Bangkok, Thailand”,
in Payne, G., (ed), Land, rights and innovation: Improving security of tenure for the urban
poor, ITDG Publishing, London, pp. 278-299.
Moser, C. and Holland, J., (1997), Household responses to poverty and vulnerability. Volume 4:
Confronting crisis in Chawama, Lusaka, Zambia. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
MOST Clearing House Best Practices Database, (n.d.), “Kaantabay sa Kauswagan - An Urban Poor
Program in Naga City - Philippines”, http://www.unesco.org/most/asia8.htm.
Mthembi-Nkondo, (1996), Statement by the South African Minister of Housing, Ms Sankie D.
Mthembi-Nkondo, on the Occasion of the Second United Nations Conference On Human
Settlements Habitat II Istanbul -12 June 1996,
http://www.un.org/conferences/habitat/eng-stat/12/sou12.txt.
Mubvami, T. and Kamete, A., (2001), Shelter co-operatives in Zimbabwe: Contributions of the
co-operative sector to shelter development, report prepared for UN-HABITAT and ICA.
Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/publications_cooperative.asp.
Mukhija, V., (2002), “New houses for old in Mumbai: an attractive but problematic strategy”,
International Development Planning Review, vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 161-176.
——, (2004), “The contradictions in enabling private developers of affordable housing: A cautionary
case from Ahmedabad, India”, Urban Studies, vol. 41, No. 11, pp. 2231-2244.
Mulugeta, S. and McLeod, R., (2004), “Feasibility study for the application of Community-Led
Infrastructure Finance Facility (CLIFF), operations in Ethiopia”, Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/ump/cliff.asp.
Mwaura, J.M., (2002), “Creating sustainable livelihoods through housing cooperatives: a case study of
Huruma informal settlement, Nairobi. Paper presented at the conference on “Housing and Urban
Development for Low-Income Groups in Sub-Saharan Africa”, Accra, Ghana, 22nd - 26th July,
2002. http://www.auhf.co.za/accra/nachuii.doc.
Napier, M., Tipple, A. G., Majija, N., Beän, R. and Wall, K., (2003), “Urban Sector Network Phase II
Mid-term evaluation report: Global report for the period January 2000 - December 2002”,
Mid-term evaluation of financing agreement (SA/73200-99/20), between the European Union and
the Urban Sector Network. Pretoria, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research and University
of Newcastle upon Tyne.
Narayan, D. and others, (1999), Voices of the poor: Can anyone hear us? Oxford University Press
for the World Bank, Oxford Available at
http://www1.worldbank.org/prem/poverty/voices/reports/canany/vol1.pdf.
Navajas, S. and others, (2000), “Microcredit and the poorest of the poor: theory and evidence from
Bolivia”, World Development, vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 333-346.
Page 86

Ndinda, C., (2003), Housing delivery in Nthutukoville, South Africa: success and problems, Journal of
International Women’s Studies, vol. 3, No. 5, pp. 29-41.
Nirman (SPARC Sumudaya Nirman Sahayak), (n.d.), “CLIFF”, http://www.nirman.org/cliff.html.
Nunan, F. and Satterthwaite, D., (2001), “The influence of governance on the provision of urban
environmental infrastructure and services for low-income groups”, International Planning
Studies, vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 409-426.
Nunes, E., (2002), “Advocacy and NGOs: in search of legitimacy”, Global Future, Fourth Quarter,
2002. Available at
http://www.globalfutureonline.org/PolicyAdvocacy/GlblFutr.nsf/issues/2B13F54C544A45BB882
56DF7005E07C4/$File/GF02Q4_web.pdf?OpenElement.
OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), (2000), Shaping the urban
environment in the 21st century: From understanding to action.
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/29/7/31621883.pdf.
OHCHR (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights), (n.d.), “The Human Right
to Adequate Housing”, Fact Sheet No .21. Available at
http://www.ohchr.org/english/about/publications/sheets.htm.
Olofsson, J. and Sandow, E., (2003), “Towards a more sustainable city planning - a case study of Dar
es Salaam, Tanzania”, MFS-report, Spring 2003.
http://www.geo.umu.se/VG_uppsatser/Olofsson&Sandow.pdf.
Orbit, (n.d.), Editorial, “Housing – home and abroad”, Orbit, No. 46, p. 2.
Oxaal, Z. and Baden, S., (1996), Human rights and poverty: A gender analysis, Report Number 49.
http://www.bridge.ids.ac.uk/reports/re49.pdf.
Palcios, P., Herzberg, C. and Guerrero, L., (2002), “Engendered budgeting”, Habitat Debate, vol. 8,
no. 4, p.5.
Pallai, K., (2004), “Emergence of strategic planning in the 1990s: the case of Budapest”, in Kopányi, M.,
Wetzel, D. and El Daher, S., (eds), Intergovernmental finance in Hungary: A decade of
experience 1990-2000. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World
Bank, Washington, D.C. http://lgi.osi.hu/publications/2004/270/IF_Ch20.pdf.
Pandey, R. and Sundaram, P.S.A., (1998), “Volume and composition of housing subsidies in India
through the central government”, Habitat International, vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 87-95.
Pardo, C.A., (2000), “Housing finance in Chile: the experience in primary and seconddary mortgage
financing”, Sustainable Development Department, Best Practices Series, Inter-American
Development Bank, Washington, D. C.
http://www.iadb.org/sds/doc/IFM-123-HousingFinanceinChile-E.pdf.
Patel, S., (2001), “Scaling up sanitation from below federation style: a documentation of the National
Slum Dwellers Federation, Mahila Milan and SPARC in India”.
http://www.homeless-international.org/doc_docs/reportScalingupSanitation_Jan011213.pdf.
—— and Mitlin, D., (2001), “The work of SPARC and its partners Mahila Milan and the national Slum
Dwellers federation in India”, IIED Working Paper 5 in Poverty Reduction in Urban Areas Series,
Page 87

IIED, London.
——, d’Cruz, C. and Burra S., (2002), “Beyond evictions in a global city: people-managed resettlement
in Mumbai”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 159-172.
Payne, G., (1989), Informal housing and land subdivisions in Third World cities: A review of the
literature, Prepared for the Overseas Development Administration (ODA), by the Centre for
Development and Environmental Planning (CENDEP), at Oxford Polytechnic.
——, (1996), “Strategies for enabling informal settlers to obtain decent housing: How can the informal
financial resources of the poor be institutionalised for house affordability?” Presentation to the
NGO workshop on Housing for Low-Income Groups at Habitat II.
——, (1997), Urban land tenure and property rights in developing countries: A REVIEW,
Intermediate Technology Publications, London.
——, (2000a), “The contribution of partnerships to urban development and housing”, Paper presented
at the International Forum on Cities and Management of Public Housing, Bogota City Hall - Metro
Vivienda, 5-6 October 2000. Available from
http://www.btinternet.com/~g.k.payne/Publications/ConferencePapers/.
——, (2000b), “Working in partnership for new settlements”, basin News, May 2000, No. 19, pp.
10-11.
——, (2002a), “Introduction”, in Payne, G., (ed.), Land, rights and innovation: Improving security
of tenure for the urban poor, ITDG Publishing, London, pp. 3-22.
——, (Ed.), (2002b), Land, rights and innovation: Improving tenure for the urban poor, ITDG
Publishing, London, pp. 193-208.
——, (2002c), “Lowering the ladder: regulatory frameworks for sustainable development”, in
Westendorff, D. and Eade, D., (eds), Development and cities: Essays from development in
practice, Oxfam, Oxford, pp. 248-262.
——, (2003), “Getting ahead of the game: A twin track approach to improving existing slums and
reducing the need for future slums”, Paper presented at the Urban Research Symposium 2003:
Urban Development for Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction, World Bank, Washington,
D.C, December 15-17, 2003.
http://www.worldbank.org/urban/symposium2003/docs/papers/payne.pdf.
——, (2005), “Getting ahead of the game: a twin-track approach to improving existing slums and
reducing the need for future slums”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 17, No. 1, pp.
135-146.
——, and Majale, M., (2004), The urban housing manual: Making regulatory frameworks work
for the poor. Earthscan, London.
Peart, D., (2004), Statement by Honourable Dean Peart, Minister of Land and Environment at the High
level Segment of the Twelfth Session of the Commission on Sustainable Development, 30 April
2004, New York. Permanent Mission of Jamaica to the United Nations.
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/csd/csd12/statements/jamaica_3004.pdf.
Philippines Government / PIDS (Philippines Institute of Development Studies), (1999), “Medium Term
Page 88

Philippine Development Plan 1999-2004, Executive Summary,”
http://dirp4.pids.gov.ph/mtpdp/execsum.pdf.
Pieterse, E., (2000), Participatory urban governance: Practical approaches, regional trends and
UMP experiences, UNCHS (Habitat), Nairobi.
Porio, E., (1998), “Reexamining partnerships in social housing: state-civil society dynamics in Southeast
Asia”, Proceedings of the International Conference on the Occasion of the First General Assembly
of the Forum of Research on Human Settlements, Geneva, July 6-8, 1998,
http://www.gruppo-cerfe.org/pdf/porio.pdf.
Pornchokchai, S., (2003), “Global Report on Human Settlements 2003 City Report: Bangkok”,
http://www.thaiappraisal.org/pdfNew/HABITAT1new.pdf.
Pozak, K., (2000), “EcoSouth - a dynamic network in action”, basin News, Novermber 2000, No. 20.
Pugh, C., (1994), “Housing policy development in developing countries: the World Bank and
internationalization, 1972-93”, Cities, vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 159-180.
——, (1995), “Urbanization in developing countries: an overview of the economic and policy issues in
the 1990s”, Cities, vol. 12, No. 6, pp. 381-398.
——, (2001), “The theory and practice of housing sector development for developing countries,
1950-99”, Housing Studies, vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 399-423.
Rahman, M.M., (2001), “Bastee eviction and housing rights: a case of Dhaka, Bangladesh”, Habitat
International, vol. 25, No 1 , pp. 49-67.
——, (2002), “Problems of the NGOs in housing the urban poor in Bangladesh”, Habitat International
, vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 433-451.
Rakodi, C., (2002), “Interactions between formal and informal urban land management: theoretical issues
and practical options”, in Kreibichand, V. and Olima, W.H.O., (eds.), Urban Land Management
in Africa, University of Dortmund, Dortmund, pp. 11-33.
Ravinet, J., (2001), “Statement” at the 25th Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly on
the Review and Appraisal of the Implementation of the Habitat Agenda, June 6, 2001,
http://www.unchs.org/istanbul+5/docs/chileE.html.
Republic of Angola, (2001), “National report of the implementation of the Habitat Agenda in Angola
(Istanbul +5).” http://www.unhabitat.org/istanbul+5/Angola1.pdf.
Republic of South Africa, National Department of Housing, (n.d.), “2003–2004 annual report of the
Department of Housing” and “Housing Code”. Available from http://www.housing.gov.za.
Research Dynamics South Africa, (2000), “Situation analysis of disability integration in 18 national
government departments”. http://www.info.gov.za/reports/2000/disability.pdf.
Risbud, N., (2002), “Policies for tenure security in Delhi”, in Durand-Lassarve, A. and Royston, L.,
(eds), Holding their ground: Secure land tenure for the urban poor in developing countries,
Earthscan, London, pp. 59-74.
Rogerson, C. M., (1998), “Local economic development and poverty alleviation: lessons for South
Page 89

Africa”, http://www.local.gov.za/DCD/ledsummaryled03.html.
Rojas, E., (2001), “The long road to housing sector reform: lessons from the Chilean housing
experience”, Housing Studies, vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 461-483.
Rossiter, J., (2000), “Comparison of single sector, multisector and integrated urban development
projects and their impact on the livelihoods of the urban poor”, Working Paper 1.
http://www.itdg.org/docs/shelter/iuhd_wp1_comparison_of_urban_development_projects.pdf.
Royston, L. and Ambert, C., (2002), “Going against the grain: alternatives to individual ownership in
South Afrivca”, in: in Payne, G., (ed), Land, rights and innovation: Improving security of
tenure for the urban poor, ITDG Publishing, London, pp. 264-277.
Ruskulis, O., (2002), “Facilitating information dissemination and exchange through formal and informal
networking”, in: Gandelsonas, C., (ed.), Communicating for development: Experience from
the urban environment, ITDG Publishing, London, pp. 64-77.
——, (2003), “Making change happen: reforming inappropriate and restrictive regulatory frameworks”,
Paper prepared for International Workshop on Regulatory Guidelines for Urban and Affordable
Shelter, 22-24 September 2003, Leamington, United Kingdom.
http://www.itdg.org/docs/shelter/rguu_making_change_happen.pdf.
Russell, S. and Vidler, E., (2000), “The rise and fall of government? Community partnerships for urban
development: grassroots testimony from Colombo,” Environment and Urbanisation, vol. 12,
No. 1, pp. 73-86.
Rust, K., (2001), Shelter co-operatives in South Africa: Contributions of the co-operative sector to
shelter development, report prepared for UN-HABITAT and ICA. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/publications_cooperative.asp.
Rutherford, S. and Staehle, S., (2002), “Innovative approaches to delivering microfinance services: the
case of VSSU, West Bengal”, http://www.safesave.org/VSSU%20Report%20July%202002.pdf.
Ryan, P., (2004), “Scaling up: a literature review”. Available at http://www.irc.nl/page/15916.
Saito, M., (2003), “Housing finance: a view from the ILO”, Habitat Debate, vol. 9, No. 1, pp, 11-12.
Sara, L.M. and Ochoa, L.S., (2002), “Homelessness and street children in Peru”. Final Report.
Research Paper for the CARDO research on homelessness in developing countries, University of
Newcastle, United Kingdom, Lima, Peru.
Satterthwaite, D., (2001a), “Environmental governance: a comparative analysis of nine city case studies”,
Journal of International Development, vol. 13, Issue 7, pp. 1009-1014.
——, (2001b), “From professionally-driven to people-driven poverty reduction: reflections on the role
of Shack Dwellers International”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 135-138.
——, (2002), “Reducing urban poverty; some lessons from experience”.
http://www.iied.org/docs/urban/urbpov_wp11.pdf.
——, (2003), “The Millennium Development Goals and poverty reduction”, in pp. Satterthwaite, D.,
(ed.), The Millennium Development Goals and local processes: Hitting the target or missing
the point?, IIED, London, pp. 7-46.
Page 90

——, (2004), “The under-estimation of urban poverty in low and middle-income nations”, Series
Working Paper 14, http://www.iied.org/docs/urban/urbpov_wp14. pdf.
—— and others, (2005), “Tools and methods for participatory governance in cities”, 6th Global Forum
on Reinventing Government Towards Participatory and Transparent Governance 24 - 27 May
2005, Seoul, Republic of Korea,
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UN/UNPAN019656.pdf.
Schilderman, T., (2002), “Strengthening the knowledge and information systems of the urban poor”
http://www.itdg.org/html/shelter/docs/kis_urban_poor_report_march2002.doc.
——, and Lowe, L., (2002), “Developing appropriate housing standards”, in Romaya, S. and Rakodi,
C., (eds.), Building sustainable urban settlements: Approaches and case studies in the
developing world, ITDG Publishing, London.
Schreckenbach, H., (2000), “Shelter for all: is there any hope?”, basin News, No. 19, pp. 6-8.
Serageldin, M., Driscoll, J. and Solloso, E., (2003), “Partnerships and targeted programs to improve the
lives of slum dwellers”. Available at
http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/research/research_centers/cuds/Weihai_paper/Serageldin,%20M,%2
0Partnerships%20and%20Targeted%20Programs%20-FINAL.pdf.
Serra, M.V., (2003), “Learning from the poor: housing and urban land markets”, Development
Outreach, November 2003, pp. 19-21). Available at
http://www1.worldbank.org/devoutreach/nov03/article.asp?id=223.
Sethuraman S.V., (1997), “Urban poverty and the informal sector: a critical assessment of current
strategies”. http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/recon/eiip/publ/1998/urbpover.htm.
Sibanda, H., (1996), “NGO influence on national policy formation in Zimbabwe”, IDR Reports, vol. 11,
No. 2.
Sibanda, J. and Dondo, S.M., (2004), “Women: The true champions/cornerstones of urban shelter
delivery in Southern Africa”, Case study for Workshop and Networking Event, Building bridges
with the grassroots: scaling up through knowledge sharing, World Urban Forum, Barcelona, 13-17
September, 2004.
Silas, J., (1992), “Government - community partnerships in Kampung improvement programmes in
Surabaya”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 4, No. 2.
——, (2001), “The kampung model”, Habitat Debate, vol. 7, No. 2.
Sivam, A. and Karuppannan, S., (2002), “Role of state and market in housing delivery for low-income
groups in India”, Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, vol. 17, No. 1 pp. 69-88.
Smart, A., (2003), “Impeded self-help: toleration and the proscription of housing consolidation in Hong
Kong’s squatter areas”, Habitat International, vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 205-225.
Smets, P., (2002), ROSCAs and housing finance in Hyderabad, India: potential for development”, in:
van Dijk, M.P., Noordhoek, M. and Wegelin, E., (eds), Governing cities: New institutional
forms in developing countries and transitional economies, ITDG Publishing, London, pp
95-108.
Page 91

Solo, T.M., (1999), “Small scale entrepreneurs in the urban water and sanitation market”, Environment
and Urbanization, vol. 11, No. 1, April, pp. 117-131.
Sorensen, A., (2000), “Conflict, consensus or consent: implications of Japanese land readjustment
practice for developing countries”, Habitat International, vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 51-73.
Souza, C., (2001), “Participatory budgeting in Brazilian cities: limits and possibilities in building
democratic institutions”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 159-184.
Stein, A. and Castillo, L., (2003), “Innovative financing for low-income housing: lessons from Central
America.” Building Issues, vol. 13, No. 1.
——, (2005), “Innovative financing for low-income housing improvement: lessons from programmes in
Central America, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 47-66.
Sundberg, M. and Thunström, L., (1998), “Housing finance for the poor in South Africa: a minor field
study”, University of UMEA, http://www.econ.umu.se/mfs/mithlind.pdf.
The Building Information Centre, (2004), “Turkeybuild Istanbul 2004,” 27th International Building,
Construction Materials and Technologies Trade Show, 05-09 May, Brochure.
Thomas, L., (1995), “NGOs in cities: an annotated bibliography”.
http://www.intrac.org/Intrac/docs/OPS9final.pdf.
Thompson, J. and others, (2000), “Waiting at the tap: Changes in urban water use in East Africa over
three decades”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 12 No 2, pp. 37-52.
Tibaijuka, A.K., (2002), “Editorial”, Habitat Debate, vol. 8, No. 4, p. 2.
——, (2004), “Security of tenure in urban Africa: where are we, and where do we go from here”,
keynote address at the Royal African Society, Natural Resources Institute (IIED), Seminar On
The 8-9 November 2004.
http://www.iied.org/docs/aboutiied/Working_Group_3_UN_Habitat.pdf.
——, (n.d), “Statement” http://www.un.org/ga/habitat/statements/docs/unchs.html.
Tipple, A.G., (1994), “A matter of interface: the need for a shift in targeting housing interventions”,
Habitat International, vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 1-15.
——, (1996), “Housing extensions as sustainable development”, Habitat International, vol. 20, No. 3,
pp. 367-376.
——, (2000), Extending themselves: User-initiated transformation of government-built housing in
developing countries, Liverpool University Press. Liverpool.
Titus, M., (1997), “Developing financial services for the urban poor: the Sharan experience”,
Environment and Urbanization, vol. 9, No. 1 pp. 227-232.
Tomlinson, R., (1999), “From rejection to resignation: beneficiaries’ views on the South African
government’ s new housing subsidy system”, Urban Studies, vol. 36, No. 8, pp. 1349-1359.
Turner, J.F.C., (1967), “The squatter settlement: an architecture that works”, Architectural Design 38,
pp. 357-360.
Page 92

——, (1972), “Housing as a Verb,” in Turner, J.FC and Fichter, R., (Eds.), Freedom to build: Dweller
control of the housing process, Macmillan, New York.
——, (1976), Housing by people: Towards autonomy in building environments, Marion Boyars,
London.
UNCHS (United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat)), (1981), Upgrading of urban slums
and squatter areas. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/upgrading.asp.
——, (1982), The rehabilitation of existing housing stock. Report of the expert group meeting on
human settlements management, with special reference to the rehabilitation of existing
housing stock, New Delhi, 1-8 February 1982. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/upgrading.asp.
——, (1984), Land for human settlements.
——, (1987), Shelter for low income communities: Sri Lanka demonstration project-case study,
Part 1.
——, (1990), Rental housing: Proceedings of an expert group meeting.
——, (1991a), Assessment of experience with the project approach to shelter delivery for the poor
. Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/publications.asp.
——, (1991b), Evaluation of experience with initiating enabling shelter strategies. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/publications.asp.
——, (1991c), Human settlements development through community participation.
——, (1993a), “Building materials for housing: Report of the Executive Director, United Nations
Commission on Human Settlements”, Habitat International, vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 1-20.
——, (1993b), Improving the quality of life of the elderly and disabled people in human
settlements. Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/pubvul.asp.
——, (1993c), National trends in housing-production practices. Volume 3: Mexico. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/pubhd.asp.
——, (1993d), National trends in housing-production practices. Volume 4: Nigeria. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/pubhd.asp.
——, (1993e), Public/private partnerships in enabling shelter strategies. Available at
http://hq.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/publications.asp.
——, (1994a), National experiences with shelter delivery for the poorest groups. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/pubhd.asp.
——, (1994b), Population, urbanization and quality of life, UNCHS (Habitat), contribution to the
International Conference on Population and Development, 1994.
——, (1994c), “Sustainable human settlements development: Implementing Agenda 21”, Report
prepared for the Commission on Sustainable Development.
Page 93

——, (1995), Case studies in community-based credit systems for low-income housing.
——, (1996a), An urbanizing world: Global report on human settlements 1996, Oxford University
Press, Oxford.
——, (1996b), “New Delhi Declaration: Global platform on access to land and security of tenure as a
condition for sustainable shelter and urban development”, Habitat II — Global Conference on
Access to Land and Security of Tenure as a Condition for Sustainable Shelter and Urban
Development, New Delhi, India, 17-19 January 1996.
http://www.spatial.maine.edu/~onsrud/Courses/SIE526/New_Delhi_Declaration.htm.
——, (1996c), The human settlements conditions of the world's urban poor. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/publications.asp.
——, (1997a), “Gendered Habitat: Working with women and men in human settlements development, A
comprehensive policy paper and action plan”, Available at
http://www.unchs.org/unchs/english/women/contents.htm.
——, (1997b), Shelter for all: The potential of housing policy in the implementation of the Habitat
Agenda. Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/publications.asp.
——, (1998a), “A guide for all partners”, http://www.unhabitat.org/ngo/documents/
partners_guidelines.doc.
——, (1998b), Implementation of the Habitat Agenda: Guidelines for the United Nations Resident
Coordinator system. http://www.unchs.org/unchs/english/hagenda/guide1/ contents.htm.
——, (1998c), “Summary Report of the Expert Group Meeting on Local Implementation of the Habitat
Agenda, with Particular Attention to Local Agendas 21 Turku, Finland, 7-11 September 1998.”
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/drivers_urb_change/urb_environment/pdf_LA_21/LA21_1998
_ExpertsMeeting.pdf.
——, (1998d), “Monitoring progress in implementing the Habitat Agenda: an overview”,
http://www.unchs.org/unchs/english/hagenda/monitor.htm#2.
——, (1998e), Privatization of municipal services in East Africa: A governance approach to
human settlements management.
——, (1999a), Basic facts on urbanization. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/publications.asp.
——, (1999b), “Innovative and effective approaches to housing: a guide to the UN Best Practices
Database.” http://www.sipa.columbia.edu/RESEARCH/Paper/housing/housebody.pdf.
——, (1999c), Living conditions of low-income older persons in human settlements. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/pubvul.asp.
——, (1999d), Women’s rights to land, housing and property in postconflict situations and during
reconstruction: A global overview. http://hq.unhabitat.org/en/uploadcontent/publication/Land.pdf
.
——, (2000a), “The Global Campaign on Urban Governance”, Draft 4A,
http://www.blpnet.org/learning/urbangov.pdf.
Page 94

——, (2000b), Putting the urban poor on the map: An informal settlement upgrading
methodology supported by information technology.
——, (2000c), Strategies to combat homelessness. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/pubvul.asp.
——, (2000d), “Synthesis of national reports on the implementation of the Habitat Agenda in the
Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) region”. Available at
http://www.un.org/ga/Istanbul+5/systhesis.htm.
——, (2000e), “Synthesis of national reports on the implementation of the Habitat Agenda in the
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) region”. Available at
http://www.un.org/ga/Istanbul+5/systhesis.htm.
——, (2000f), “Synthesis of national reports on the implementation of the Habitat Agenda in the
Economic Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) region”. Available at
http://www.un.org/ga/Istanbul+5/systhesis.htm.
——, (2001a), Cities in a globalizing world: Global report on human settlements 2001, Earthscan,
London.
——, (2001b), “Implementing the Habitat Agenda: The 1996-2001 experience”. Report on the
Istanbul+5 Thematic Committee, 25th Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly,
New York, 6-8 June 2001. Available at http://hq.unhabitat.org/register/item.asp?ID=1681.
——, (2001c), “Position paper on housing rights”.
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingrights/documents/housing.pdf.
——, (2001d), The state of the world’s cities 2001.
——, (2001e), Tools to support participatory urban decision making.
http://www.unhabitat.org/campaigns/governance/docs_pubs.asp#Toolkit.
——, (2001f), “Istanbul + 5: The United Nations Special Session of the General Assembly for an
Overall Review and Appraisal of the Implementation of the Habitat Agenda, New York, 6-8 June
2001”, brochure, http://www.unhabitat.org/istanbul+5/brochure.pdf.
——, and AVBC (2001a), “Compressed earth blocks,” poster 1 of 5 on low-cost building techniques.
Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/bmct.asp.
—— and ——, (2001b), “Dome construction,” poster 3 of 5 on low-cost building techniques. Available
at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/bmct.asp.
—— and ——, (2001c), “Ferro-cement channels,” poster 2 of 5 on low-cost building techniques.
Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/bmct. asp.
—— and ——, (2001d), “Rammed earth construction,” poster 5 of 5 on low-cost building techniques.
Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/bmct.asp.
—— and ——, (2001e), “Vault construction,” poster 4 of 5 on low-cost building techniques. Available
at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/bmct.asp.
——, and ICA (International Co-operative Alliance), (2001), Shelter co-operatives in Eastern and
Page 95

Southern Africa. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/publications_cooperative.asp.
—— and ILO, (1995), Shelter provision and employment generation, Nairobi and Geneva.
Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/pubincome.asp.
UN-DESA and UN-HABITAT, (2004), “Background report on sustainable human settlements
development and management”, presented at the 12th Session of the Commission on Sustainable
Development, 19-30 April 2004, New York, http://www.unhabitat.org/csd/documents/main.pdf.
UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), (1991), Cities, poverty and people: Urban
development cooperation for the 1990s, New York.
——, (1997), Human development report 1997: Human development to eradicate poverty, Oxford
University Press.
——, (1999), Human development report 1999: Globalization with a Human Face, Oxford
University Press. Available at http://www.undp.org/hdro/report.html.
——/World Bank RWSG-EAP (Regional Water and Sanitation Group for East Asia and the Pacific),
(1996), “The strategic sanitation approach: lessons learned from selected case studies”,
UMP-Asia Occasional Paper No. 28. Available at
http://www.serd.ait.ac.th/ump/Occ_%20Pap.htm.
UNECA (United Nations Economic Commission for Africa), (2000), “Review of the implementation of
the Habitat Agenda in Africa”, ECA/UNCHS/IST.+5/00/1
http://www.uneca.org/csd/CSD2_Habitat_Eng.htm.
UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe), (2004), “The future of social housing is
considered to be crucial”, Social Housing, UNECE Conference, Vienna, 28-30 November, 2004.
http://www.europaforum.or.at/data/media/med_binary/original/1112795288.pdf.
——, (2005) Housing finance systems for countries in transition: Principles and examples, United
Nations, New York and Geneva
http://www.unece.org/env/hs/prgm/housing_modern_managmt/hsg_finance/housingfinance.pdf.
UNED-UK (United Nations Environment and Development, UK Committee), (n.d.), UN conference
focus, Road map to 2002. http://www.earthsummit2002.org/roadmap/conf.htm.
UNEP (United Nations Environmental Programme), (2002), Environmentally sound technology for
wastewater and stormwater management: An international source book. Available at
http://www.unep.or.jp/Ietc/Publications/TechPublications/TechPub-15/main_index.asp.
UNESCAP (United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific), (1995),
Municipal land management in Asia: A comparative study,
http://www.unescap.org/huset/m_land.
——, (1997) Urban land policies for the uninitiated. http://www.unescap.org/huset/land_policies/.
UN-HABITAT (United Nations Human Settlements Programme), (2002a), Compilation of selected
adjudication on housing rights. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingrights/unhrp_reports.asp.
Page 96

——, (2002b), International instruments on housing rights. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingrights/unhrp_reports.asp.
——, (2002c), Local democracy and decentralization in East and Southern Africa: Experiences
from Uganda, Kenya, Botswana, Tanzania and Ethiopia.
——, (2002d), “Cambodia Project”, in Habitat in Action, vol. 1,No. 2.
http://www.unhabitat.org/hb/feb02/RTCD.htm.
——, (2002e), City development strategies: Lessons from UMP/UN-HABITAT Experiences.
Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/ump/publications.asp.
——, (2003a), Improving the lives of 100 million slum dwellers. Progress towards the Millennium
Development Goals. Guide to Monitoring Target 11. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/guo/documents/mdgtarget11.pdf.
——, (2003b), Guidelines on how to undertake a national campaign for secure tenure. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/campaigns/tenure/publication.asp.
——, (2003c), Handbook on best practices, security of tenure and access to land: implementation
of the Habitat Agenda. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/publication/hs58899e/hs58899e.pdf.
——, (2003d), “Preliminary study of land tenure related issues in urban Afghanistan with special
reference to Kabul City”, A study financed by the Global Campaign on Secure Tenure of
UN-HABITAT.
http://www.fukuoka.unhabitat.org/out/siryo/project_b/01/Afghan%20Land%20Report.5%20Aug
%2003.pdf.
——, (2003e), Rental housing: An essential option for the urban poor in developing countries.
Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/pubrental.asp.
——, (2003f), “Slums of the world: The face of poverty in the new millennium? Monitoring the
Millennium Development Goal, Target 11 - World-wide Slum Dwellers Estimation”, Working
Paper. Available at http://www.unchs.org/publication/slumreport.pdf.
——, (2003g), The challenge of slums: Global report on human settlements 2003, Earthscan,
London.
——, (2003h), Water and sanitation in the world’s cities: Local action for global goals, Earthscan,
London.
——, (2004a), “Financing human settlements development”, http://www.dep.no/
filarkiv/203311/NR9__habitatFinancing.pdf.
——, (2004b), “72 frequently asked questions about participatory budgeting”,
http://www.unhabitat.org/campaigns/governance/documents/FAQPP.pdf.
——, (2004c), Global Campaign for Secure Tenure: A tool for advocating the provision of
adequate shelter for the urban poor, Concept paper 2nd edition.
——, (2004d), Pro poor land management: Integrating slums into city planning approaches.
Page 97

——, (2004e), “Report of the Second Session of the World Urban Forum”, Barcelona, Spain, 13-17
September 2004. http://www.unhabitat.com/wuf/2004/documents/WUF-FINAL_Report.pdf.
——, (2004f), The state of the world's cities 2004/2005: Globalization and urban culture,
Earthscan, London.
——, (2004g), Urban land for all.
——, (2005a), “Addressing the challenge of slums, land, shelter delivery and the provision of and access
to basic services for all: Overview”, African Ministerial Conference on Housing and Urban
Development (AMCHUD), Incorporating the 5th assembly of the African Population Commission,
31 January - 4 February 2005, Durban, South Africa. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/amchud/documentation.asp.
——, (2005b), Financing shelter and urban development: Global report on human settlements
2005, Earthscan, London.
——, (2005c), Operational activities report 2005.
—— and OHCHR (2002a), Housing rights legislation: Review of international and national legal
instruments, Nairobi and Geneva. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingrights/unhrp_reports.asp.
—— and ——, (2002b), “Programme document: United Nations Housing Rights Programme”.
Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingrights/Other_UNHRP_documents.asp.
—— and ——, (2003), “Action table”, Nairobi and Geneva. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingrights/Other_UNHRP_documents.asp.
—— and ——, (2004), “Report on the implementation of the first phase of the UNHRP”. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingrights/Other_UNHRP_documents.asp.
—— and ——, (2005), Indigenous peoples’ right to adequate housing: A global overview.
Available at http://hq.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingrights/unhrp_reports.asp.
——, UNECE, ICA, HDA and TÜRKKONUT, (2002), Report of colloquium on contribution of
the co-operative sector to housing development, convened at Ankara Hilton Hotel, Turkey,
27-28 June, Nairobi, Geneva and Ankara. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/publications_cooperative.asp.
UNICEF (United Nations Children's Fund), (1984). “Urban basic services: reaching children and
women of the urban poor”. Report by the Executive Director. Occasional Papers Series No. 3,
New York.
UNiSA (University of South Australia), (n.d.), “Resolving issues and complaints at UNiSA”,
http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/learningconnection/students/intstds/isheets/resolving-issues.asp.
United Nations, (2000), The world’s women 2000: Trends and statistics, New York.
——, (2001), Indicators of sustainable development: Guidelines and methodologies, New York.
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/publications/indisd-mg2001.pdf.
——,(2002), “Johannesburg Summit 2002: Zimbabwe country profile”.
Page 98

http://www.un.org/esa/agenda21/natlinfo/wssd/zimbabwe.pdf.
——, (2005). “Millennium Indicators Database”. http://millenniumindicators.un.org/unsd/mi/mi_goals.asp
, 20th July 2005.
Unknown Author, (2000), “Citizen participation and consensus building for local development, San
Salvador,” UN-HABITAT Best Practices Database.
http://database.bestpractices.org/bp_display_best_practice.php?best_practice_id=1025.
UNRISD (United Nations Research Institute for Social Development), (n.d.), “Commercialization,
privatization and universal access to water”
http://www.unrisd.org/unrisd/website/projects.nsf/0/E8A27BFBD688C0A0C1256E6D0049D1B
A?OpenDocument.
UPDF (Urban Poor Development Fund), (2003), “News about some of the recent activities of the
Urban Poor Development Fund in Cambodia”.
USN (Urban Sector Network), (2003), “Scoping study: Urban land issues”. Final report. Prepared for
DFID-SA. http://www.sarpn.org.za/documents/d0000645/P656-USN_Sept03.pdf.
Vaa, M., (2000), “Housing policy after political transition: the case of Bamako”, Environment and
Urbanization, vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 27-34.
Van Bastelaer, T., (2000a), “Does social capital facility the poor’s access to credit? A review on the
microeconomic literature” Social Capital Initiative Working Paper No. 8. February 2000.
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/intsocialcapital/Resources/Social-Capital-Initiative-Working-Pa
per-Series/SCI-WPS-08.pdf.
——, (2000b), “Imperfect information, social capital and the poor’s access to credit”,
http://www.gdrc.org/icm/sk-and-mf.pdf.
Van Horen, B., (2004), “Community upgrading and institutional capacity building to benefit the urban
poor in Asia”, paper presented at Forum on urban infrastructure and public service delivery for the
urban poor, Regional focus: Asia, India Habitat Centre, New Delhi, India, 24-25 June 2004.
http://wwics.si.edu/topics/docs/Upgrading%20Paper%20Van%20Horen.doc.
Vanderschueren, F. Wegelin, E. and Wekwete, K., (1996), Policy programme options for urban
poverty reduction, UMP 20. Available from
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/ump/publications.asp.
VMSDFI (Vincentian Missionaries Social Development Foundation Incorporated), Manila (2001),
“Meet the Philippines Homeless People’s Federation”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 13,
No. 2, pp. 73-84.
Vuyo, J., (n.d.), “From the starting bloc: a decade of black economic empowerment, the progress of
economic empowerment from 1992 to 2002”,
http://population.pwv.gov.za/ResearchReports/Documents/TenYearReview/FromTheStartingBloc
DecadeOfBEE_TheProgressOfEconomicEmpowerment.doc.
Warah, R., (1997), “The partnership principle key to implementing the Habitat”, Habitat Debate, vol. 3,
No. 1.
——, (2001a), “Land rights campaign in Nairobi: squatters fight for their homes”, Africa Recovery,
Page 99

vol.15, No. 1-2, p. 35 http://www.un.org/ecosocdev/geninfo/afrec/vol15no1/151city3.htm.
——, (2001b), “Perspective: the emerging 'urban archipelago'”, United Nations Chronicle Online
Edition vol. XXXVIII, No 1. http://www.un.org/Pubs/chronicle/2001/issue1/0101p30.html.
——, (2001c), “Slum upgrading: lessons learned in Nairobi”, Habitat Debate, vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 12-4.
——, (2003), “The challenge of slums: Global report on human settlements 2003”, United Nations
Chronicle Online Edition, December 2003. Available from
http://157.150.195.47/Pubs/chronicle/archive/index.html.
Webster, D., (2000), “Financing city-building: the Bangkok case”,
http://iis-db.stanford.edu/pubs/11894/Webster.pdf.
Wegelin-Schuringa, M., (1999), “Strategic elements in water supply and sanitation services in urban
low-income areas” http://hq.unhabitat.org/cdrom/water/HTML/strategic.htm.
Wells, J. and Wall, D., (2003), “The expansion of employment opportunities in the building construction
sector in the context of structural adjustment: some evidence from Kenya and Tanzania”, Habitat
International, vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 325-337.
Weru, J., (2004), “Community federations and city upgrading: the work of Pamoja Trust and Muungano
in Kenya,” Environment and Urbanization, vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 47-62.
—— and Bodewe, C., (2001), Housing rights: A Kenyan perspective, UN Chronicle Online Edition,
vol. XXXVIII, No. 1, http://www.un.org/Pubs/chronicle/2001/issue1/0101p42.html.
Whaites, A., (2002), “Making PRSPs work: can rhetoric and reality coincide?”, in Whaites, A., (ed.),
Masters of Their Own Development: PRSPs and the Prospects for the Poor, World Vision
International, Monrovia, pp. 8-45.
Whitehead, C.M.E., (2000), “Housing and finance in developing countries (Book Review)”, Urban
Studies, vol. 37, No. 9, pp. 1696-1697.
Winayanti, L. and Lang, H.C., (2004), “Provision of urban services in an informal settlement: a case
study of Kampung Penas Tanggul, Jakarta”, Habitat International, vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 41-65.
Wolfensohn, J.D. and Fischer, S., (2000), “The Comprehensive Development Framework (CDF), and
Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP)”, Joint note by James D. Wolfensohn and Stanley
Fischer. http://www.imf.org/external/np/PRSP/pdf/cdfPRSP.pdf.
Wolff, P. and others, (2002), The comprehensive poverty reduction and growth strategy in Vietnam
process, Donor contribution, and prospects for its implementation, Preliminary summary of
findings, May 2002. http://www.PRSP-watch.de/publikationen/archiv/poverty_die.pdf.
World Bank, (1980), Shelter, poverty and basic needs, Washington, D.C.
——, (1991), Urban policy and economic development: An agenda for the 1990s, A World Bank
Policy Paper, Washington, D.C.
——, (1993), Housing: Enabling markets to work, World Bank, Washington, D.C.
——, (1994), “Building capacity for decentralization and local governance in Sub-Saharan Africa: the
Page 100

Municipal Development Program, Findings, Africa Region,” Number 15.
http://www.worldbank.org/afr/findings/english/find15.htm.
——, (1997), World development report 1997: The State in a changing world, Oxford University
Press, Oxford.
——, (1998), “Sanitation: Low tech still works”, Urban Age, Autumn 1998 Issue.
http://www.worldbank.org/html/fpd/urban/urb_age/fall98/fall98.htm.
——, (1999), World development report: Entering the 21st Century, Oxford University Press, New
York.
——, (2001a), “What is urban upgrading? Scaling up” in “Upgrading Urban Communities. A resource
for practitioners”. http://web.mit.edu/urbanupgrading/upgrading/whatis/scaling-up.html.
——, (2001b), World development report 2000/2001: Attacking poverty. Oxford University Press,
New York.
——, (2002), “Upgrading of low income settlements country assessment report: Burkina Faso”.
http://www.worldbank.org/urban/upgrading/docs/afr-assess/burkinafaso.pdf.
——, (2003), World development report 2004: Making services work for poor people, Oxford
University Press, New York.
——/IMF (2000), A new approach to country-owned poverty reduction strategies, Washington,
D.C.
Yahya, S.S., (2002a), “Community land trusts and other tenure innovations in Kenya”, in: Payne, G.,
(Ed.), Land, rights and innovation: improving tenure for the urban poor, ITDG Publishing,
London, pp. 233-263.
——, (2002b), “The certificate of rights story in Botswana”, in: Payne, G., (Ed.), Land, rights and
innovation: improving tenure for the urban poor, ITDG Publishing, London, pp. 193-208.
—— and others, (2001), Double standards, single purpose: reforming housing regulations to
reduce poverty, ITDG Publishing, London.
Yap, K.S., (1989), “Some low-income housing delivery subsystems in Bangkok, Thailand”,
Environment and Urbanisation, vol. 1, No 2.
——, (2002), “Housing, the state and the market in Thailand: Enabling and enriching the private sector”,
Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, vol. 17, pp. 33-47.
Yeung, Y.M., (1996), “Housing the masses in Asia: two decades after Habitat I”, Keynote address,
International Housing Conference, 20-23 May 1996 at the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition
Centre.
Yu, S. and Karaos, A., (2004), “Establishing the role of communities in governance: the experience of
the Homeless People’s Federation Philippines”, Environment and Urbanization, vol. 16, No. 1,
pp. 107-120.
Zack, T. and Charlton, S., (2003), “Better off, but…: beneficiaries’ perceptions of the government’s
housing subsidy scheme”, Housing Finance Resource Programme, Occasional paper no 12.
Page 101

http://housingstudies.wits.ac.za/Zack%20better%20off%20but.pdf.
Zaman, H., (2004), “The scaling-up of microfinance in Bangladesh: determinants, impact, and lessons”,
World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3398.
Zanetta, C., (2003), “Determinants of national housing and urban policies in the context of economic
reform programs: A comparison of Mexico and Argentina during the 1980s and 1990s”, Paper
presented at the Urban Research Symposium 2003: Urban Development for Economic Growth
and Poverty Reduction, World Bank, Washington, D.C., December 15-17, 2003.
http://www.worldbank.org/urban/symposium2003/docs/papers/zanetta.pdf.
Page 102

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of references and relevant documents
International legal instruments (and related interpretations), and declarations/programmes of actions of United
Nations conferences
International Covenants, Conventions and Declarations
“Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women”, adopted and opened for
signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 34/180 of 18 December
1979, entry into force 3 September 1981, in accordance with article 27(1). (UN-Doc. A/34/46).
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/e1cedaw.htm.
ICCPR (“International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”), adopted and opened for signature,
ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI), of 16 December 1966,
entry into force 23 March 1976, in accordance with Article 49, (UN-Doc. A/6316).
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/a_ccpr.htm.
ICESCR (“International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights”), adopted and opened for
signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI), of 16
December 1966, entry into force 3 January 1976, in accordance with article 27, (UN-Doc.
A/6316). http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/a_cescr.htm.
“International Labour Organization Recommendation No. 115 concerning Worker’s Housing”, adopted
at the forty-fifth session of the ILO Governing Body on 7 June 1961.
http://ilolex.ilo.ch:1567/cgi-lex/convde.pl?R115.
“Convention on the Rights of the Child”, adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by
General Assembly resolution 44/25 of 20 November 1989, entry into force 2 September 1990,
in accordance with article 49, (UN-Doc. A/44/49). http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/k2crc.htm
.
“Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217
A (III), of 10 December 1948, (UN-Doc. A/810 at 71 (1948)).
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html.
Page 103

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of references and relevant documents
International legal instruments (and related interpretations), and declarations/programmes of actions of United
Nations conferences
Interpretative texts of international covenants/conventions
United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR)
“General Comment 4, The right to adequate housing (Art. 11 (1), of the Covenant)”, adopted at the sixth
session, 13 December 1991, (UN-Doc. E/1992/23, Annex III).
http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/MasterFrameView/469f4d91a9378221c12563ed0053547e?O
pendocument, also available in UN-HABITAT, 2002b.
“General Comment 7, The right to adequate housing (Art. 11 (1), of the Covenant): Forced evictions”,
adopted at the sixteenth session, 20 May 1997 (UN-Doc. E/C.12/1997/4).
http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/MasterFrameView/959f71e47624596802564c3005d8d50?Op
endocument, also available in UN-HABITAT, 2002b.
Other
Limburg Principles (“Limburg Principles on the Implementation of the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights”), (UN-Doc. E/CN.4/1987/17). Available in
UN-HABITAT, 2002b.
Maastricht Guidelines (“Maastricht Guidelines on Violation of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights”),
published in SIM Special No. 20, Utrecht, Netherlands: Utrecht University (1998). Available in
UN-HABITAT, 2002b.
Page 104

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of references and relevant documents
International legal instruments (and related interpretations), and declarations/programmes of actions of United
Nations conferences
Declarations and programmes of action of United Nations Conferences
“Agenda 21”, adopted at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (Rio de
Janerio, Brazil, 3-14 June 1992), endorsed by General Assembly resolution 47/190 of 22
December 1992, (UN-Doc. A/CONF.151/26/Rev.1 (Vol. I)).
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/agenda21text.htm.
“Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action”, adopted at Fourth World Conference on Women
(Beijing, China, 4-15 September 1995), (UN-Docs. A/CONF.177/20 and
A/CONF.177/20/Add.1). http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/beijing/platform/index.html.
“Declaration on Cities and Other Human Settlements in the New Millennium”, adopted by the United
Nations General Assembly Special Session for an Overall Review of the Implementation of the
Habitat Agenda (Istanbul+5), (New York, 6-8 June 2001), endorsed by General Assembly
resolution 56/205 of 21 December 2001, (UN-Doc. A/56/565).
http://www.unhabitat.org/Istanbul+5/declaration_cities.htm.
GSS (“Global Strategy for Shelter to the Year 2000”), adopted by the United Nations General
Assembly in resolution 43/181 on 20 December 1988. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/gss_monitoring.asp.
“Habitat Agenda and Istanbul Declaration”, adopted at the Second United Nations Conference on
Human Settlements (Habitat II), (Istanbul, 3-14 June 1996), endorsed by General Assembly
resolution 51/177 of 16 December 1996, (UN-Doc. A/CONF.165/14). Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/overall.asp.
“Millennium Declaration”, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in resolution 55/2 of 8
September 2000. http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/millennium.htm.
“Vancouver Declaration on Human Settlements and and the Vancouver Action Plan”, adopted at
Habitat: United Nations Conference on Human Settlements, (Vancouver, Canada, 31 May - 11
June 1976), (UN publication, Sales No. E.76.IV.7 and corrigendum). Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/overall.asp.
Page 105

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of references and relevant documents
United Nations resolutions and other documents (UN-Doc …)
General Assembly (A/…)
A/44/8/Add.1, “First report of the Commission on Human Settlements on the implementation of the
Global Strategy for Shelter to the Year 2000”, United Nations General Assembly, New York, 1
June 1989. Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/gss_monitoring.asp.
A/46/8/Add.1 and Corr.1, “Second report of the Commission on Human Settlements on the
implementation of the Global Strategy for Shelter to the Year 2000”, United Nations General
Assembly, New York, 20 June 1991. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/gss_monitoring.asp.
A/48/8/Add.1, “Third report of the Commission on Human Settlements on the implementation of the
Global Strategy for Shelter to the Year 2000”, United Nations General Assembly, New York, 4
June 1993. Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/gss_monitoring.asp.
A/50/8/Add.1, “Fourth report of the Commission on Human Settlements on the implementation of the
Global Strategy for Shelter to the Year 2000”, United Nations General Assembly, New York, 24
May 1995. Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/gss_monitoring.asp.
A/59/326, “Implementation of the first United Nations Decade for the Eradication of Poverty
(1997-2006), and preparations for the International Year of Microcredit, 2005,” Report of the
Secretary-General, Fifty-ninth session, 2 September 2004.
http://www.sdnpbd.org/SDI/international_year/microcredit/documents/N0449915.pdf.
A/CONF.165/PC.2/5 and HS/C/15/3/Add.3, “Mid-term review of the Global Strategy for Shelter to
the Year 2000”, Report of the Secretary-General of the Conference and Executive Director, to the
Second session of the Preparatory Committee for the United Nations Conference on Human
Settlements (Habitat II), Nairobi, 24 April - 5 May 1995 and Fifteenth session of the Commission
on Human Settlements, Nairobi, 25 April - 1 May 1995.
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/documents/HS.C.15.3.Add.3.pdf.
A/CONF.165/PC.3/3/Add.1, “The future of human settlements: good policy can make a difference”,
Executive summary, Note by the Secretariat, Preparatory Committee for the United Nations
Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II), Third session, New York, 5-16 February 1996.
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/documents/A.CONF.165.PC.3.3.Add.1.html
.
A/RES/37/221, “International Year of Shelter for the Homeless”, 20 December 1982,
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/37/a37r221.htm.
A/S-25/3, “Report of the Executive Director of the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements on the
Page 106

eview and appraisal of progress made in the implementation of the Habitat Agenda”, Review and
appraisal of progress made in the implementation of the Habitat Agenda, Twenty-fifth special
session, 6-8 June 2001. http://www.unhabitat.org/istanbul+5/A_S25_3_English.pdf.
A/S-25/3/Add.1, “Report of the Executive Director of the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements
on the review and appraisal of progress made in the implementation of the Habitat Agenda,
Progress report of the Executive Director of the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements on
the Cities Alliance”. Twenty-fifth special session, 6-8 June 2001,
http://www.un.org/ga/Istanbul+5/A_S25_3_Add1_ English.pdf.
A/S-25/7/Rev.1, “Report of the Ad Hoc Committee of the Whole of the twenty-fifth session of the
General Assembly”, General Assembly, Official Records, Twenty-seventh special session,
Supplement No. 3,
http://www.reliefweb.int/library/documents/2002/unicef_A%20World%20Fit%20for%20Children.
pdf.
Page 107

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of references and relevant documents
United Nations resolutions and other documents (UN-Doc …)
Commission on Human Rights (E/CN.4/…)
E/CN.4/1994/20, “Forced evictions”, analytical report compiled by the Secretary-General pursuant to
Commission resolution 1993/77.
http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/E.CN.4.1994.20.En?Opendocument.
E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.1, “Compilation and Analysis of Legal Norms, Part II: Legal Aspects Relating to
the Protection against Arbitrary Displacement” (11 February 1998).
http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/E.CN.4.1998.53.Add.1.En?Opendocume
nt.
E/CN.4/2002/59, “Report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to
an adequate standard of living, Mr. Miloon Kothari,” 1 March 2002.
http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/E.CN.4.2002.59.En?Opendocument.
E/CN.4/2004/48, “Economic. Social and Rights: Report of the special Rapporteur on adequate housing
as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, Miloon Kothari”, 8 March 2004.
Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingrights/UNHRP_documents.asp.
E/CN.4/2004/48/Add.1, Adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living
Report by the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate
standard of living, Miloon Kothari, Addendum, Mission to Peru, Sixtieth session, Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingrights/UNHRP_documents.asp.
E/CN.4/RES/1993/77, Resolution 1993/77: “Forced Evictions”, adopted 10 March 1993.
http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/E.CN.4.RES.1993.77.En?Opendocument
.
Page 108

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of references and relevant documents
United Nations resolutions and other documents (UN-Doc …)
Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights under the Commission on Human Rights
(until 1999 the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities)
(E/CN.4/Sub.2/…)
E/CN.4/Sub.2/1993/15, “The right to adequate housing: progress report submitted by Mr. Rajindar
Sachar, Special Rapporteur appointed pursuant to resolution 1992/26 of the Sub-Commission on
Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities and decision 1993/103 of the
Commission on Human Rights”.
http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/E.CN.4.Sub.2.1993.15.En?Opendocume
nt.
E/CN.4/Sub.2/1994/20, “Second Progress Report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on
Promoting the Right to Adequate Housing”.
http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/E.CN.4.Sub.2.1994.20.En?Opendocume
nt.
E/CN.4/Sub.2/1995/12, “Final Report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Promoting the Right
to Adequate Housing”.
http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/E.CN.4.Sub.2.1995.12.En?Opendocume
nt.
Page 109

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of references and relevant documents
United Nations resolutions and other documents (UN-Doc …)
Commission on the Status of Women (E/CN.6/…)
E/CN.6/2005/2, “Report of the Secretary-General on the Review of the implementation of the Beijing
Platform for Action and the outcome documents of the special session of the General Assembly
entitled ‘Women 2000: gender equality, development and peace for the twenty-first century’”.
Available at http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/csw/csw49/documents.html.
Page 110

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of references and relevant documents
United Nations resolutions and other documents (UN-Doc …)
Commission on Sustainable Development (E/CN.17/…)
E/CN.17/2005/4, “Human settlements: policy options and possible actions to expedite implementation:
Report of the Secretary-General”. Available at
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/docs_csd13.htm.
Page 111

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of references and relevant documents
United Nations resolutions and other documents (UN-Doc …)
Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (E/ESCWA/…)
E/ESCAP/APDDP/4/Rev.1, “Biwako Millennium Framework for Action towards an inclusive,
barrier-free and rights-based society for persons with disabilities in Asia and the Pacific”, Note by
the Secretariat, 24 January 2003. http://www.unescap.org/esid/psis/disability/bmf/bmf.html.
Page 112

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of references and relevant documents
United Nations resolutions and other documents (UN-Doc …)
Commission on Human Settlements (HS/C/…)
HS/C/14/3, “Implementation and Monitoring of the Global Strategy for Shelter to the Year 2000”,
Report of the Executive Director. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/gss_monitoring.asp.
HS/C/15/2/Add.2, “Towards a housing strategy: practical contributions by UNCHS (Habitat), on
promoting, ensuring and protecting the full realisation of the human right to adequate housing”,
report of the Executive Director”. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingrights/UNHRP_documents.asp.
HS/C/15/3, “Implementation of the Global Strategy for Shelter to the Year 2000”, Report of the
Executive Director. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/gss_monitoring.asp.
HS/C/15/3/Add.3 and A/CONF.165/PC.2/5, “Mid-term review of the Global Strategy for Shelter to
the Year 2000”, Report of the Secretary-General of the Conference and Executive Director, to the
Second session of the Preparatory Committee for the United Nations Conference on Human
Settlements (Habitat II), Nairobi, 24 April - 5 May 1995 and Fifteenth session of the Commission
on Human Settlements, Nairobi, 25 April - 1 May 1995. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/gss_monitoring.asp.
HS/C/15/5, “Review of National Action to Provide Housing For All Since Habitat: United Nations
Conference On Human Settlements, 1976”, Report of the Executive Director, 3 January 1995.
Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/gss_monitoring.asp.
HS/C/16/3, “Implementation of the Global Strategy for Shelter to the Year 2000”, Report of the
Executive Director. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/gss_monitoring.asp.
HS/C/16/7, “The contribution of the private sector and non-governmental sectors to shelter delivery for
low-income groups”, Report of the Executive Director. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingpolicy/gss_monitoring.asp.
HS/C/17/2/Add.1, “Activities of the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (UNCHS), (Habitat):
Progress Report Of The Executive Director, Addendum, The State of the World's Cities: 1999”,
Report of the Executive Director. http://www.unhabitat.org/chs17/2add1.htm.
HS/C/17/3, “Follow-up to the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II):
Implementation of the Habitat Agenda”, Report of the Executive Director.
http://www.unhabitat.org/chs17/chs3.htm.
Page 113

HS/C/17/INF.6, “Guidelines on Practical Aspects in the Realization of the Human Right to Adequate
Housing Including the Formulation of the United Nations Housing Rights Programme (UNHRP)”,
30 March 1999). Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingrights/UNHRP_documents.asp.
HS/C/PC.2/2, “Preparation of a draft report on the overall review and appraisal of the implementation of
the Habitat Agenda”, Draft report of the Executive Director, to the Second session of the
Commission on Human Settlements, Nairobi, 19-23 February 2001.
http://www.unchs.org/istanbul+5/documents/2e.pdf.
Page 114

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of references and relevant documents
United Nations resolutions and other documents (UN-Doc …)
Governing Council of the United Nations Human Settlements Programme (HSP/GC/…)
HSP/GC/19/5, “Urban development and shelter strategies in favour of the urban poor”, Note by the
Secretariat, Nineteenth session, 5-9 May 2003.
http://www.unhabitat.org/governingbodies/documents/english/K0263108E.pdf.
HSP/GC/20/2/Add.5, “UN-Habitat and youth: strategy for enhanced engagement, a working
document”, Note by the secretariat, Twentieth session, Nairobi, 4-8 April 2005. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/gc/gc20/presession.asp.
HSP/GC/20/6, “Implementing the goal of the United Nations Millennium Declaration on improving the
lives of slum dwellers”, Report of the Executive Director, Twentieth session, Nairobi, 4-8 April
2005 Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/gc/gc20/presession.asp.
HSP/GC/RES/20/13, Resolution 20/13: “Housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard
of living for persons who are vulnerable and disadvantaged”, adopted 8 April 2005. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/housingrights/unhrp_resolutions.asp.
Page 115

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
List of references and relevant documents
United Nations resolutions and other documents (UN-Doc …)
World Urban Forum (HSP/WUF/…)
HSP/WUF/1/DLG.I/Paper 3, “International role of non-governmental organizations in the implementation
of the Habitat Agenda”. Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/uf/documentation.htm.
HSP/WUF/1/DLG.I/Paper 4, “Cities Without Slums”. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/uf/documentation.htm.
HSP/WUF/2/2, “Dialogue on urban cultures: globalization and culture in an urbanizing world”. Available
at http://www.unhabitat.org/wuf/2004/documentation.asp.
HSP/WUF/2/3, “Dialogue on urban realities: innovative urban policies and legislation in implementing the
Habitat Agenda and attaining the Millennium Development Goals”. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/wuf/2004/documentation.asp.
HSP/WUF/2/4, “Dialogue on Civil Society’s Contribution to Urban Governance”. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/wuf/2004/documentation.asp.
HSP/WUF/2/6, “Dialogue on the urban poor: improving the lives of slum dwellers”. Available at
http://www.unhabitat.org/wuf/2004/documentation.asp.
HSP/WUF/2/7, “Dialogue on urban resources: financing and mobilizing domestic capital for slum
upgrading”. Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/wuf/2004/documentation.asp.
Page 116

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
Notes (Chapter I)
1.a.
UNCHS (1996a) defines ‘housing poverty’ as “…individuals and households who lack safe
water, secure and healthy shelter with basic infrastructure such as piped water and
adequate provision for sanitation, drainage and the removal of household waste.”
1.1. UNCHS, 1994b:1.
1.2. UN-HABITAT, 2005b.
1.3. UNCHS, 2001a:XXX.
1.4. UNDP, 1999, World Bank, 1999, UNCHS, 2001a.
1.5. UN-Doc. HSP/WUF/2/2: paragraph 4.
1.6. UNCHS, 2001a; UN-HABITAT, 2003f.
1.7. UN-Doc. E/CN.4/2002/59: paragraph 51.
1.8. UNCHS, 1999a; Drakakis-Smith, 1996.
1.9. UN-Doc. HSP/GC/19/5.
1.10. UN-HABITAT, 2003f:7.
1.11. United Nations, 2001:121-122.
1.12. UN-HABITAT, 2003g:12.
1.13. UNCHS, 1997b.
1.14. UNCHS, 1991b.
1.15. UN-DESA and UN-HABITAT, 2004:10. See also Ravinet, 2001.
1.16. Zanetta, 2003; Ministério das Relações Exteriores, 2001; Sara and Ochoa, 2002.
1.17. Zanetta, 2003.
1.18. Firstbroker Network, n.d.
1.19. Greater Nashua Habitat for Humanity, 2004:2.
Page 117

1.20. Baksh, 2001.
1.21. Mubvami and Kamete, 2001.
1.22. GRi, 2002.
1.23. UN-DESA and UN-HABITAT, 2004:7.
1.24. Fogweh, 2001; Assefa, 2002.
1.25. Republic of Angola, 2001.
1.26. UNCHS, 1996c.
1.27. Committee on Ways and Means, 2004.
1.28. The Building Information Centre, 2004.
1.29. UN-DESA and UN-HABITAT, 2004:34.
1.30. Cities Alliance, 2002; Sivam and Karuppannan, 2002.
1.31. IIED, 2004.
1.32. Farooqi, 2005.
1.33. Hoek-Smit, 2002.
1.34. Duffy, 1998.
1.35. UNECE, 2004; Hegedüs, 2002.
1.36. UNCHS, 2001c:2.
1.37. UNCHS, 2001c.
1.38. UN-HABITAT, 2003g:4.
1.39. UN-HABITAT, 2003f.
1.40. UNCHS, 2001b.
1.41. UN-Doc. HSP/WUF/2/7: paragraph 7.
1.42. UNCHS, 1996a; 1997b.
1.43. Merrill and others, 2000.
1.44. Black and others, 2000; UNCHS and ILO, 1995.
1.45. UNCHS and ILO, 1995.
1.46. UNCHS and ILO, 1995: Back cover.
1.47. UNCHS, 1991b.
Page 118

1.48. UN-Doc. HSP/WUF/2/7: paragraph 10.
1.49. UNCHS, 1991b.
1.50. Pardo, 2000.
1.51. Ha, 2004.
1.52. UNCHS and ILO, 1995.
1.53. Cohen, 1990.
1.54. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 204.
1.55. UN-HABITAT, 2003g:xxvii.
1.56. Pugh, 2001.
1.57. Wells and Wall, 2003:328.
1.58. World Bank/IMF, 2000 citied in Whaites, 2002:9.
1.59. Wolfensohn and Fischer 2000: paragraph 1.
1.60. Whaites, 2002.
1.61. UN-Doc. HS/C/17/3: paragraph 7.
1.62. Pugh, 1994, 1995; UNCHS, 1991b.
1.63. Awotona and others, 1995; Burgess, 1992; Majale, 1998; Rossiter, 2000.
1.64. GSS: paragraph 5.
1.65. GSS: paragraph 13.
1.66. GSS: paragraph 35.
1.67. UNCHS, 1991b.
1.68. UNCHS, 1991b:3.
1.69. UN-Doc. HS/C/15/5: paragraph 18.
Page 119

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
Notes (Chapter II)
2.a.
The Habitat Agenda (paragraph 60), defines adequate shelter at some length as follows:
“Adequate shelter means more than a roof over one's head. It also means adequate privacy;
adequate space; physical accessibility; adequate security; security of tenure; structural
stability and durability; adequate lighting, heating and ventilation; adequate basic
infrastructure, such as water-supply, sanitation and waste-management facilities; suitable
environmental quality and health-related factors; and adequate and accessible location with
regard to work and basic facilities: all of which should be available at an affordable cost.
Adequacy should be determined together with the people concerned, bearing in mind the
prospect for gradual development. Adequacy often varies from country to country, since it
depends on specific cultural, social, environmental and economic factors. Gender-specific
and age-specific factors, such as the exposure of children and women to toxic substances,
should be considered in this context.”
2.1. Orbit, n.d.
2.2. Serra, 2003.
2.3. Abrams, 1964; Mangin, 1967; Turner, 1967; 1972; 1976.
2.4. Cohen, 1983.
2.5. Harris, 2003; UNCHS, 1981.
2.6. MacDonald and Mata, 1996.
2.7. Vancouver Declaration: Part III, paragraph 8.
2.8. Vancouver Action Plan: Section F, paragraph 1.
2.9. UN-Doc. A/RES/37/221.
2.10. UN-Doc. A/RES/37/221: paragraph 2.
2.11. UN-Doc. A/RES/37/221: paragraph 3(b).
2.12. GSS: paragraph 13.
2.13. OHCHR, n.d.
2.14. GSS: paragraph 22.
Page 120

2.15. UNCHS, 1991b:1.
2.16. GSS: paragraph 14.
2.17. COHRE, 2000b.
2.18. GSS: paragraph 54.
2.19. UNCHS, 1997b:i.
2.20. Mayo, 1994.
2.21. UN-Doc. HSP/GC/19/5.
2.22. UNCHS, 1991b.
2.23. HIC-WAS, 1999.
2.24. UNCHS, 1994c.
2.25. UNCHS, 1998c.
2.26. UN-Doc. HSP/GC/19/5: paragraph 25.
2.27. UNED-UK, n.d.
2.28. UNCHS, 1998c.
2.29. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 40 (h).
2.30. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 40 (i).
2.31. UNCHS, 1998d.
2.32. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 61.
2.33. See United Nations, 2001; UN-HABITAT, 2002a; 2002b; UN-HABITAT and OHCHR,
2002a.
2.34. Istanbul Declaration: paragraph 8; Habitat Agenda: paragraph 39.
2.35. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 9.
2.36. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 61.
2.37. UN-HABITAT and OHCHR, 2002a.
2.38. DFID, 2000b.
2.39. UN-HABITAT, 2004c:8.
2.40. UN-Doc. HSP/GC/20/6: paragraph 15.
2.41. Choike, n.d.
2.42. Tibaijuka, n.d.
Page 121

2.43. UNCHS, 2001f.
2.44. Declaration on Cities and Other Human Settlements in the New Millennium: paragraph 17.
2.45. UN-Doc. HSP/WUF/1/DLG.I/Paper 4: paragraph 14.
2.46. UNCHS, 1991b.
2.47. Angel and Mayo, 1996.
2.48. Angel, 2000.
2.49. UNCHS, 1994a:iii.
2.50. World Bank, 1993.
2.51. UN-Doc. HS/C/15/5: paragraph 18.
Page 122

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
Notes (Chapter III)
3.a.
3.b.
3.c.
3.d.
3.e.
3.f.
3.g.
3.h.
3.i.
3.j.
3.k.
3.l.
Peru, Equador, Bolivia, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile, Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, El
Salvador and Mexico.
For example in Cameroon, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia.
For example in India and Sri Lanka.
Such as Kenya.
A satellite town of Brasilia.
Private developers/realtors, banking/finance institutions, etc.
See also section II.B.3 above.
Subsidies are discussed in more detail in section IV.D.2.
The issue of resettlement, voluntary or otherwise, is discussed in section V.B.3 below.
Marcoux (1997), for instance, questions the validity of some of the data on the feminization of
poverty.
“Allah commands you regarding your children. For the male a share equivalent to that of
two females.” [Quran 4: 11]. Other female heirs, however, such as mothers and uterine sisters,
may inherit equally with men [Quran 4: 12] (see Hussain, A., n.d.).
Some observers consider this as a conservative estimate, with some sources suggesting that as
many as one in 10 of the world’s population may be defined as having a disability (DFID, 2000a).
3.m. Normally defined as those aged 65 and over.
3.1. See for example UNCHS, 1991b; 2001b. UN-Docs. A/46/8/Add.1 and Corr.1; A/48/8/Add.1;
A/50/8/Add.1; A/CONF.165/PC.2/5; A/CONF.165/PC.3/3/Add.1; HS/C/14/3; HS/C/15/3;
HS/C/15/3/Add.3; HS/C/15/5; HS/C/16/3; HS/C/17/3; HS/C/PC.2/2.
3.2. Hardoy and others, 2001.
3.3. UNCHS, 1998a.
3.4. Devas, 2004; Nunan and Satterthwaite, 2001.
Page 123

3.5. UN-HABITAT, 2004e.
3.6. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 43 (h).
3.7. Balbo, 2001.
3.8. Kasongo and Tipple, 1990.
3.9. Akrofi, 1991.
3.10. Smart, 2003:206.
3.11. Rahman, 2001:50.
3.12. Agbola and Jinadu, 1997:279.
3.13. See also UNCHS, 1993d; 2000c.
3.14. Agbola and Jinadu, 1997:280.
3.15. Agbola and Jinadu, 1997.
3.16. UN-Doc. E/CN.4/RES/1993/77: paragraph 1. See also CESCR, General Comment No. 7.
3.17. ACHR, 2003:2.
3.18. CityNet, 1995; UNCHS, 1997b.
3.19. Warah, 2003.
3.20. Barreto, 2001.
3.21. Fernandes, 1999; Fernandes and Varley, 1998.
3.22. Fernandes and Varley, 1998:5.
3.23. Hansen and Vaa, 2004a:9.
3.24. Gatabaki-Kamau and Karirah-Gitau, 2004:17.
3.25. Hansen and Vaa, 2004b.
3.26. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 7.
3.27. UN-Doc. HSP/WUF/2/4.
3.28. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 66.
3.29. UN-Doc. A/S-25/7/Rev.1.
3.30. Government of Uganda, 1997.
3.31. Pieterse, 2000.
3.32. UN-HABITAT, 2003c.
Page 124

3.33. UN-Doc. HSP/WUF/2/4.
3.34. Gilbert and others, 1996:18.
3.35. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 59.
3.36. UNCHS, 1999b:58.
3.37. Napier and others, 2003.
3.38. UN-Doc. HS/C/PC.2/2.
3.39. UN-Doc. HS/C/17/2/Add.1.
3.40. Bretas, 1996; Souza, 2001.
3.41. Cabannes, 2004; CRS, 2003; DFID, 2004; Satterthwaite and others, 2005.
3.42. UNCHS, 2001b:35.
3.43. UN-Doc. HS/C/17/3.
3.44. UNECA, 2000.
3.45. UN-HABITAT, 2002c; Beall, 2003.
3.46. Whaites, 2002.
3.47. Wolff and others, 2002:ii.
3.48. IDRC, n.d.
3.49. IMF/World Bank, 2002.
3.50. UNCHS, 1991b.
3.51. El Araby, 2003.
3.52. Porio, 1998; UNCHS, 1993e.
3.53. Payne, 2000b:10.
3.54. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 33.
3.55. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 59.
3.56. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 73 (f).
3.57. UNCHS, 1991b.
3.58. UN-HABITAT, 2003g: xxvii.
3.59. Satterthwaite, 2001b:135.
3.60. Satterthwaite, 2001a.
Page 125

3.61. Etemadi, 2000:72.
3.62. Cummings and Bhanjee, 2002:7.
3.63. Russell and Vidler, 2000.
3.64. Serra, 2003.
3.65. Palacios and others, 2002.
3.66. Mitlin and Satterthwaite, 1996:55.
3.67. GSS: paragraph 15.
3.68. Miraftab, 2003:226.
3.69. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 18.
3.70. Whaites, 2002.
3.71. Moser and Holland, 1997:17.
3.72. GSS: paragraph 53.
3.73. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 72.
3.74. Payne and Majale, 2004.
3.75. Payne, 2002a.
3.76. Malpezzi, 1991; Arnott, 1995:99.
3.77. Majale, 1998; Basu and Emerson, 2000; Arnott, 1995; Lind, 2001.
3.78. UNCHS, 1987.
3.79. UNCHS, 1997b.
3.80. UN-HABITAT, 2003e.
3.81. UN-HABITAT, 2003e:162.
3.82. Pandey and Sundaram, 1998:89.
3.83. UN-Doc. A/CONF.165/PC.2/5 and HS/C/15/3/Add.3.
3.84. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 72 (c).
3.85. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 186.
3.86. UN-Doc. E/CN.6/2005/2.
3.87. UNCHS, 2000d.
3.88. UN-HABITAT, 2003c:37.
Page 126

3.89. UN-Doc. HS/C/15/2/Add.2
3.90. UN-Doc. HS/C/15/5
3.91. Fernandes, 1999.
3.92. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 79 (c).
3.93. Durand-Lasserve, 1999.
3.94. UN-HABITAT, 2004d.
3.95. Farvacque and McAuslan, 1992.
3.96. Dowall and Clarke, 1996:34.
3.97. Mthembi-Nkondo, 1996.
3.98. Payne and Majale, 2004; ITDG, 2003.
3.99. Ruskulis, 2003; UN-Doc. A/CONF.165/PC.2/5 and HS/C/15/3/Add.3.
3.100. UN-Doc. A/CONF.165/PC.2/5 and HS/C/15/3/Add.3: paragraph 104.
3.101. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 90 (n).
3.102. Government of Kenya and UNCHS, 2001.
3.103. UN-Doc. A/CONF.165/PC.2/5 and HS/C/15/3/3/Add.3.
3.104. Government of Kenya and UNCHS, 2001; Yahya and others, 2001; Ruskulis, 2003.
3.105. Best Practices Database.
3.106. Agbola, 1994.
3.107. Narayan and others, 1999.
3.108. Mitlin and Satterthwaite, 1992; Der-Petrossian, 1999.
3.109. UNCHS, 2001d.
3.110. Nunes, 2002:21.
3.111. World Bank, 1997:116.
3.112. Mallaby, 2004.
3.113. Kunfaa and others, 2002; Datta, 2002:43.
3.114. Zaman, 2004.
3.115. Lopes and Rakodi, 2002.
3.116. Thomas, 1995.
Page 127

3.117. Narayan and others, 1999.
3.118. DPU, 2001.
3.119. Sivam and Karuppannan, 2002.
3.120. Hasan, 2003.
3.121. Porio, 1998.
3.122. Burra and Patel, 2002; ACHR and SDI, 2003; Patel, 2001; UN-HABITAT, 2003h.
3.123. Gilbert and others, 1996; Abbot, 2003.
3.124. Napier and others, 2003.
3.125. Beall and Mitlin, 2001.
3.126. Satterthwaite, 2004.
3.127. Government of Kenya and UNCHS, 2001; Warah, 2001a; Weru and Bodewe, 2001; Weru,
2004.
3.128. Bolnick, 1996; Baumann and Bolnick, 2001; Baumann and Mitlin, 2003.
3.129. VMSDFI. 2001; Yu and Karaos, 2004.
3.130. OECD, 2000:68.
3.131. CESCR General Comment No. 4: paragraph 6.
3.132. UN-HABITAT, 2005b.
3.133. GSS: paragraph 4.
3.134. Habitat Agenda: pararaph 12.
3.135. UN-Doc. HS/C/15/2/Add.2.
3.136. CESCR General Comment No. 4: paragraph 10.
3.137. Maastricht Guidelines: paragraphs 11, 12, 14.
3.138. UNCHS, 1996a; Beall, 2000.
3.139. UNiSA, n.d.
3.140. ICESCR, Article 2(2); Limburg Principles, Principles 35 and 36.
3.141. ICESCR, Article 11(1).
3.142. UNCHS, 1993e; Majale, 2002.
3.143. UNCHS, 1997b.
3.144. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 93.
Page 128

3.145. UNCHS, 1997b.
3.146. UNCHS, 1997b.
3.147. Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action.
3.148. UNCHS, 1999a.
3.149. UNCHS, 1999d:12.
3.150. UNDP, 1997; UNCHS, 1999a; UNCHS, 2001a; Warah, 2001b.
3.151. Beijing Platform for Action.
3.152. UN-Doc. E/CN.6/2005/2.
3.153. UNCHS, 1999a.
3.154. Engle, 2000.
3.155. United Nations, 2000.
3.156. BRIDGE, 2001:3.
3.157. Engle, 2000.
3.158. Tibaijuka, 2002:2.
3.159. UN-Doc. E/CN.4/2004/48.
3.160. UN-HABITAT, 2003g:XXX.
3.161. Engle, 2000.
3.162. Tibaijuka, 2002:2.
3.163. ANC, 1992.
3.164. Mgugu, 2004:28-29.
3.165. COHRE, 2005.
3.166. Yahya, 2002b:193.
3.167. COHRE, 2000a.
3.168. Oxaal and Baden, 1996:14.
3.169. Maastricht Guidelines: paragraph 8.
3.170. Karirah-Gitau, 2002.
3.171. Mgugu, 2004.
3.172. COHRE, 2005.
Page 129

3.173. World Bank, 2001b:122-123.
3.174. UN-Doc. A/CONF.177/20
3.175. UN-HABITAT and OHCHR, 2002a.
3.176. UN-HABITAT, 2004d:41.
3.177. UN-HABITAT, 2004d.
3.178. Gulyani and Connors, 2002.
3.179. COHRE, 2005.
3.180. Idasa, 2002.
3.181. UNCHS, 1997b.
3.182. UN-HABITAT and OHCHR, 2002b:16.
3.183. Helander, 1992, cited in DFID, 2000a.
3.184. DFID, 2000a; 2003.
3.185. UNCHS, 1993b.
3.186. Frost, 2000.
3.187. UN-HABITAT and OHCHR, 2002A:24.
3.188. Department of Housing, 1994: Clause 4.5.4 Special Needs Housing.
3.189. Idasa, 2002; Research Dynamics South Africa, 2000.
3.190. Napier and others, 2003.
3.191. ANC, 1992.
3.192. Philippines Government/ PIDS, 1999.
3.193. Best Practices Database, n.d.b.
3.194. UNCHS, 2000d.
3.195. UNCHS, 2000d.
Page 130

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
Notes (Chapter IV)
4.a. World Habitat Day has been celebrated on the first Monday of October every year since 1985,
when it was introduced by the United Nations General Assembly.
4.b.
4.c.
4.d.
4.e.
4.f.
4.g.
4.h.
4.i.
4.j.
4.k.
4.l.
The Global Campaign for Secure Tenure was launched in 1999, when it was endorsed by the
United Nations Commission on Human Settlements.
CityNet, UNDP Special Unit for Technical cooperation among Developing Countries and
UN-HABITAT have prepared CityNet, UNDP Special Unit for Technical Cooperation
among Developing Countries and UN-HABITAT have developed ‘Guidelines for
Transferring Effective Practices: A Practical Manual for South-South cooperation’
(CityNet, UNDP and UNCHS, 1998). The manual is a user-friendly guide to sharing
information and lessons learned from best practice initiatives in improving the living
environment.
Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) affirms:
“Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to
seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds.”
Ley de Politica Habitacional.
Vivekananda Sevakendra O Sishu Uddyon.
Fundación Salvadoreña para la Asistencia Integral (Salvadorian Foundation for Integral
Assistance).
Fundación Promotora de Vivienda (Foundation for Housing Promotion).
See section IV.E.4.0.
Such as Bangalore, Bangkok, Bombay, Dhaka, Ho Chi Minh City, Kampur, Madras, Manila
and Phnom Penh.
BRAC was initially the acronym for Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee. It is now
known only by its acronym.
These include traditional activities such as rural trading, transport (boat and rickshaw) and
rice processing. Loans are also granted for non-traditional activities such as grocery shop
and rural restaurant management, or technology-based activities such as poultry farming,
sericulture or mechanized irrigation.
4.m. These include Bamako (Mali), Cuenca (Ecuador), Colombo (Sri Lanka), Johannesburg
(South Africa), Santo Andre (Brazil), Shenyang (China) and Tunis (Tunisia).
Page 131

4.n.
4.o.
However, Tipple (2004) finds that in India, home-based enterprises can operate in tiny
spaces in small dwellings, but tend to crowd the living space.
The New Delhi Declaration was set out at the “Global Conference on Access to Land and
Security of Tenure as a Condition for Sustainable Shelter and Urban Develop¬ment” held
in New Delhi, India 17–19 January 1996. The declaration addresses some of the major
chal¬lenges to sustainable, productive, and equitable urban development.
4.p. The matter of forced evictions is discussed further in Chapter V.
4.q.
4.r.
4.s.
4.t.
4.u.
4.v.
Land sharing is discussed in more detail in section V.B.2.
These include Colombia, India Japan, the Republic of Korea, and some countries in West
Africa (UN-Doc. HS/C/15/5).
See UN-HABITAT study of Afghanistan (UN-HABITAT, 2003d), which catalogues these
tools as examples of formal and informal ways of facilitating the working of the land
market.
Such as Buenos Aires, Argentina; La Paz, Bolivia; and Cartagena, Colombia.
Such federations are active in Cambodia, India, Namibia, the Philippines, South Africa,
Thailand and Zimbabwe and are emerging in several more countries (IIED, 2001).
Fondo Nacional de Habitaciones Populares (National Fund for Popular Housing).
4.w. See aso section IV.D.2b).
4.x.
4.y.
a.z.
Such as the International Centre for Earth Construction (CRATerre).
Less than one per cent of the total national housing production in a number of Eastern and
Southern African countries, e.g., Kenya, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda and Zimbabwe (
UNCHS and ICA, 2001).
The KIP is discussed in more detail in section V.D below.
4.aa. The World Charter on the Right to the City was developed at the Social Forum of the
Americas (Quito, Ecuador, July 2004) and the 2nd World Urban Forum (Barcelona, Spain,
September 2004). During the 5th World Social Forum (Porto Alegre, Brazil, January 2005)
the organizations supporting the Charter met to debate its contents, make additions and
work out a platform of action towards its implementation.
4.bb. An important point to keep in mind is that the Charter is not an international treaty. It has
been neither adopted nor ratified by states. It is a proclamatory document, developed by
civil society organizations.
4.cc. Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan.
4.dd. Association Française des Volontaires du Progrès (French Association of Volunteers of
Progress).
4.ee. The Local Agenda 21 approach is briefly discussed in Section II.B.1.
4.ff. BRAC was initially the acronym for Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee. It is now
Page 132

known only by its acronym.
4.gg. The issue of rent control was raised in section III.D.1 above.
4.1. Amole and others, 1993.
4.2. De Visser, 2001.
4.3. UNCHS, 1994a:15
4.4. UN-HABITAT, 2003b:4.
4.5. UNCHS, 1991b.
4.6. DPU, 2001.
4.7. UNCHS, 2001b:45.
4.8. UN-Doc. HS/C/17/3.
4.9. http://www.gtz.de/basin.
4.10. Schilderman, 2002:46.
4.11. Lowe, 2002; Schilderman, 2002; Ruskulis, 2002.
4.12. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 45.
4.13. GSS: paragraph 58.
4.14. UNCHS, 1991b:48.
4.15. Schilderman and Lowe, 2002; Majale, 2004.
4.16. Pozak, 2000.
4.17. UNCHS, 1997b.
4.18. Gulyani and Connors, 2002.
4.19. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 184.
4.20. http://www.sdsindia-urbanindicators.org/about.htm.
4.21. See http://www.unhabitat.org/programmes/tcbb/publications2005.asp.
4.22. UN-Doc. HS/C/17/3.
4.23. http://www.unesco.org/most/guic/guicaboutframes.htm.
4.24. World Bank, 1994.
4.25. http://www.bestpractices.org/bpbriefs/city2city.html.
Page 133

4.26. Vancouver Declaration: paragraph 18.
4.27. Du Plessis, 2002:33.
4.28. ILO, 2003:9
4.29. UN-HABITAT, 2003c.
4.30. UNCHS, 1995.
4.31. Mika, 2004; Sibanda and Dondo, 2004.
4.32. UNCHS, 2001a.
4.33. HIC-WAS, n.d.
4.34. http://www.huairou.org/index.html.
4.35. UN-HABITAT, 2004a.
4.36. Vanderschueren and others, 1996:17; ADB, 2000; Saito, 2003.
4.37. UN-HABITAT, 2005b.
4.38. Barcelo, 1998; UN-HABITAT, 2004a.
4.39. Saito, 2003.
4.40. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 80.
4.41. GHB, n.d.b.
4.42. UN-Doc. HS/C/16/3; Kim, 1997; Hoek-Smit, 2004.
4.43. Kim, 1997:1604.
4.44. UN-Doc. E/CN.17/2005/4: paragraph 66.
4.45. Khan and Thurman, 2001:5.
4.46. Khan and Thurman, 2001; Sundberg and Thunström, 1998; FSF, n.d.
4.47. Saito, 2003.
4.48. UNCHS, 1997b.
4.49. Ghatate, 1999; D’Cruz and Satterthwaite, 2005.
4.50. Ferguson, 2001.
4.51. Ferguson and Navarette, 2003:314-315.
4.52. Cities Alliance, 2002:37.
4.53. Van Bastelaer, 2000b.
Page 134

4.54. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 118.
4.55. Van Bastelaer, 2000b.
4.56. Rutherford and Staehle, 2002:47.
4.57. Cosgrove, 1999:222.
4.58. Millennium Project, 2005a:131.
4.59. Lea and Bernstein, 1996:88.
4.60. UN-Doc. A/CONF.165/PC.2/5 and HS/C/15/3/Add.3: paragraph 18.
4.61. UNCHS, 1997b:43.
4.62. Whitehead, 2000:1696.
4.63. UNECE, 2005.
4.64. Lea and Bernstein, 1996.
4.65. Matin and others, 1999:22.
4.66. Banerjee and Srilakshmi, 2002.
4.67. UNCHS, 1997b; Imparato and Ruster, 2003.
4.68. Frank, 2004.
4.69. Alonzo, 1994.
4.70. Boonyabancha, 2003.
4.71. Satterthwaite, 2003.
4.72. Jones and Mitlin, 1999:40.
4.73. Ferguson and Haider, 2000:3.
4.74. Stein and Castillo, 2003; 2005.
4.75. UN-HABITAT, 2003g:120.
4.76. Cities Alliance, 2001:23.
4.77. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 81.
4.78. UNCHS, 1997b; UN-Doc. HS/C/16/7.
4.79. Karaos, 2002.
4.80. Ferguson, 1999:185.
4.81. Lee, 1996.
Page 135

4.82. United Nations, 2002.
4.83. Saito, 2003:11.
4.84. IIED, 2001.
4.85. UNCHS and ICA, 2001.
4.86. McLeod, 2001; Smets, 2002; Van Bastelaer, 2000a.
4.87. McLeod, 2001.
4.88. Boonyabancha, 1997.
4.89. UNCHS, 2001b.
4.90. Titus, 1997:227.
4.91. Weru, 2004.
4.92. Homeless International, 2001:17.
4.93. Homeless International, 2001.
4.94. Baumann and Mitlin, 2003.
4.95. Chitekwe and Mitlin, 2001:87.
4.96. Payne, 1996.
4.97. Chowdhury and Bhuiya, 2004.
4.98. McCann, 2003.
4.99. Jones and Mitlin, 1999.
4.100. Personal communication, Olivia van Rooyen, Kuyasa Trust, October 2004.
4.101. Jones and Mitlin, 1999.
4.102. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 47.
4.103. Buckley and Kalarickal, 2004:24.
4.104. UN-Doc. A/59/326: paragraph 3.
4.105. Ferguson and Navarette, 2003:316.
4.106. Cities Alliance, 2003b.
4.107. Centre for Urban Development Studies, 2000; Kellet and Tipple, 2000.
4.108. Frankel and others, 1999.
4.109. Van Bastelaer, 2000b.
Page 136

4.110. Halder and Mosley, 2004:403.
4.111. Navajas and others, 2000:344.
4.112. Van Bastelaer, 2000a:16.
4.113. UN-Doc. A/59/326: paragraph 23.
4.114. Zaman, 2004.
4.115. ADB, 2000:27.
4.116. Dowall, 1991:2.
4.117. Environment and Urbanization, 2000; UN-HABITAT, 2003g; 2004g; Payne and Majale,
2004.
4.118. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 78.
4.119. Haughton, 1999:67.
4.120. Unknown Author, 2000.
4.121. UN-Doc. HSP/GC/19/5
4.122. Goudsmit and Blackburn 2001.
4.123. UN-HABITAT, 2002e; ADB, 2004.
4.124. UNCHS, 2001e.
4.125. Rogerson, 1998.
4.126. UN-Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1993/15: paragraph 9 (d).
4.127. Payne and Majale, 2004.
4.128. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 77.
4.129. Rakodi, 2002.
4.130. UN-HABITAT, 2003c:64.
4.131. Payne, 2002c.
4.132. Beall, 1996; UNCHS, 1991b; 1997a.
4.133. UN-HABITAT, 2003e:149; Mitlin, 1997:3.
4.134. UN-HABITAT, 2003g:110.
4.135. UN-HABITAT, 2003e:149.
4.136. Kumar, 2001:101.
4.137. UNCHS, 1991b.
Page 137

4.138. UNCHS, 2001a.
4.139. UNCHS, 2001d:36.
4.140. GSS: paragraph 95.
4.141. Payne, 2000a.
4.142. GSS: paragraph 95.
4.143. DFID, 2002.
4.144. UNCHS, 2001d:36.
4.145. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 75.
4.146. Angel, 2000.
4.147. Payne, 2000a:2.
4.148. UNESCAP, 1995.
4.149. Dowall and Clarke, 1996.
4.150. GSS: paragraph 93.
4.151. Durand-Lasserve, 2003.
4.152. UN-Docs. HS/C/16/7; HS/C/15/5.
4.153. Harare City Council, 2000.
4.154. Homeless International, 2002.
4.155. New Delhi Declaration, 1996: paragraph 16 (in UNCHS, 1996b).
4.156. UN-HABITAT, 2003g.
4.157. COHRE, 2003:13.
4.158. Dowall and Clarke, 1997.
4.159. UN-Doc. HS/C/15/5.
4.160. Dowall and Clarke, 1997.
4.161. UN-HABITAT, 2003c; Larsson, 1997.
4.162. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 76.
4.163. Sorensen, 2000.
4.164. Masser, 1987.
4.165. UNCHS, 1997b.
Page 138

4.166. UN-HABITAT, 2004e.
4.167. UNCHS, 1996a.
4.168. Magel, 2001.
4.169. UN-HABITAT, 2003c.
4.170. Webster, 2000:25.
4.171. Karki, 2004; Sorensen, 2000.
4.172. UN-Doc. E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.1: paragraph 18; Agbola and Jinadu, 1997; K’Akumu,
2002.
4.173. Sivam and Karuppannan, 2002.
4.174. UN-Doc. HS/C/17/INF/6.
4.175. Max Lock Centre, 2002:4.
4.176. Fiori and others, 2000:102.
4.177. Friedmann, n.d.:70; Dowall and Clarke, 1997.
4.178. Farvacque and McAuslan, 1992; Dowall and Clarke, 1997.
4.179. UNESCAP, 1995:42.
4.180. UN-Doc. HS/C/17/3: paragraph 17.
4.181. Fourie, 1999:8.
4.182. Dowall and Clarke, 1997.
4.183. Payne, 1989:2.
4.184. UN-HABITAT, 2003c.
4.185. Mukhija, 2002.
4.186. UNCHS, 2000c; UN-HABITAT, 2003g.
4.187. UN-HABITAT, 2002d.
4.188. UNCHS, 2000c; UN-HABITAT, 2003g.
4.189. UNCHS, 2001b.
4.190. Grimmet, n.d.
4.191. Tibaijuka, 2004:3.
4.192. Mohit, 2002.
4.193. IDB, 1999.
Page 139

4.194. ACHR, 2001.
4.195. UNCHS, 2000f.
4.196. USN, 2003:40.
4.197. Majale, 2002; Berner, 2002; Durand-Lasserve, 2003;USN, 2003.
4.198. Aristizabal and Gomez, 2002.
4.199. World Bank, 2003:129.
4.200. UN-HABITAT, 2003h.
4.201. Budds and McGranahan, 2003.
4.202. Thompson and others, 2000.
4.203. Budds and McGranahan, 2003.
4.204. UNRISD, n.d.
4.205. Budds and McGranahan, 2003.
4.206. Hardoy and Schusterman, 2000.
4.207. UNRISD, n.d.
4.208. UNCHS, 2001a; Budds and McGranahan, 2003.
4.209. UN-Doc. E/CN.4/2002/59.
4.210. UNCHS, 1998e.
4.211. Thompson and others, 2000.
4.212. Solo, 1999.
4.213. UNCHS and ILO, 1995.
4.214. Allen and You, 2002.
4.215. Burra and others, 2003; Patel, 2001.
4.216. Burra, 1999a; Hobson, 2000.
4.217. UN-Doc. HS/C/17/2/Add.1.
4.218. Hasan, 2003.
4.219. McLeod, 2004.
4.220. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 189.
4.221. Wegelin-Schuringa, 1999.
Page 140

4.222. Laquian, 1983:110.
4.223. Wegelin-Schuringa, n.d.
4.224. UN-HABITAT, 2003g.
4.225. Angel, 2000.
4.226. Mayo, 1999.
4.227. UNCHS, 1994a:iii.
4.228. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 97.
4.229. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 86.
4.230. UNCHS, 1991a.
4.231. Gilbert, 2004.
4.232. UNCHS, 2001b.
4.233. UNCHS, 2001b.
4.234. Huchzermeyer, 2003.
4.235. Kessides, 1997.
4.236. Mukhija, 2002.
4.237. CityNet, 1995; Dowall and Clarke, 1997; Boonyabancha, 2001.
4.238. UNDP/World Bank RWSG-EAP, 1996:27.
4.239. Kessides, 1997, Annex 19.
4.240. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 3.
4.241. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 44.
4.242. Mukhija, 2002; Pandey and Sundaram, 1998.
4.243. Sivam and Karuppannan, 2002.
4.244. Banerjee, 2002.
4.245. UNCHS, 2000e.
4.246. Serageldin and others, 2003.
4.247. Harvard University, 2004.
4.248. Yap, 2002:38.
4.249. Mehlomakulu and Marais, 1999.
Page 141

4.250. Tomlinson, 1999:1349.
4.251. Khan and Thurman, 2001:3.
4.252. Adebayo and Adebayo, 2000; Zack and Charlton, 2003:35.
4.253. Cities Alliance, 2003a.
4.254. Jenkins, 1999:443.
4.255. Sethuraman, 1997.
4.256. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 90.
4.257. UNCHS, 1993a.
4.258. UNCHS, 1997b:45.
4.259. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 118.
4.260. Best Practices Database, n.d.b.
4.261. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 91.
4.262. UNCHS, 1993a.
4.263. UNCHS and AVBC, 2001a; 2001b; 2001c; 2001d; 2001e.
4.264. UNCHS, 1997b.
4.265. Islam, 1996.
4.266. UNCHS and ILO, 1995.
4.267. Schilderman and Lowe, 2002.
4.268. Van Horen, 2004; Payne and Majale, 2004.
4.269. Ndinda, 2003.
4.270. De Koe, 2002.
4.271. UN-HABITAT and others, 2002:1.
4.272. UNCHS and ICA, 2001.
4.273. Butaumocho, 2003.
4.274. Mubvami and Kamete, 2001.
4.275. Dube, 2004.
4.276. UNCHS and ICA, 2001.
4.277. Mwaura, 2002:2.
Page 142

4.278. Alder and Munene, 2001.
4.279. Royston and Ambert, 2002. See also Rust, 2001.
4.280. Sivam and Karuppannan, 2002.
4.281. UNCHS and ICA, 2001.
4.282. UNCHS, 1998b; Napier and others, 2003.
4.283. UNCHS, 2001b.
4.284. Winayanti and Lang, 2004.
4.285. Tipple, 1994.
4.286. Majale, 2005.
4.287. http://www.env-health.org/IMG/pdf/World_Charter_on_the_Right_to_
the_City_-_October_04.pdf.
4.288. Homeless International with the Urban Poverty Group, 2005.
4.289. Whaites, 2002:18.
4.290. IPHN, 2001.
4.291. UNCHS, 1991c.
4.292. Gulyani and Connors, 2002.
4.293. Majale, 2005.
4.294. UN-HABITAT, 2003f.
4.295. Majale, 2005; UN-HABITAT, 2003g.
4.296. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 68.
4.297. ADB, 1998.
4.298. ADB, 1998: paragraph 29.
4.399. UNCHS, 2001e:77; Payne and Majale, 2004.
4.300. Hasan, 2003.
4.301. Hardoy and others, 2001.
4.302. Patel and Mitlin, 2001.
4.303. Homeless International, n.d.
4.304. DPU, 2001.
4.305. Government of Bangladesh, 2001.
Page 143

4.306. Napier and others, 2003.
4.307. UN-HABITAT, 2003f; Payne and Majale, 2004.
4.308. UN-Doc. A/S-25/3/Add.1.
4.309. UNCHS, 2001b.
4.310. Rojas, 2001.
4.311. Porio, 1998.
4.312. Mukhija, 2004:2234.
4.313. UN-HABITAT, 2003g.
4.314. UN-HABITAT, 2003e:171.
4.315. UNCHS, 1990:6.
4.316. Hegedüs and Teller, 2004.
4.317. UNCHS, 1997b.
4.318. UNCHS, 1990.
4.319. UN-HABITAT, 2003e:147.
4.320. GHB, n.d.a.
4.321. UN-HABITAT, 2003e:137.
Page 144

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
Notes (Chapter V)
5.a.
5.b.
5.c.
5.d.
5.e.
5.f.
5.g.
5.h.
5.i.
From which an estimated over 100,000 people have benefited to date.
See footnote o, section IV.C.3.a).
Kaantabay sa Kauswagan.
See section III.A above.
Companhia de Habitação do Paraná.
The so-called solids-free sewerage system (ASAS) consists of interceptor tanks used to sediment
solids that are present in sewage. Because the system receives sewage free of solids, it can operate
under dramatically reduced slopes. Costs can thus be significantly reduced in comparison to
conventional sewer lines (UNEP, 2002).
See section II.B.3.
SPARC's Assistance to Collective Community Construction.
See also section III.C.
5.1. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 70.
5.2. UN-HABITAT, 2003g:81.
5.3. UNCHS, 1996a; UN-HABITAT, 2003g.
5.4. UNCHS, 1991b; UN-HABITAT, 2003g.
5.5. UNCHS, 1982.
5.6. UNCHS, 1997b.
5.7. UN-HABITAT, 2003g:205.
5.8. Warah, 1997.
5.9. Mitlin, 1997:6.
5.10. UNCHS, 2001b; UN-HABITAT, 2003e.
Page 145

5.11. Pallai, 2004.
5.12. UNCHS, 2001b.
5.13. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 75.
5.14. UNCHS, 2001b:5.
5.15. UNCHS, 2001c.
5.16. Angel 1983.
5.17. Jack and Braimah, 2004:37.
5.18. UN-HABITAT, 2003c:10.
5.19. UNCHS, 1984:43.
5.20. UN-HABITAT, 2004g.
5.21. Payne, 1997:31.
5.22. Durand-Lasserve and others, 2002; UN-HABITAT, 2004g; Yahya, 2002a; 2002b.
5.23. UN-HABITAT, 2004g:16.
5.24. Payne, 1997.
5.25. Durand-Lasserve and others, 2002.
5.26. Payne, 1997; D’Cruz and Satterthwaite, 2005.
5.27. UNCHS, 1996b.
5.28. UN-HABITAT, 2003g:121.
5.29. Fourie, 2001:2.
5.30. Gulyani and Connors, 2002:5-6.
5.31. Fourie, 1999.
5.32. Baharoglu, 2002:4.
5.33. Yeung, 1996.
5.34. UN Doc. E/CN.4/1994/20.
5.35. Mohit, 2002.
5.36. MOST, n.d.
5.37. UPDF, 2003.
5.38. Khan and Thurman, 2001:20.
Page 146

5.39. Durand-Lasserve and Clerc, 1996; Mohit, 2002; UNESCAP, 1997.
5.40. Durand-Lasserve and Clerc, 1996:90.
5.41. Pornchokchai, 2003.
5.42. IIED, 2004.
5.43. Durand-Lasserve, 1999.
5.44. Yap, 1989.
5.45. Millennium Project, 2005a:92.
5.46. Farvacque and McAuslan, 1992:79.
5.47. Agbola and Jinadu, 1997:286.
5.48. COHRE, 2004b:3.
5.49. Gulyani and Connors, 2002:14.
5.50. Burra, 1999b; Patel and others, 2002; UN-HABITAT, 2003g.
5.51. Cabannes, 2003.
5.52. Banerjee, 2002; Risbud, 2002.
5.53. UN-Doc. A/S-25/3; Peart, 2004.
5.54. Payne and Majale, 2004.
5.55. UN-HABITAT and OHCHR, 2002a.
5.56. Home and Lin, 2004.
5.57. UN-HABITAT, 2003g.
5.58. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 84.
5.59. UN-Doc. HSP/WUF/2/6: paragraph 45.
5.60. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 84.
5.61. Cities Alliance, 2004.
5.62. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 87.
5.63. World Bank, 1998.
5.64. Cities Alliance, 2004.
5.65. Mulugeta and McLeod, 2004; Jack and Braimah, 2004; McLeod, 2004; Hughes and Masimba,
2004.
5.66. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 43.
Page 147

5.67. UN-DESA and UN-HABITAT, 2004:4.
5.68. Lee, 1996:586.
5.69. Baharoglu, 2002.
5.70. UNCHS and ILO, 1995.
5.71. UNCHS, 1997b.
5.72. Baharoglu, 2002:8.
5.73. Winayanti and Lang, 2004:63.
5.74. Silas, 1992.
5.75. Rahman, 2001:55-56.
5.76. Rahman, 2001; 2002.
5.77. UNCHS, 2000b; Abbot, 2002:305.
5.78. Serageldin and others, 2003.
5.79. Abbot, 2004:194.
5.80. Olofsson and Sandow, 2003.
5.81. Gulyani and Connors, 2002.
5.82. Assefa, 2002.
5.83. Majale, 1998; MDC, 1993.
5.84. Balbo, 2001.
5.85. Serra, 2003.
5.86. UN-Doc. A/S-25/3/Add.1: paragraph 29.
5.87. UN-HABITAT, 2003g.
5.88. UNCHS, 2001b.
5.89. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 61.
5.90. International Labour Organization Recommendation No. 115 concerning Worker’s Housing,
Principle 2 of Section II (Objectives of National Housing Policy), paragraph 2, available in
UN-HABITAT, 2002b.
5.91. Best Practices Database, n.d.a.
5.92. UNCHS, 1996a.
5.93. GSS: paragraph 38.
Page 148

5.94. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 179.
5.95. Habitat Agenda.
5.96. UN-Doc. HSP/GC/20/2/Add.5: paragraph 31.
5.97. UN-Doc. HSP/WUF/2/3.
5.98. UN-HABITAT, 2003g:191.
5.99. UN-HABITAT, 2005a: paragraph 5.
5.100. Cities Alliance, 2004.
Page 149

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
Notes (Chapter VI)
6.a.
See section III.B.
6.b. See Chapter V.
6.c.
6.d.
6.e.
6.f.
6.g.
6.h.
6.i.
6.j.
6.k.
6.l.
See section II.B.
For a comprehenisive discussion and elaboration of a housing rights framework, see the website of
the United Nations Housing Rights Programme at http://www.unhabitat.org/?unhrp.
See section III.B.
See section IV.A.4.
This issue was discussed in detail in section III.F.2.
See section IV.A.5.
See section IV.E.1.
See section I.A.
See section V.A.
See section V.B.
6.m. Some of these were presented in section V.B.1.
6.n.
6.o.
6.p.
6.q.
6.r.
See section IV.C.
See section V.C.
See section II.B.
Discussed in detail in section V.D.
See section IV.B.
6.s. See section IV.A.2 and box 9.
6.t.
6.u.
See section III.B.2.
The success of Porto Alegre has been scaled up from the municipal to the state level.
Page 150

6.v.
See section V.C.
6.w. Such as direct supply of subsidized dwellings and rent controls.
6.x.
6.y.
6.z.
The ‘Ration Card’ system in India demonstrates that even demand-side assistance might be
impossible to control. The card was originally introduced to provide basic subsistence support for
people below the poverty level. The extent of abuse is such that the ration card is now an almost
universal possession and has come to represent a national identity card without which government
services are inaccessible.
Such as those mentioned in section IV.A.4.
Such as those assisted by UN-HABITAT programmes, including the Urban Management
Programme, Sustainable Cities Programme and Localizing Agenda 21.
6.aa. UN-HABITAT’s offers useful information and resources in this regard (see
http://www.?unhabitat.org/programmes/genderpolicy/resources.asp).
6.bb. More details in section III.F.3.
6.cc. As illustrated in Figure 1.
6.dd. As is made clear in the 2005 Global Report on Human Settlements (UN-HABITAT, 2005b).
6.ee. Examples of this approach were reviewed in IV.E.5.d).
6.ff. As a group, ‘the poor’ are in fact described based on what they do not have (e.g., income and/or
assets), rather than on what they do have. Many poor people are better characterized through their
vulnerabilities or disadvantage, e.g. as persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples, refugees,
internally displaced persons, older persons, tenants, etc. Rajindar Sachar, a former Special
Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing, has compiled a list of such groups that require
particular government attention (see UN-Doc. E/CN.4/Sub. 2/1994/20: section X.B, paragraph
2).
6.gg. For example, the Global Urban Research Unit (GURU), at the University of Newcastle upon
Tyne, the United Kingdom, has carried out research on ‘Enabled Environments: Reducing Barriers
for Low-Income Disabled People’ in urban low-income settlements in India and South Africa. The
Water, Engineering and Development Centre (WEDC) at Loughborough University, the United
Kingdom, has likewise researched access to water and sanitation for people with disabilities.
6.hh. The ‘Biwako Millennium Framework’ provides regional (Asia and Pacific region) policy
recommenda¬tions for action by governments and relevant stakeholders to achieve an inclusive,
barrier-free and rights-based society for persons with disabilities for the 2003-2012 period. The
regional framework for action identifies seven areas for priority action. Each priority area contains
critical issues, targets and the specific actions required. The framework incorporates the MDGs
and their relevant targets to ensure that concerns relating to persons with disabilities become an
integral part of efforts to achieve the MDGs.
6.ii.
6.jj.
See section IV.C.3.c).
See section IV.B.2.b).
6.kk. Such as those identified in section IV.A.2.
Page 151

6.1. UN-Doc. A/44/8/Add.1.
6.2. UN-Doc. E/CN.4/2005/48, Summary: paragraph 2.
6.3. Schreckenback, 2000:6.
6.4. UN-Doc. HSP/WUF/1/DLG.I/Paper 4: paragraph 16.
6.5. UNCHS, 1991b.
6.6. UN-Doc. HSP/WUF/1/DLG.I/Paper 4. See also UNCHS, 1994a.
6.7. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 39.
6.8. UN-DESA and UN-HABITAT, 2004.
6.9. UN-Doc. HS/C/PC.2/2: paragraph 76.
6.10. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 68.
6.11. Kiwala, 2004:13.
6.12. D’Cruz and Satterthwaite, 2005:35.
6.13. Cities Alliance, 1999.
6.14. Cities Alliance, 1999:6.
6.15. Imparato and Ruster, 2003.
6.16. UN-Doc. A/59/326: paragraph 23.
6.17. UN-Doc. HSP/WUF/1/DLG.I/Paper 3: paragraph 9.
6.18. World Bank, 2001a.
6.19. Ryan, 2004:59.
6.20. UN-Doc. A/CONF.165/PC.3/3/Add.1.
6.21. UN-Doc. HSP/WUF/1/DLG.I/Paper 4: paragraph 16.
6.22. Dahiya, 1999.
6.23. Hickey and Mohan, 2003:17.
6.24. UN-Doc. HSP/WUF/1/DLG.I/Paper 4: paragraph 16.
6.25. UN-HABITAT and OHCHR, 2003.
6.26. UN-HABITAT and OHCHR, 2004.
6.27. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 184.
Page 152

6.28. UNCHS and ILO, 1995.
6.29. Hamdi and Majale, 2004:49.
6.30. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 61.
6.31. UN-Doc. HSP/GC/RES/20/13.
6.32. Tipple, 1996; 2000.
6.33. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 78 (c).
6.34. Habitat Agenda: paragraph 87.
6.35. UN-HABITAT, 2003a.
6.36. Payne, 2003; 2005.
6.37. Ryan, 2004:59.
6.38. UNCHS, 1993b; 1999c.
6.39. See http://www.worldbank.org/html/extdr/thematic-alpha.htm#d.
6.40. UN-HABITAT and OHCHR, 2005.
6.41. UN-HABITAT and OHCHR, 2005:iii.
6.42. See for example, Durand-Lasserve and Royston, 2002b; Payne, 2002b.
Page 153

ABOUT
Enabling shelter strategies:
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
HS/785/05 E
ISBNE 92-1-131543-3 (electronic version)
Text source: UN-HABITAT printed publication: ISBN 92-1-131767-3 (published in 2006).
This electronic book was designed and created by Inge Jensen.
This version was compiled on 3 February 2006.
Copyright© 2006 UN-HABITAT.
All rights reserved.
Disclaimer:
This publication has been reproduced without formal editing by the United Nations.
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the
expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations Secretariat concerning the legal
status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its
frontiers or boundaries.
Reference to names of firms and commercial products and processes does not imply their endorsement
by the United Nations, and a failure to mention a particular firm, commercial product or process is not a
sign of disapproval.
Excerpts from the text may be reproduced without authorisation, on condition that the source is
indicated.
UN-HABITAT publications can be obtained from UN-HABITAT's Regional Offices or directly from:
UN-HABITAT,
Information Services Section,
G.P.O. Box 30030,
Nairobi 00100, KENYA
Fax: (254) 20-7623477 or (7624266/7)
E-mail: Habitat.Publications@unhabitat.org
Web-site: http://www.unhabitat.org/
Page 154

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
Preface
As the urban millennium unfolds — with half of humankind already living in cities and towns, and the
numbers on the rise — the process of urbanization leaves us facing unprecedented challenges. One of the
more daunting is the provision of adequate shelter for all. This is made all the more critical by the
urbanization of poverty, the fact that an increasing proportion of the world’s poor are to be found in cities
and towns. The most conspicuous evidence of this phenomenon is the proliferation and expansion of
slums and informal settlements in the cities of developing countries.
The first Habitat Conference heralded a major turning point in the evolution of housing policies and
strategies. Convened by the United Nations in Vancouver in 1976, it aimed to address the growing
development challenges arising in human settlements, especially as a consequence of rapid urbanisation in
developing countries. The enabling shelter strategies that were subsequently introduced and articulated in
the Global Strategy for Shelter to the Year 2000 (GSS) and the Habitat Agenda came as the most
pragmatic response to the growing urban housing challenges in developing countries. The GSS set out a
comprehensive framework that held out promise of adequate shelter for all in the foreseeable future; the
Habitat Agenda provided a blueprint for achieving the twin goals of ‘adequate shelter for all’ and ‘
sustainable human settlements development’.
Nearly two decades have passed since the GSS introduced enabling shelter strategies and, the
year 2006 will see the 30th anniversary of the first Habitat Conference. Yet, the majority of national and
local governments in developing countries are still struggling to meet the housing requirements of their
respective populations and, in particular, those living in poverty and vulnerable groups. Moreover, other
stakeholders involved in these issues — the private sector, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and
community groups — are sill restricted from playing an effective role in shelter development and
improvement.
Therefore, this is as good a time as any to reflect on the implementation of enabling shelter
strategies and ask some incisive questions: What lessons can we learn from the implementation of
enabling shelter strategies? Are persistent inadequacies in housing supply due to inefficiencies in the
enabling approach, or in the manner in which the approach has been implemented? Are there any
noteworthy examples of good practice or promising innovative approaches that are relevant across
national boundaries and may be replicable in different settings? What has been the impact of enabling
shelter strategies on vulnerable and disadvantaged groups and women? What are the priorities for further
research, experience-sharing and action?
This report has been prepared as part of UN-HABITAT’s role in monitoring the implementation of
the Habitat Agenda. The report’s review of experiences with enabling shelter strategies is a contribution
towards the formulation of better housing (and urban development) policies. Indeed, the formulation and
application of effective enabling shelter strategies are crucial to the full and progressive realization of the
right to adequate housing and the achievement of adequate shelter for all.
Page 155

I wish to express my appreciation and gratitude to all those who have contributed to the
preparation of this report.
Anna K. Tibaijuka
Executive Director
United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT)
Page 156

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
Acknowledgements
Dr. A. Graham Tipple and Dr. Michael Majale — both of the Global Urban Research Unit, School of
Architecture, Planning and Landscape, at the University of Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom —
prepared the draft that forms the basis of this report. Their contributions are gratefully acknowledged.
Selman Ergüden and Inge Jensen (both of UN-HABITAT) developed the research design and
finalized the substantive content as well as the layout of the publication. They also provided valuable
insights. Thanks also to Rasmus Precht (of UN-HABITAT) and Anniken Binz (of the University of
Oslo).
Special thanks are due to the Government of Italy for financial support, through their contribution
to the Global Campaign for Secure Tenure. Without this financial contribution, neither this research
project nor the publication of this report would have been possible.
Page 157

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
Executive Summary
1. Enabling shelter strategies have been widely seen as the most promising way of addressing the
housing challenge posed by urbanization in developing countries. Foremost among these are rapidly
growing urban populations, the urbanization and feminization of poverty, and the proliferation and
expansion of slums and informal settlements. Enabling shelter strategies were first articulated in the GSS,
which was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1988. The comprehensive
framework for action provided by the GSS represented a fundamental shift in thinking about shelter
issues. The change held out the promise of adequate shelter for all in the foreseeable future. The optimism
invoked by the GSS is reflected in an earlier UN-HABITAT report, “Evaluation of experience with
initiating enabling shelter strategies”, published in 1991. The enabling approach was subsequently
elaborated in the Habitat Agenda, adopted in 1996. Since these two milestones, governments have
endorsed and committed themselves to following the recommendations of these and various other United
Nations resolutions, declarations and campaigns. Many of these have sought to improve the housing
conditions of the growing majority of urban poor. Today, nearly two decades after the formulation of the
GSS, and nearly a decade after the adoption of the Habitat Agenda, this report reviews experiences in
the implementation of enabling shelter strategies. The principal objective is to draw lessons from
experience and make recommendations on the way forward.
2. Chapter I provides background on the urban housing challenge facing developing countries
today. It introduces the twin phenomena of urbanization and globalization, and outlines the impact of
these on housing conditions in the cities of the developing countries. The Chapter highlights national
shelter needs in various countries and regions of the world. The link between national shelter policy and
the overall economy is summarized. Next comes a brief review of the overall effectiveness of earlier
policies, strategies and programmes in addressing the needs of the poor and other vulnerable and
disadvantaged groups at the national level.
3. Chapter II looks into the background to, and evolution of, enabling shelter strategies. It also
traces the evolution of housing policies and strategies. The endorsement of the Habitat Agenda and the
recommendations therein marked the beginning of radical change in national approaches to housing in
many countries. In particular, governments have withdrawn from centre stage in the housing delivery
process. Other actors are now playing a more prominent role in shelter development and improvement.
The implementation of enabling shelter strategies has also had significant implications for women and
other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups.
4. Chapter III reviews the effects of the enablement paradigm on national approaches to shelter
development and improvement. Starting with the changes in those institutional arrangements responsible
for shelter issues, the Chapter focuses on three areas where reform is required for effective
implementation of enabling shelter strategies: decentralization, participation and partnerships. Legislative
and regulatory frameworks governing the shelter sector in developing countries (many of which have
been adopted from a foreign context without adaptation) are then discussed. The effects of enabling
shelter strategies on women, and on vulnerable and disadvantaged groups are also appraised, as they
Page 158

comprise a significant proportion of the population and are singled out for special attention in the Habitat
Agenda.
5. Chapter IV examines how the roles of the various actors in the shelter process have changed
since the adoption of the enabling approach. Given the lack of resources and capacity constraints of most
central and local governments in developing countries, the other actors have a crucial role to play. Crucial
to the effective implementation of enabling shelter strategies is the mobilization of resources. This includes
human resources, i.e., people — the most valuable resource a country has at its disposal. Lack of access
to essential shelter inputs is a major impediment to the achievement of adequate shelter for all. Such
inputs include land, infrastructure, services and finance. Action by governments to enable access to these
critical elements is fundamental to establishing a fully enabling framework.
6. Chapter V provides an in-depth assessment of particularly successful experience in
implementing enabling strategies and initiatives in the shelter sector. Governments can intervene in a
variety of ways, either directly or in partnership with the key actors in the shelter process, to enable the
realization of housing rights. In some countries, a substantial stock of inner-city tenement housing can be
rehabilitated to provide adequate and affordable shelter. While access to land is essential for shelter
development, de jure security of tenure in the form of individual title is not a prerequisite. People will build
their own homes as long as they feel secure that they will not be forcibly evicted. Basic infrastructure and
services are key components of shelter, which are required to prevent adverse impacts on human health
and the environment. This is especially the case in slum and informal settlements. Slum upgrading
programmes/projects are an efficient and cost-effective way of achieving Millennium Development Goal
7, Target 11 (MDG 7, Target 11). This aims to improve the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers by
the year 2020. The formulation of appropriate national policies and strategies is critical.
7. Chapter VI synthesizes the observations and lessons from the preceding chapters, and
experiences in general, and draws conclusions. It identifies various ways of improving workable elements
of enabling shelter strategies, together with those areas needing further research. This final Chapter
includes recommendations on the way forward. Given the housing situation in most developing country
cities, much remains to be done. Governments must have the capacity effectively to carry out their role as
enabling partners. However, political will is also crucial to success, as are participation and partnerships.
Any projects must specifically target women and vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. Scaling up and
sustainability are vital if successful practical experiences of enabling shelter strategies are to help bring
about adequate shelter for all.
Page 159

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
I. Introduction
The adoption of enabling shelter strategies — which were at the heart of the GSS, and which the Habitat
Agenda extensively elaborated on later — marked a fundamental change in approaches to housing
development and improvement. Yet, about one in six persons worldwide currently live in slums. An even
greater proportion is living in inadequate housing in urban and rural areas.
The purpose of the present report is to review the evolution of enabling shelter strategies during the
last two decades and the experience gained from implementing them. The intent is to draw lessons from
experience, with a view to recommending the best ways to improve the practical elements of such
strategies.
Page 160

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
I. Introduction
A. Urbanization, globalization and the shelter challenge
As the new millennium unfolds, the world’s economy, politics and thinking continue to be shaped by two
major forces which are inextricably interlinked: urbanization and globalization.
Urbanization “has been an integral part of human civilization and … continues unabated in
every part of the world.” (1.1) As a result, 49 per cent of people worldwide lived in urban areas in 2005.
This proportion will rise to 50 per cent in 2007 as the global urban population continues to increase by
more than 60 million every year. (1.2)
Globalization is not a new phenomenon either — “what is new is the speed, the scale, the scope
and the complexity of global connections today.” (1.3) Globalization is significantly shaping the
socio-economic, political and cultural development of both nations and cities worldwide. Its importance
is underscored in recent major publications by UNDP, the World Bank and UN-HABITAT. (1.4) Although
globalization undoubtedly affects rural areas, its effects are being felt most acutely in cities, which are
competing against each other to attract global capital. Consequently, cities must provide enabling
conditions, including meeting the demand for well-functioning infrastructure and services, housing, efficient
transportation and communication systems, and public facilities (e.g., health, educational and recreational
facilities). But they are also faced with the dilemma of opening up to “free exchanges with other cities
and cultures, while protecting residents from the negative aspects of such free flows.” (1.5)
However, the impact of globalization is a highly contentious development issue. While globalization
has, no doubt, stimulated economic growth, the benefits and costs of this growth have not been evenly
distributed. In many countries, real incomes have fallen, costs of living have risen, the number of people
living in poverty has increased, and inequalities are worsening — especially in cities. (1.6)
“Overall, globalization and the process of increasing economic integration have limited the role and
capacity of States to provide adequate resources and other provisions which are often necessary in
fulfilling economic, social and cultural rights.” (1.7)
On the other hand, cities have been portrayed as engines of growth and characterized as places of
opportunity. Cities also have the potential for solving many of the problems associated with urbanization
and globalization. However, the continued rapid growth of urban populations in developing countries —
those with the least resources to deal with accelerated urbanization — remains one of the major
challenges of the 21 st century. The capacity of most urban economies in developing countries is being
stretched to the limit and beyond. Cities are facing enormous housing deficits, deficiencies in infrastructure
and services, deteriorating environmental conditions, and unsustainable consumption patterns. (1.8) These
problems are being compounded by the urbanization of poverty — the fact that a rapidly increasing
proportion of those considered poor (using various measures of poverty) can now be found in cities and
towns. The various aspects of urban poverty are presented in Table 1.
For shelter policies and strategies in developing countries, perhaps the most significant
Page 161

development has been this fundamental change in the spatial dimension of poverty (see Table 2).
Urbanization of poverty in developing countries is most conspicuous in the proliferation and expansion of
slums and informal settlements. In countries in transition, urban poverty is characterized by rapid growth
of substandard housing and slums, gentrification of residential neighbourhoods, and an absence of capital
spending on the existing housing stock. (1.9)
At this point, it is worth clarifying two important underlying definitions and concepts: ‘slum’ and ‘
informal settlement’. The traditional meaning of the term ‘slum’ is:
“housing areas that were once respectable or even desirable, but which have since deteriorated,
as the original dwellers have moved to new and better areas of cities. The condition of the old
houses has then declined, and the units have been progressively sub-divided and rented out to
lower-income groups.” (1.10)
Informal settlements are commonly taken to refer to:
“i), residential areas where a group of housing units has been constructed on land to which the
occupant have no legal claim, or which they occupy illegally; ii), unplanned settlements and areas
where housing is not in compliance with current planning and building regulations (unauthorized
housing).” (1.11)
There is no internationally accepted definition of a slum. However, a UN-HABITAT expert group
meeting has agreed on a generic definition, which it recommended for future international use. In this
definition, a slum is:
“an area that combines, to various extents, the following characteristics (restricted to the
physical and legal characteristics of the settlements, and excluding the more difficult social
dimensions):
inadequate access to safe water;
inadequate access to sanitation and other infrastructure;
poor structural quality of housing;
overcrowding;
insecure residential status.” (1.12)
This is the definition that this report will use, and the terms ‘slum’ and ‘informal settlement’ will be used
interchangeably and together in this context.
Page 162

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
I. Introduction
B. Shelter needs at the national scale
Generalizing about shelter conditions is always dangerous. However, it is safe to say that there are few
countries or cities in the world where there has been a significant improvement in the housing situation of
the poor since the introduction of enabling shelter strategies. (1.13) Rather, in most countries, there are still
calls that ‘something must be done’ to improve the housing conditions of the poor. Accurate forecasts of
shelter needs may be useful for this purpose. However, quantifying these estimates is not straightforward,
and trying to do so could be altogether misleading. Changes in demographic structure, socio-economic
conditions and cultural preferences also make it difficult to justify quantitative housing targets. Moreover,
some of the criteria on which estimated housing needs are based are partly subjective. (1.14) There are
further difficulties related to the measurement of need to replace inadequate, derelict and obsolete
housing stock. Still, such estimates are useful in indicating the scale of housing needed and can facilitate
effective national planning.
Most Latin American countries are distinct from other developing countries in their high degrees
of urbanization. However, urbanization processses and the application of macro-economic adjustment
policies, combined with severe recession, have had serious consequences in terms of urban poverty in the
region. As a result, “the housing deficit is increasing in all countries except Chile.” (1.15) In 1999,
Argentina had an estimated total housing deficit of 3.0 million units while the figures for Brazil and Peru
were 5.2 million and 1.0 million respectively. (1.16) In Mexico, which had a housing deficit of 4.3 million
units in 2000, (1.17) “the annual housing deficit … is calculated at approximately 700,000 homes for
each of the next 10 years.” (1.18) Ecuador's housing deficit, estimated at 1.2 million, is increasing by
50,000 to 60,000 units per year. (1.19) Trinidad and Tobago reportedly faced the challenge of providing
40,000 shelter units between 2001 and 2006. (1.20)
In Sub-Saharan Africa, the most rapidly urbanizing yet economically poorest region of the world,
almost every country is experiencing a growing housing shortage. Zimbabwe's urban housing deficit in
1992 was estimated at about 670,000 units, but by 1999 the figure had risen to over one million. (1.21)
Ghana had an annual housing deficit of about 400,000 units in 2002. (1.22) The backlog in provision in
South Africa was estimated at 2.3 million in mid-2003. (1.23) Cameroon has an annual housing deficit of
close to 70,000 units, while the annual requirement for new dwellings in Ethiopia is estimated to be
between 73,000 and 151,000 housing units. (1.24) Angola had an estimated housing deficit of 700,000 units
in the year 2000, but this figure could double to 1.4 million by 2015. (1.25)
Deteriorating economic conditions in North Africa and the Middle East have led to a decline in
housing conditions in countries in that region, in particular for the urban poor. (1.26) The current housing
shortage in Morocco, according to government estimates, is one million units. (1.27) In Turkey, the annual
housing shortfall is estimated at 200,000 units. (1.28)
In Asia in general, formal housing delivery processes kept pace with urban growth in the 1990s.
This was also the case in most of South Asia until the financial and currency crisis of 1997, when “many
Page 163

countries in the region experienced sharp economic contraction.” (1.29) The overall housing shortage in
India is estimated to be as high as 40 million units, with the urban housing shortage increasing from 10.4
million in 1991 to 15.5 million in 2001. (1.30) The housing shortage in Sri Lanka is expected to rise from
400,000 to 650,000 units between 2002 and 2010. (1.31) Pakistan’s housing deficit has been increasing by
270,000 units a year, and is currently estimated at 7.3 million units. (1.32) Bangladesh has an estimated
national urban housing need of 659,000 units, while Indonesia needs to house approximately 735,000
new urban households per year. (1.33)
Countries in transition are also experiencing a general shortage of housing. In Poland, although
the gross domestic product (GDP) has grown, housing construction has decreased, resulting in a massive
shortage of two million housing units. The Czech Republic faces a housing deficit of 170,000 units. (1.34)
The total housing deficit in Serbia is estimated to be around 100,000 units, compared to about 45,000
units in Albania. (1.35)
One of the most significant changes in the last two decades has been the move away from
assessing the quantitative dimensions of housing backlogs or deficits within countries. Very often, the
problem is not one of quantity, but rather of the quality of the housing. In most developing countries,
informal housing delivery systems are providing at least rudimentary shelter for the rapidly growing
numbers of urban poor households, where the vast majority reside — typically in slums and informal
settlements.
Approximately one third of the world’s urban population is living in ‘housing poverty’ (1.a) , i.e, in
slums and informal settlements. These are characterized by a lack of basic urban services (water supply,
sanitation, drainage, solid waste disposal, and roads and footpaths), and deplorable and overcrowded
housing conditions (see Table 3). Many of those living in slums and informal settlements are under
constant threat of eviction, without due legal process. This is the condition of more than one billion urban
dwellers, and the number is rising. “This increasing population of ‘housing poor’ are being denied
one of the basic components of the right to an adequate standard of living as outlined in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” (1.36) The poorest among the ‘housing poor’ are the homeless,
estimated at some 100 million worldwide. (1.37) However,
“slums and urban poverty are not just a manifestation of a population explosion and
demographic change, or even of the … forces of globalization. Slums must be seen as the result of
a failure of housing policies, laws and delivery systems, as well as of national and urban policies.”
(1.38)
While some 670 million people were living in slums in developing countries in 1990, this figure had
increased to 870 million in 2001, and is projected to have reached 960 million by 2005. If current trends
continue, about half of the additional population growth worldwide over the next years will occur in the
urban slums of developing countries, increasing their population to about 1.4 billion by 2020. The
majority of the urban population in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia currently lives in slums (see Table
4). (1.39) The radical increase in urban poverty, especially in the cities of developing countries, raises
complex policy issues that call for human rights to be integrated into the overall development framework,
i.e., a rights-based approach to human development. (1.40)
Faced with a bleak scenario of global poverty and inequality, the international community has set
itself a series of goals and targets — the MDGs — with the fundamental objective of halving the number
of people in the world living in poverty by the year 2015. One of these, namely Goal 7, Target 11, aims
specifically to achieve a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers by 2020.
However, as many governments recognize,
“improving the lives of slum-dwellers — and in a broader sense, the cities in which they are
located — can only be part of a wider strategy to tackle urban poverty.” (1.41)
Page 164

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
I. Introduction
C. Shelter policy and its links with the overall economy
The intrinsic link between housing conditions, policy options and the overall economy has been
recognized for a long time. (1.42) Indeed, this is reflected in the way in which the dominant development
paradigms have influenced the housing policies adopted by developing countries (see Table 5).
The complex inter-relationships between the macro economy and housing affect the growth of both
GDP and the housing sector. The relationship is two-way: growth in GDP is crucial to a well-functioning
housing sector, and vice-versa. (1.43) A thriving housing sector can contribute to economic growth through
creation of employment opportunities in the building materials and construction sector. (1.45) There are also
“considerable indirect multiplier effects through the creation of investment in other sectors
generated by the demand in the construction sector for their products.” (1.44) Thus, the philosophy
underpinning the GSS, Agenda 21 and the Habitat Agenda is that favourable shelter policies can
contribute significantly to overall macroeconomic, environmental and social development. In fact, as part
of the preparations for the World Social Summit in 1995, UN-HABITAT and ILO argued that:
“The priorities of local and national governments, and of international development cooperation,
should be to advocate and provide active support for development strategies based on
labour-intensive shelter delivery, using local resources, thus linking the goal of shelter for all with
that of full employment, in a common strategy for poverty reduction.” (1.46)
The links between housing production, employment and economic growth are now widely
accepted. However, this is seldom reflected in governments’ budgetary allocations to the shelter sector
and investment in housing (see Box 1). (1.47)
“In developing countries, total investment in housing and related infrastructure tends to range
between 3 and 8 per cent of gross national product (GNP), depending largely on the income level
of the country concerned. On aggregate, these investments amount to around $300 billion. This
will not enable developing countries to reduce the growth of urban slums as mandated by the
Millennium Development Goals.” (1.48)
While economic growth may be a necessary condition for achieving the goal of ‘shelter for all’, it is
by no means a sufficient one. (1.49) For example, Chile was able to reduce its housing gap largely because
of rapid growth in the economy since the end of the external debt crisis of 1982–1985. (1.50) By contrast,
rapid economic growth in the Republic of Korea failed to mitigate housing problems in urban areas. (1.51)
In the 1980s and early 1990s, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
imposed structural adjustment programmes (SAPs) on many developing countries. Housing policies were
a part of SAPs, even though “some economists would argue that structural adjustment and housing
improvements are inconsistent.” (1.52) Poorly planned economic adjustment programmes can impact
adversely on employment and wages, food prices, and housing costs. (1.53) Hence the insistence in the
Habitat Agenda that SAPs be:
“consistent with the economic and social conditions, concerns, objectives and needs of each
Page 165

country, including the need for adequate shelter for all … and protect basic social programmes
and expenditures, in particular those benefiting people living in poverty, women and vulnerable
groups….” (1.54)
SAPs tended to require “among other conditionalities, the retreat of the state from the urban
scene, leading to the collapse of low-income housing programmes.” (1.55) As a result, the housing
situation in many developing countries worsened considerably. However, SAPs implemented in Mexico
and Chile during the 1980s led to positive reform, through which some groups dependent upon
subsidized housing benefited. (1.56) SAPs in Kenya and Tanzania have resulted in “a quite spectacular
extension of informal house building methods”, which has contributed positively to economic growth
through the expansion of employment opportunities in the construction sector. (1.57)
In 1999, SAPs were replaced by a Poverty Reduction Growth Facility, under which developing
countries were required to draw up Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs). According to the IMF
and the World Bank, through the PRSP process “countries become masters of their own
development, with a clearly articulated vision for their future and a systematic plan for achieving
it.” (1.58) The PRSP is based on the principles of the Comprehensive Development Framework (CDF), an
optional, voluntary approach in which “each country must decide on, and own, its priorities and” (1.59)
programmes. To optimize available human and financial resources,
“the CDF emphasizes partnerships between government (at the national, and local levels), civil
society, the private sector, and external assistance agencies.” (1.59)
While many PRSPs include measures of access to basic needs as poverty indicators, housing
needs are not widely addressed. However, PRSPs typically, emphasize the need for basic services such
as water and sanitation, consistent with MDG 7, Target 10. One serious concern, though, is that “the
PRSP initiative has lacked an explicit commitment to the principles of rights-based development.”
(1.60)
Still, available information suggests that:
“[t]he implementation of the Habitat Agenda has … strengthened the trend of utilizing the shelter
sector as a driving force for the promotion of economic development and as an effective entry
point for poverty eradication and social development.” (1.61)
Page 166

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
I. Introduction
D. Effectiveness of policies, strategies and programmes in addressing the needs of the poor and other
vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
Most developing countries have had similar experiences in terms of their official response to shelter policy
and practice during the past five decades, (1.62) for two main reasons. Firstly, the evolution of housing
policies, strategies and programmes has been significantly influenced by the dominant development
paradigm of the time (1.63) (see Table 5). Secondly, many governments attended the landmark United
Nations conferences described in Chapter II, endorsed the resulting declarations, and subscribed to the
goals and principles of the various agendas. They further committed to comply with the recommendations
and implement the different strategies and plans of action. However, there have been significant
differences in the effectiveness of housing policies and shelter strategies and programmes and activities at
national level. This was particularly the case when addressing the needs of the poor, and other vulnerable
and disadvantaged groups.
The performance of national housing policies, strategies and programmes in developing countries
prior to the proclamation of the GSS was generally poor. Launched with much optimism in 1988, the
GSS was to be based on:
“an ‘enabling’ approach, facilitating the actions of all the present and potential participants in
the shelter production and improvement process.” (1.64)
The GSS emphasized that the:
“right to adequate shelter is recognized universally and constitutes the basis for national
obligations to meet shelter needs.” (1.65)
It envisaged the implementation of national shelter strategies as:
“a step-by-step incremental process, aiming at a series of small immediate improvements for the
disadvantaged majorities and gradually leading to introduction of a full system of shelter
production and distribution for the whole population.” (1.66)
In 1991, UN-HABITAT published a report entitled “Evaluation of experience with initiating
enabling shelter strategies”, (1.67) to which this report is a follow-up. This was only a few years after the
launch of the GSS. Therefore, governments had little time to gain experience in formulating and
implementting enabling shelter strategies in their respective countries in accordance with GSS guidelines.
At the time, UN-HABITAT concluded that:
“shelter programmes and activities intended to benefit low-income groups have often been
misdirected, inefficient, inaccessible, inadequate and fragmented.” (1.68)
This conclusion was based on five weaknesses that were identified as major sources of concern, and
which the GSS, at the time, was “only just beginning to correct.” (1.68) These were the following:
Misdirected efforts;
Inefficient use of scare resources;
Lack of access among the very poor;
Page 167

Inadequate scale; and
Fragmented responses.
During the early 1990s, many countries made substantial progress towards re-defining the aims
and objectives of their respective national strategies to coincide with the principles of the enabling
approach. In many cases, there was also wide consultation with the NGO, community and private
sectors. However, most national strategies lacked a detailed plan of action, timescale, provision for
ensuring that resources are available to implement the actions proposed, and indicators for monitoring
and evaluation. “They [were] closer to ‘policies’ than ‘strategies’." (1.69) This is one reason why
implementation of enabling shelter strategies has so far been disappointing. Four preconditions for
success were identified a decade ago:
(a) Governments must take unambiguous decisions that provide for autonomy at local
level;
(b) Measures to foster local initiative must be accompanied by others to address barriers
that stand in the way of these initiatives;
(c) Governments must accept the demands of poor communities as legitimate, and
respond to them; and
(d) Professionals involved in human settlements development must be prepared to
re-define their roles. (1.69) Page 168

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
II. Background to and evolution of enabling shelter strategies
Prior to the first Habitat Conference in 1976, governments had primary responsibility for the formulation
and implementation of housing policies and strategies, and the implementation of housing development.
The launch of the GSS and the introduction of enabling shelter strategies marked a radical change in this
approach.
This Chapter presents the background to and evolution of enabling shelter strategies, and locates
this within the predominant development paradigms of the time. The major United Nations conferences
and declarations that significantly influenced housing policies and strategies are reviewed. Finally, the
Chapter discusses some of the specific components of enabling shelter strategies derived from the GSS
and the Habitat Agenda on national approaches to housing development and improvement.
Page 169

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
II. Background to and evolution of enabling shelter strategies
A. Background to the enabling approach in the shelter sector and the GSS
Housing in developing countries has been described as “the world’s most unsolvable problem” (2.1) —
making itself most conspicuous in slums, where the vast majority of urban poor live. Despite its adverse
characteristics — inadequate infrastructure (water, sanitation, drainage, waste management, and access
roads and footpaths), and poor building and shelter conditions — poor people’s housing can be seen as
a significant expression of human ingenuity and effort. It reflects the strategies the poor use to cope with
an environment that is negligent, if not hostile, to their needs. Through these strategies, which they pursue
individually or in groups, the poor meet their housing needs in a rational and most cost-effective manner.
“Given the prevailing levels of income and other constraints, informal settlements can therefore
be said to be solutions, not problems.” (2.2)
Early proponents of informal settlements as a solution to the housing problem in developing
countries urged governments to support the self-help initiatives of the poor. (2.3) They highlighted the fact
that public authorities in developing countries were not managing housing development effectively. Rather,
much of the housing was being built by individuals and/or groups without formal financing on illegally
occupied land and in contravention of regulatory requirements. Those authors saw this process as a
positive contribution. They argued that the logical step in improving housing conditions in these countries
was not to impose new controls and regulations. Instead, it was to remove constraints on the housing
process such as inappropriate and restrictive regulatory frameworks. Most importantly, security of tenure
would encourage investment in housing improvement and maintenance. (2.4) The strength of this alternative
view of informal settlements influenced the agenda and discussions at the first global conference on human
settlements in Vancouver, Canada, in 1976. (2.5) Page 170

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
II. Background to and evolution of enabling shelter strategies
A. Background to the enabling approach in the shelter sector and the GSS
1. Habitat: United Nations Conference on Human Settlements
The first Habitat Conference, convened in Vancouver in 1976, was a major milestone in the evolution of
housing policies and strategies. It was convened in response to the growing development challenges
arising in human settlements, especially as a result of rapid urbanization in developing countries. (2.6) The
Vancouver Declaration on Human Settlements affirmed that:
“Adequate shelter and services are a basic human right which places an obligation on
Governments to ensure their attainment by all people … Governments should endeavour to
remove all impediments hindering attainment of these goals….” (2.7)
The Conference also adopted the Vancouver Action Plan, which included 64 recommendations for
national action. It emphasized that effective implementation of policies, strategies, plans and programmes
in the field of human settlements required appropriate instruments, in:
“the form of political, administrative or technical institutions, enabling legislation and regulatory
instruments, and formal procedures for the harnessing of resources, in particular human
capacities.” (2.8)
It also called for the removal of any barriers that prevented women from actively participating in the
planning, design and implementation of all aspects of human settlements. Therefore, it can be said that the
major shift in the housing policy and formulation of practical strategies towards enabling concepts started
with the first Habitat Conference. The adoption and implementation of enabling shelter strategies marked
a major turning point in the evolution of housing policy (see Table 5).
As part of the follow-up to the Habitat Conferences, the United Nations Centre for Human
Settlements — UNCHS (Habitat) — was established in 1978. Its mandate included the promotion of the
Vancouver Action Plan and monitoring of national housing policies around the world. UNCHS (Habitat),
influenced the decision by the United Nations General Assembly to declare 1987 the International Year
of Shelter for the Homeless (IYSH). It also played a fundamental role in drawing up the GSS to
co-ordinate global efforts to facilitate the provision of adequate shelter for all by the year 2000.
Page 171

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
II. Background to and evolution of enabling shelter strategies
A. Background to the enabling approach in the shelter sector and the GSS
2. International Year of Shelter for the Homeless (IYSH)
The IYSH was intended to focus international attention on the problems of homelessness and inadequate
housing in urban and rural areas in developing countries. A major concern at the time was that the shelter
conditions of the majority of people in slums and informal settlements and rural areas — in developing
countries in particular — were continuing to deteriorate. And this was despite efforts at the international,
national and local levels. (2.9)
The objective of activities before and during the IYSH was thus,
“to improve the shelter and neighbourhoods of some of the poor and disadvantaged by the end of
1987, particularly in the developing countries, according to national priorities, and to
demonstrate by the year 2000 ways and means of improving the shelter and neighbourhoods of
the poor and disadvantaged.” (2.10)
The United Nations General Assembly also resolved to:
Consolidate and share knowledge and relevant experience gained since Habitat I, so as to
provide “tested and practical alternatives for improving the shelter and neighbourhoods
of the poor and disadvantaged and for providing shelter for the homeless.” (2.11)
Develop and demonstrate new ways of supporting the efforts of the homeless, poor and
disadvantaged to secure their own shelter as a basis for formulating new national policies and
strategies for improving their shelter conditions by the year 2000. (2.9)
IYSH stimulated a wide range of international and national initiatives aimed at improving the shelter
conditions of the poor, which involved governments at the national and local levels, NGOs, communities
and their organizations, as well as international organizations. The need for better global mechanisms to
monitor trends and developments and to share experience on effective approaches and solutions was
also recognized.
Page 172

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
II. Background to and evolution of enabling shelter strategies
A. Background to the enabling approach in the shelter sector and the GSS
3. Global Strategy for Shelter to the Year 2000 (GSS)
The experiences of the IYSH informed the formulation of the GSS, which was formally adopted by the
United Nations General Assembly in 1988. The GSS affirmed “[t]he right to adequate shelter is
recognized universally and constitutes the basis for national obligations to meet shelter needs.” (2.12)
The GSS also gave housing rights more prominence on the United Nations human rights agenda than ever
before. (2.13)
The GSS provided “the framework for a continuous process towards the goal of facilitating
adequate shelter (2.a) for all by the year 2000” (2.14) It emphasized that:
“the goal of national housing policy should be to widen the range of housing choices available to
all households so that they can adjust their shelter situation to their own needs and preferences.
This is much more important than having pre-determined targets in terms of housing production.”
(2.15)
The fundamental policy change put forward in the GSS was:
“the adoption of an enabling approach whereby the full potential and resources of all actors in
the shelter production and improvement process are mobilized; but the final decision on how to
house themselves is left to the people concerned.” (2.16)
The intention was not to reduce governmental responsibility, but rather to rationalize and optimize
the activities and resources of all the actors in housing development. Accordingly, governments would
serve as 'enablers' in the housing sector, withdrawing from their role as providers of housing and playing a
more effective one in facilitating the construction and improvement of housing, especially by and for the
poor. They were to do this by creating an appropriate legal, institutional and regulatory environment, and
ensuring the availability of housing finance. (2.17) However, the GSS also underlined that:
“governmental intervention may be required, in many instances to remove or offset market
imperfections, and, in some specific cases, a policy may be justified to meet the social welfare
requirements of the very poor and destitute.” (2.18)
Nevertheless, the GSS noted that “there is no panacea for housing policy formulation, nor is
there a universal housing policy for adoption at the national level.” (2.19) Therefore, while the strategy
was applicable to all governments, individual countries were able to adapt it according to national
parameters and goals. The relative priorities of different strategic elements would vary from country to
country. (2.20)
Many countries adopted shelter strategies that were never implemented. There were a variety of
reasons for this, including lack of institutional, financial and human resources, as well as lack of political
will. Moreover, with the revised role for government under the enabling approach, housing issues slowly
disappeared from many national strategies and from the international development agenda. (2.21) Page 173

The ‘enabling’ approach set out in the GSS was a relatively new and untried approach for most
governments. Therefore, effective monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, through which lessons could be
learned and put into practice, were required if the chances of success were to be improved. An earlier
UN-HABITAT report, “Evaluation of experience with initiating enabling shelter strategies”, (2.22)
was one of many systematic attempts in this direction.
Page 174

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
II. Background to and evolution of enabling shelter strategies
B. Evolution of housing policies and strategies and basic changes since the adoption of the GSS
The adoption of the GSS marked a major milestone in the evolution of housing policy and strategies,
particularly in developing countries. Since then, several other international conferences have taken place
under the auspices of the United Nations, which have further influenced housing policy and strategies.
The main outcomes of these are summarized below.
Page 175

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
II. Background to and evolution of enabling shelter strategies
B. Evolution of housing policies and strategies and basic changes since the adoption of the GSS
1. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
Following the adoption of the GSS, the next major United Nations international conference that
significantly influenced the direction of housing policies and strategies, albeit perhaps less directly, was the
United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. This took place in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
in 1992. Some 178 Governments agreed to a set of objectives on sustainable human settlements
development, in a global plan of action for the 21 st century: Agenda 21. (2.23)
Chapter 7 of Agenda 21 — “Promoting sustainable human settlement development” — reaffirms
the overall objective of improving the social, economic and environmental quality of human settlements
and the living and working environments of all people, particularly the poor. It identifies eight programme
areas that should form the central principles of national settlement strategies. Countries should prioritise
the eight programme areas listed below, according to national plans and objectives:
Providing adequate shelter for all;
Improving human settlement management;
Promoting sustainable land-use planning and management;
Promoting the integrated provision of environmental infrastructure: water, sanitation, drainage
and solid waste management;
Promoting sustainable energy and transport systems in human settlements;
Promoting human settlement planning and management in disaster-prone areas;
Promoting sustainable construction industry activities; and
Promoting human resources development and capacity for human settlement development.
All these programme areas call for an enabling approach and partnership between the public,
private and community sectors in pursuit of sustainable development. (2.24) In addition, the decision-making
process should involve women, indigenous peoples, community groups, elderly people, and those living
with disabilities.
In Chapter 28 of Agenda 21, local authorities are called upon to consult with and involve their
communities, in the development and implementation of a local plan for sustainability — e.g., a 'Local
Agenda 21'. The Habitat Agenda (discussed below) views this local action as the way forward, with
local authorities taking the lead in co-ordinated and integrated action in partnership with other local
stakeholders. (2.25) Page 176

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
II. Background to and evolution of enabling shelter strategies
B. Evolution of housing policies and strategies and basic changes since the adoption of the GSS
2. The Second United Nations Conference on Human Settlements
The Second United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II) — convened in 1996 in
Istanbul, 20 years after the first Habitat Conference — “made great strides towards putting housing
back on the international agenda.” (2.26) The focus of Habitat II brought together the issues addressed at
earlier United Nations conferences. Discussions focused on two principle themes of ‘sustainable human
settlements development in an urbanizing world’ and the provision of ‘adequate shelter for all’. (2.27) The
conference unanimously adopted the Istanbul Declaration and the Habitat Agenda, which consists of
goals, principles, commitments and a global plan of action with strategies for implementation. The Habitat
Agenda reiterates many of the substantive issues and approaches towards achieving sustainable
development in human settlements recommended by Chapter 7 of Agenda 21. (2.28)
To achieve the goal of adequate shelter for all, governments committed themselves to:
“Increasing the supply of affordable housing, including through encouraging and promoting
affordable home ownership and increasing the supply of affordable rental, communal,
cooperative and other housing through partnerships among public, private and community
initiatives, creating and promoting market-based incentives while giving due respect to the rights
and obligations of both tenants and owners.” (2.29)
They further committed to promote the upgrading of existing housing stock through maintenance
and rehabilitation, and provision of basic services, facilities and amenities. (2.30)
The strategies proposed for effective implementation of the Habitat Agenda are based on five main
principles: (2.31)
(a) Formation of partnerships;
(b) Building of capacity among all partners groups;
(c) Adoption of enabling approaches;
(d) Activation of and support to participatory mechanisms; and
(e) Monitoring and assessment of progress through the appropriate use of indicators,
networking and making full use of information technologies.
The Habitat Agenda calls on governments to take appropriate action in order to grant the right to
adequate housing within the overall context of an enabling approach. These actions include: (2.32)
Prohibiting by law any form of discrimination in the matter of housing;
Providing equal access to land, secure tenure and protection against unlawful eviction for all,
Page 177

including women and the poor, recognizing human rights and refrain from penalising homeless
people for their status;
Adopting policies to make housing habitable, accessible and affordable for all, including those
unable to secure adequate housing through their own means, by, inter alia:
o
o
o
o
“i) Expanding the supply of affordable housing through appropriate regulatory
measures and market incentives;
ii) Increasing affordability through the provision of subsidies and rental and
other forms of housing assistance to people living in poverty;
iii) Supporting community-based, cooperative and non-profit rental and
owner-occupied housing programmes;
iv) Promoting supporting services for the homeless and other vulnerable
groups;
o v) Mobilizing innovative financial and other resources — public and private —
for housing and community development;
o
vi) Creating and promoting market-based incentives to encourage the private
sector to meet the need for affordable rental and owner-occupied housing.”
Over the past decade, various United Nations agencies, numerous national constitutions and
legislations, and civil society organizations across the world have consistently reaffirmed the right to
adequate housing as a distinct human right. (2.33) Indeed, this is enshrined in several international
instruments. The most notable of these are the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). The right to adequate
housing gained increasing recognition in the early 1990s. However, the debate preceding Habitat II
centred on the terminology used in international human rights instruments, with some countries contending
that the 'right to an adequate standard of living', as set out in article 25 of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, did not imply a separate 'right to adequate housing'.
However, governments have reaffirmed their “commitment to the full and progressive
realization of the right to adequate housing, as provided for in the international instruments.” (2.34)
Moreover, the Habitat Agenda makes clear that it is up to individual governments to ensure that housing
policy is coherent and that it is implemented within a human rights framework. (2.35) In addition, it underlines
that governments have special responsibility for groups who cannot participate in or are excluded from
the housing market. (2.36) Box 2 outlines some of the recommendations in the Habitat Agenda regarding the
full and progressive realization of the right to adequate housing.
The right to adequate housing remains unrealized for the vast majority of poor and vulnerable
people across the world. However, the national constitutions of many governments feature general
statements regarding the promotion and protection of housing rights. (2.37) Some countries, of which South
Africa is a prime example, have explicitly adopted a rights-based approach to development, including the
right to housing in their constitutions. Some Latin American countries also include the right to housing in
their constitutions. Argentina provides a notable example of the way governments can not only recognise
the right to adequate housing in their constitutions, but also use international human rights instruments to
interpret the meaning of that right. (2.37) The United Kingdom’s bilateral development agency, the
Department for International Development (DFID), is working to develop an enabling environment to
ensure that those governments committed to meeting their obligations to respect, protect and ensure the
Page 178

ealization of human rights, have sufficient resources to do so. (2.38) UN-HABITAT and the Office of the
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), have also prepared a report to romote
global understanding of the linkages between housing and human rights. (2.37) With a focus on housing
legislation, governments and the international community can use this comprehensive report to address
the problems of housing developments in general, and particularly forced evictions, housing deprivation
and homelessness, from a human rights perspective.
The Global Campaign for Secure Tenure and the Global Campaign on Urban Governance arose
out of the Habitat Agenda. The two Campaigns reflect many of the internationally agreed goals that led to
the Millennium Declaration (see below). The overall development objective of the Global Campaign for
Secure Tenure is “to improve the conditions of people living and often working in [slums] and
informal settlements in [cities worldwide] by promoting security of their residential tenure.” (2.39) The
Global Campaign on Urban Governance advocates “transparent, responsible, accountable, just,
effective and efficient governance of cities and other human settlements.” (2.40) The two Campaigns
also relate to the two main themes of the Habitat Agenda: ‘Adequate Shelter for All’ and ‘Sustainable
human settlements development in an urbanizing world’.
Page 179

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
II. Background to and evolution of enabling shelter strategies
B. Evolution of housing policies and strategies and basic changes since the adoption of the GSS
3. The Millennium Declaration
As a recognition that a new millennium is a time for bold and optimistic measures, the United Nations
adopted the Millennium Declaration in 2000, which launched the MDGs. The MDGs distil many of the
goals, principles, commitments and recommendations of Habitat II and the other United Nations
conferences of the 1990s into a mutually reinforcing framework of eight goals, 16 targets and a number
of indicators to improve overall human development. The targets most relevant to this report come under
Goal 7, which aims to ensure environmental sustainability (see Table 6). Target 11 is the target contained
in the Cities without Slums action plan, drafted in 1999 by the Cities Alliance (see Box 3). The Cities
without Slums action plan was incorporated into the United Nations Secretary-General’s report to the
Millennium Assembly and the Millennium Declaration. The MDGs also provide “another arena in
which housing rights are being internationally discussed.” (2.41) Page 180

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
II. Background to and evolution of enabling shelter strategies
B. Evolution of housing policies and strategies and basic changes since the adoption of the GSS
4. Istanbul +5
In June 2001, the United Nations General Assembly held a special session, commonly known as ‘
Istanbul +5’, to review and appraise worldwide implementation of the Habitat Agenda. As part of the
preparations, governments submitted reports on the implementation of the Habitat Agenda in their
respective countries, at both national and local level. The reporting process was guided by the
commitments and strategies of the Habitat Agenda. About 100 countries submitted reports,
demonstrating that:
“the international community shares a common purpose, the political will to face the global urban
challenge and the desire to work collectively in search of effective strategies to achieve [its]
objectives.” (2.42)
When the national reports were consolidated a number of themes emerged, including:
“• Urbanization and globalization have accelerated dramatically since Habitat II and have
contributed to an increase in urban poverty. …
• Emerging priorities have been identified, including urban governance, housing rights, basic
services, civil conflict, urban violence and the urban environment.
•The review process has reconfirmed that actions that actually improve the quality of life of
people, particularly the poor, are usually designed and implemented at the local level.” (2.43)
In particular, the General Assembly noted that:
“Although Governments and their Habitat Agenda partners have continued efforts to fulfil their
commitments, widespread poverty remains the core obstacle … Critically, the majority of people
living in poverty still lack legal security of tenure for their dwellings, while others lack even basic
shelter.” (2.44)
The Istanbul +5 process revealed that many countries have well-formulated and comprehensive
housing policies and strategies. However, in most cases respective countries are unable to implement
them effectively for the following reasons:
“(a). Weak or lacking institutional arrangements;
(b). Ineffective or lacking mechanisms to engage the poor themselves, and provide an appropriate
enabling framework to harness their potential contribution;
(c). Inadequate or lacking legal frameworks;
(d). Lack of strategic focus, such as on the needs and potential contributions of women;
(e). Limited or lacking financial resources;
(f). Limited or lacking political will.” (2.45)
The special session adopted the ‘Declaration on Cities and other Human Settlements in the New
Millennium’, which recognized the above shortcomings and renewed governments’ commitment to the
goals and principles set out in the Habitat Agenda.
Page 181

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
II. Background to and evolution of enabling shelter strategies
C. II.C. Specific effects of enabling shelter strategies on national housing policies
The underlying philosophy of the enabling approach is that governments should withdraw from direct
provision of housing. Instead, they should enable other actors — the private sector, non-governmental
organizations and community groups — to contribute fully towards the achievement of adequate shelter
for all. However, this does not mean a lesser or no role at all for government, as is commonly
misconceived. Decisive and coherent action on the part of government is required. This includes
providing supportive institutional, legislative, regulatory and financial environments, within which other
actors can operate more effectively, and also intervening in land, housing and financial markets that so far
are incompatible with the needs of the poor. In this context, the institutional arrangements underpinning
housing development and improvement are a critical element of the enabling approach. (2.46)
Enablement is not limited to the action of governments vis-à-vis the other actors in the shelter
sector. Both central and local government, the latter in particular, likewise require an enabling
environment to operate effectively. They need a supportive operational framework, adequate resources,
professional capabilities and incentives if they are to be able to carry out their responsibilities efficiently.
(2.47)
The enabling approach to shelter development and improvement calls for a policy environment
where the government, for the most part, does not supply housing directly. Rather, public authorities
facilitate production by other actors in the sector. This paradigm rejects the interventionist provision of
public housing by the state, which presupposes that the other actors in the housing sector cannot fulfil the
right to adequate housing. (2.48) An enabling strategy should allow the other actors to develop and improve
housing in the most efficient manner possible, leaving governments to target their limited resources more
effectively where they are most needed. One such area is in direct interventions to enable the poorest to
gain access to adequate housing:
“In fact, it is only by enabling the not so poor to help themselves that governments can make
resources available to assist the poorest groups.” (2.49)
As they moved to enable owner-occupier housing, many countries have instituted more
user-friendly mortgage companies and/or practices in order to broaden and deepen access to formal
housing finance. In doing so, the intention and rhetoric is often more inclusive than the practice. Though
more people gain access to more easily repayable mortgage loans, they tend to belong to the upper
income groups. This is because mortgages are usually unsuitable for the majority of households, owing to
their high transaction costs.
The World Bank has identified seven major enabling instruments that governments have at their
disposal — three that address demand-side constraints, three that address supply-side constraints, and
one that improves the management of the housing sector as a whole. (2.50) The three demand-side
instruments include: developing property rights; developing mortgage finance; and rationalizing subsidies.
The three supply-side instruments include the following: providing infrastructure for residential land
development; regulating land and housing development; and organizing the building industry.
Page 182

These instruments are to be supported by the seventh instrument — development of an
appropriate institutional framework for managing the housing sector. This includes strengthening
institutions that can oversee the performance of the sector as a whole; co-ordinating public agencies, the
private sector, NGOs and community-based organizations (CBOs); and ensuring that policies and
programmes benefit the poor and encourage their participation. The seven enabling instruments are
applicable to some degree in all countries, though priorities for their use will vary across countries. The
World Bank (2.50) also advocates a holistic assessment of national housing policy, using an index of
normative policy input ‘dos’ and ‘don’ts’ (see Table 7), Most of these are consistent with the GSS and
Habitat Agenda recommendations on national approaches for housing.
Many countries made substantial progress during the 1980s and early 1990s towards re-defining
the aims and objectives of their national strategies pursuant to the principles of the enabling approach.
Many such cases involved broad consultation with the NGO, community and private sectors. However,
most national strategies lacked a detailed plan of action, time frame, provisions for ensuring that
resources are available to implement the actions proposed, and indicators for monitoring and evaluation.
“They [were] closer to ‘policies’ than ‘strategies’.” (2.51) This is one reason why implementation of
enabling shelter strategies has so far been disappointing. Among the major lessons learned to date is the
identification of the following set of four preconditions for success:
(a) Governments must take unambiguous decisions that provide for autonomy at local
level;
(b) Measures to foster local initiative must be accompanied by others to address barriers
that stand in the way of these initiatives;
(c) Governments must accept the demands of poor communities as legitimate, and
respond to them; and
(d) Professionals involved in human settlements development must be prepared to
re-define their roles. (2.51) Page 183

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
There is growing evidence that many countries around the world have accepted and implemented the
enabling approach to shelter provision and improvement, (3.1) — the background and main components of
which were outlined in Chapters I and II. Enabling policies have gained even more favour with the
growing recognition that democratic and participatory government structures are both important goals of
development and significant means of achieving them. (3.2) The Habitat II Conference in Istanbul in 1996
has been described as “a ‘conference of partnerships, solutions and commitments’ for adequate
shelter and sustainable human settlements development.” (3.3) The partners identified at the conference
were the following: national governments; local authorities; NGOs and CBOs; the private sector;
parliamentarians; foundations; professionals and researchers; academics of science and engineering; trade
unions; and women, youth and human solidarity groups. (3.3) In contrast to earlier summits, local authorities,
NGOs and CBOs participated actively in the formulation of the eventual plan of action. Istanbul +5
likewise broadened participation beyond national government delegates and actively included all the
partners.
This Chapter begins with an examination of how governments’ and public organizations’ attitudes
towards slums and informal settlements in developing countries have changed over the past few decades.
The consequent changes in institutional arrangements are also appraised, with a focus on the three major
areas where reform is essential for effective implementation of enabling shelter strategies. This is followed
by a discussion on the influence of the enabling approach on legislative and regulatory frameworks, and a
review of the roles and involvement of various actors in the shelter development and improvement
process. Finally, the Chapter examines the effects of enabling shelter strategies on women and vulnerable
and disadvantaged groups. Despite having a lesser role with respect to direct provision of shelter under
the enablement paradigm, governments are still required to address the housing needs of these groups.
Page 184

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
A. Governments’ and public bodies’ attitudes to informal settlements
One of the most significant developments with respect to the housing conditions of the urban poor in the
last few decades has been the change in attitude of governments towards informal settlements. This
section reviews the reason for this change and the implications for the implementation of enabling shelter
strategies.
Most local governments play a major role in determining the location of land for housing, who can
gain access to it and under what terms. The way public authorities define land uses, allocate land and
implement regulatory frameworks influences whether, and where, low-income households can acquire
land legally on which to build their homes. Government attitudes to informal settlements in general, and to
the extra-legal ways in which low-income groups acquire land in particular, vary from one country to
another. They range from opposition and eviction, to tolerance, to support for legalization and upgrading.
These attitudes also influence who obtains land for housing. Local governments also have a major say as
to whether or not the land will be serviced with water supply, sewerage, a drainage system and roads.
Links are evident between infrastructure and service provision and the legality of land occupation. Public
service providers may be unwilling or unprepared to serve those living on illegally occupied or subdivided
land or land acquired through traditional means. They may even be legally prevented from doing so.
Moreover, particular difficulties may arise when servicing informal settlements that have developed
haphazardly with unclear plot boundaries, or have developed on hazardous sites. (3.4)
Official attitudes towards slums and informal settlements have long been an impediment to the
adoption of enabling strategies. Governments and public organizations remain suspicious of these
settlements, often even antagonistic. This is to disregard the fact that slums and informal settlements are
innovative, productive and affordable solutions to the shelter needs of the urban poor. Perceptions of
slum dwellers also remain negative and the vital contribution they make to the urban economy still goes
unrecognised. As a result, they seldom receive the services delivered to formally planned and developed
housing areas, such as municipal water, sanitation, sewerage and roads. This not only perpetuates the
degrees and scale of poverty, but also affects cities as a whole. (3.5) The enabling approach calls for a
reversal of these attitudes. Under the enabling approach, governments commit themselves to promoting:
“where appropriate, the upgrading of informal settlements and urban slums as an expedient
measure and pragmatic solution to the urban shelter deficit.” (3.6)
As seen in section I.B above, the 1960s and 1970s brought growing evidence that conventional
shelter policies — based on public sector provision of housing — could not match the demand of
low-income households. The subsequent proliferation of slums and informal settlements has led most
developing countries to accept that these are not only inevitable, but also an integral part of a city.
Therefore, instead of being viewed as a problem, informal settlements have come to be seen as part of
the solution. Many governments now acknowledge that they are the only shelter options available to poor
and low-income groups, and that they have a vital function in urban economies. Moreover, the rapid
expansion of slum populations has made them an important political constituency. (3.7) Page 185

However, these trends have been endorsed to different degrees and in a variety of ways. Box 4
summarizes some experiences in Sub-Saharan Africa. A number of countries appear to have gradually
accepted informal settlements as inevitable and recognized them as part of the housing stock after many
years of harassment. Others seem to have embraced informal settlements earlier, only to reject them at a
later stage. This occurred in Zambia, with acceptance in the early 1970s followed by less hospitable
policies in the late 1980s. (3.8) Box 5 suggests that Turkey has experienced a similar cycle.
The enabling approach specifically urges the inclusion of all actors in the housing process. Many
governments, however, still do not see informal settlers as city builders, but as a nuisance: “They are
tolerated as long as they do not take over prime sites; otherwise they are bulldozed with little or
no compensation.” (3.9) For example, since 1954, Hong Kong has consistently proscribed the
improvement of squatter areas and rejected self-help upgrading and improvement initiatives. Hong Kong
has never regularized any of its informal settlements to integrate them into the formal city. Rather,
“the complex set of regulatory policies and practices that control the squatter areas have been
directed in part at preventing squatter residents from consolidating or improving their housing.”
(3.10)
In Bangladesh, the 1990 Report of the Slum Problem Eradication Committee (BSNC) led to a
change of attitude towards bastees (slums), and a better understanding of the rights of basteebashees
(slum dwellers). The BSNC Report recommendations, which included slum upgrading, were included in
the National Housing Policy, which was approved by the National Assembly in December 1993.
“The government and various other authorities have … ignored the policy provisions, and
practiced forced eviction. There have been many such incidents, which show the government's
unwillingness to solve the bastee problem more humanely.” (3.11)
In Lagos, Nigeria, the Government has demolished Maroko, a squatter settlement of 300,000, “in
the ‘over-riding public interest’ and to give room for good planning so as to make life more
pleasant, safe and convenient for those evicted.” (3.12) The settlement, which had existed for 18 years,
had developed on government land, a mere 1.5 metres above sea level. The Government had earlier
acquired some parts of Maroko in 1972. It is more likely, though, that the residents of nearby
high-income neighbourhoods, who were fearful of epidemics, crime, and depreciation of the value of their
properties, pressured the public authorities into doing so. Only 2,933 of the estimated 41,776
homeowners were relocated to government housing estates. (3.13) Moreover, gross irregularities marred the
allocation process, with some “people, who had not been landlords in Maroko, [securing] two to
three different allocations.” (3.14) Most of the relocated population preferred to stay in Maroko as it
offered cheap accommodation and transport, a low cost of living, a favourable business environment, and
communal understanding. Some Maroko evictees settled at Maroko-Beach, which developed rapidly
without much official planning. (3.15) This typically happens with forced evictions when those affected are
not provided with an appropriate, alternative site on which to settle. Evictees also require adequate
support if they are to be able to rebuild their lives and livelihoods.
“[T]he practice of forced eviction constitutes a gross violation of human rights, in
particular the right to adequate housing.” (3.16) Mass forced evictions in Boavista and Bairro Soba
Kapassa in Luanda and Benfica Commune and Samba Municipality in Angola between 2001 and 2003
illustrate what can happen in the absence of a comprehensive and effective human rights-based housing
and urban development policy. The discourse on eviction is definitely intensifying, with more legislation
introduced to address it. The issue is triggering a lot more networking and international discussion,
together with more global campaigns. Awareness of the issue is as high as ever, yet evictions are still
occurring, causing considerable displacement, impoverishment and suffering:
“The bulldozing of informal settlements has become a major cause of urban poverty and one of
the most urgent problems of the new millennium.” (3.17)
Page 186

Lessons from several countries underscore the importance and fundamental role of sustained
political will and commitment to improving or reducing informal settlements. In Indonesia, the Kampung
Improvement Programme (KIP), (see Box 35) probably rates as the foremost settlement upgrading
achievement in the world. A key factor in the success of KIP was official recognition of, and support to,
the economic potential and productivity attached to settlement upgrading. (3.18) Some countries in Latin
America have implemented comprehensive tenure regularization programmes with strong political
support. In the process, they have significantly reduced the number of squatter households. (3.19) However,
the political will to launch regularization processes is lacking in many countries. A case in point is
Venezuela, where:
“[t]he politicians who depend on patronage to remain in office have no interest in ‘resolving’ the
problem, since that would ‘kill the goose that lays the golden egg’.” (3.20)
It is important to recognize that residential illegality is not limited to the poor: (3.21)
“Illegal forms of production of urban land and housing are being observed more and more
frequently in the more privileged parts of [developing] world cities.” (3.22)
In Africa,
“[t] here are considerable variations in legal contexts between … countries, and in the de facto
recognition or acceptance of unauthorized settlements in the same city.” (3.23)
Informal development of middle- and high-income residential areas has been a notable feature in some
cities in recent years. This has happened in complete disregard of planning regulations, standards or
administrative procedures. These neighbourhoods have been based primarily on unauthorized subdivision
of land, both public and private. It has typically been supported by “varied and mutually reinforcing
interests in urban land and housing.” (3.24) As in low-income informal settlements, infrastructure in those
developments is inadequate or non-existent, and houses have been built without permission and in
contravention of building codes. However, many informal settlements that appear to have developed in
defiance of the law may actually be based on political patronage or the tacit permission of the local
administration. Or, they may be the result of arbitrary application of some elements of existing regulatory
frameworks to the selective exclusion of others. In some cases, the law itself may be outdated and
inconsistent with practice. In other cases, some activities, even though formally illegal, may be considered
legitimate by the actors concerned. (3.25) Bribes may also change hands to facilitate development.
Page 187

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
B. Changes in the institutional arrangements responsible for shelter issues
Political and institutional reforms have enhanced the scope for meaningful participation and involvement
for civil society actors, for decentralized participatory planning and management, and for public-private
partnerships. (3.26) Democratization processes have played a critical role in this regard. In many cases,
reforms have been brought about by agitation and lobbying by civil society and NGOs. Experience in
various countries shows that civil society involvement in local governance can be significantly enhanced
through institutional innovation and procedural reform, and does not require any radical or comprehensive
legislative overhaul. (3.27) This section examines some of the changes in institutional arrangements that have
had an impact on shelter development and improvement.
Reform of institutional arrangements is essential for effective implementation of enabling shelter
strategies in three major areas: decentralization, participation, and partnerships, which are discussed in
the sections below.
Page 188

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
B. Changes in the institutional arrangements responsible for shelter issues
1. Decentralization
The enabling approach requires governments “to decentralize shelter policies and their
administration to subnational and local levels within the national framework, whenever possible
and appropriate.” (3.28) Decentralization is one of the global norms and principles which UN-HABITAT
develops and promotes through its Global Campaign on Urban Governance.
The arguments supporting decentralization are compelling. Effective decentralization of political,
administrative and financial authority results in the following improvements:
stronger local authorities;
improved policy-making through increased public participation in decision-making;
more accountable and transparent local government;
increased efficiency and responsiveness of urban service delivery;
a sense of ownership over services; and in many cases
equity. (3.27)
However, determining which institutional, legal and financial arrangements will best facilitate the realization
of these benefits is by no means easy. (3.27) Many developing countries have endeavoured to enact
decentralization policies as “a means of strengthening the operation of local authorities in the
implementation of the Habitat Agenda.” (3.29)
In Uganda, the decentralization policy that was launched in 1992 is fully institutionalized by now.
Under this framework, authorities share obligations, competencies and revenues and, above all, shift
decision making as close as possible to the citizens. In practice, decision making devolves to the lowest
effective level. The 1997 Local Government Act provides further details for the implementation of the
decentralization policy. (3.30) Although local authorities have discretionary powers to act independently in
their areas of jurisdiction, they are guided by broad national policies. As a result, physical planning is now
a decentralized function. However, the quantity and quality of staff remain inadequate if Uganda is to
meet the fresh challenges of decentralisation. Box 6 summarizes some additional experiences of
decentralization of shelter-related policies.
Decentralization is also important in improving the capacity of city and municipal authorities to rise
to the challenges posed by urbanization and globalization. (3.31) As stated earlier, in an urbanizing and
globalizing world, cities must be more efficient, productive and competitive, as well as healthier, safer and
more equitable. Greater decentralization can help overcome any constraints arising from the political
concerns of central government and lack of political will at the national level. (3.32) Page 189

“Decentralization initiatives have tended to be more successful in those countries where they
draw on local support from civil society groups and other institutional stakeholders under the
jurisdiction of local authorities.” (3.33)
In countries where traditional local leaders are still held in high esteem, decentralization is more
likely to be successful than where they are absent. Box 7 describes recent experience in Nigeria.
Nevertheless, devolution of responsibilities to local authorities has brought both benefits and
problems:
“In cities in many parts of the world, new responsibilities and autonomy have led to creative
responses to urban issues. Almost everywhere, however, the decentralization of authority has not
been accompanied by adequate fiscal resources or capacity and the situation is getting worse. The
decentralization trend has also led to increased disparities in fiscal resources between local
governments, even within the same country.” (3.34)
Page 190

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
B. Changes in the institutional arrangements responsible for shelter issues
2. Participation
Under the Habitat Agenda, government efforts should be geared towards:
”establishing legislative, institutional and financial frameworks that will enable the private
sector, non-governmental organizations and community groups to contribute to the achievement
of adequate shelter for all.” (3.35)
They should seek to promote equality and equity, including the gender factor and the full and equal
participation of women, the poor, and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. This requires
institutional measures to ensure adequate representation of their interests in policy- and decision-making
processes. Governments should further aim to empower all people — including those living in poverty
and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups — to participate equally and effectively in shelter
development and improvement. ‘Enabling’ and ‘participation’ are inseparable, as demands and priorities
are major influences on the development of effective policies, strategies and programmes. “Local
participation can be crucial to the viability and sustainability of housing projects.” (3.36)
The South African housing subsidy programme has rightly recognized the importance of community
involvement and has encouraged NGO activity to build community organizations among subsidy
applicants. In their struggle for rights and traumatized as they were under apartheid rule, most of the
population had adopted a pattern of systematic opposition to local authorities and official policies.
Therefore, they needed assistance if they were to become involved in the housing process virtually
overnight. NGOs working in the most active sector of the subsidy process — the project-linked
approach — involve subsidy applicants in the planning and implementation of the projects to the greatest
possible extent. (3.37)
Many governments have formally introduced civic engagement and community participation in
sectors such as planning, budgeting, service provision, disaster preparedness and mitigation, and crime
prevention. They have done so through their respective local authority frameworks. (3.38) For instance, in
the Philippines, Naga City has created a mechanism whereby residents are responsible for designing,
implementing and evaluating the municipal development agenda. (3.39)
Participatory budgeting is one of the most significant democratic innovations that have enabled
greater citizen participation in major decision-making processes. It formally came into existence in Brazil
some 15 years ago, most notably in the city of Porto Alegre. It subsequently spread to over 100 Brazilian
municipalities during the late 1990s and now involves the direct participation of hundreds of thousands of
people. (3.40) Since 2000, participatory budgeting has also extended, to different degrees and with varying
levels of formalization, to other countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. (3.a) Some African cities have
also introduced participatory budgeting processes (3.b) and some countries in Asia (3.c) are on the verge of
doing the same. Other countries (3.d) and cities also use various participatory mechanisms for municipal
resource allocation which, even if not called participatory budgeting, bear similar characteristics. (3.41) Page 191

Nevertheless, participatory budgeting is not without its limitations and risks. Public demand for
expenditure may stretch budgetary resources beyond the limit. Another risk is that unrealistic and
unachievable budgets only seek to win the popular vote. This could result in public discontent and other
adverse consequences.
In Brazil, the transformation of Samambaia (3.e) “from a shanty town into a vibrant city” (3.42) has
been put down to the adoption of the main principles of enablement. These include participation of the
urban poor in decision-making and a participatory budgeting process. An important element in the
Holistic Upgrading Programme in Medellin, Colombia is the participation of the community in the project
design and implementation. This has been made possible by training and basic capacity building among
the community. The enabling approach emphasizes training and capacity building especially for women,
people with disabilities and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups, in order to ensure their
participation at all stages of the shelter development process.
Innovative initiatives that have enabled local communities and their organizations to participate
effectively in shelter and environmental development and improvement can also be found in Asia.
Examples include the ‘Earning from Cleaning’ approach and ‘Sindh Community Shelter Project’ in
Pakistan; the campaign for a ‘Just and Humane City’ in the Philippines, and the ‘Urban Community
Environment Activities Project’ in Thailand. (3.43)
A number of African countries have a long tradition of community participation in rural areas that is
being adapted to contemporary realities in towns and cities. Some of those countries have also revised
their respective constitutions and passed legislation that supports the participation of excluded and
vulnerable and disadvantaged groups, especially women, in economic, social and political
decision-making. (3.44) Uganda provides a useful example in this regard. (3.45)
A core principle of the PRSP approach, whose origins lie substantially with civil society
movements in the late 1990s, (3.46) is that it should be:
“participatory, involving broad-based participation of the poor, of civil society organisations, of
governmental and of administrative institutions at national and sub-national levels and by the
private sector in all operational steps.” (3.47)
However, several NGOs have observed that the degree of civil society participation in developing
PRSPs has been minimal. (3.48) This fact is acknowledged by the IMF and the World Bank. (3.49) The City
Development Strategies Initiative, on the other hand, has been more successful in including the urban
poor, women and other marginalized groups in participatory strategic vision and decision-making
processes that ultimately affect them. The vision exercises identify city-wide priority objectives and
develop action plans to meet them.
Page 192

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
B. Changes in the institutional arrangements responsible for shelter issues
3. Partnerships
The enabling paradigm advocates an integrated approach to the use of institutional, financial, physical,
and human resources to achieve the objective of adequate shelter for all. Governments will be ineffective
in the coordinative, supportive and facilitative role assigned to them in the enabling approach if their
actions are fragmented and disparate. Efficient government action requires that the number of actors
responsible for different activities within the shelter sector is kept minimal, and that their activities are
closely co-ordinated. (3.50) This has been a notable problem in some countries. In Egypt, for example,
several agencies are involved in urban land and housing development, yet few of them have a
well-defined mandate. Therefore, overlapping of responsibilities and jurisdictions is frequent, resulting in
disorganized and ineffective implementation of development interventions, (3.51) and inefficient use of
available resources.
A crucial principle of the enabling approach is establishing partnerships between the various
stakeholders in the shelter sector. Governments, as facilitators and partners, should form and strengthen
effective partnerships with all actors and stakeholder groups in the shelter process. These include local
authorities, both the formal and informal private sector, (3.f) NGOs, CBOs, poor people themselves, and
also women, youth, the elderly, persons with disabilities, and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups.
All of these have different, distinct and valuable roles to play, as well as comparative advantages, which
should be put to work in a complementary and mutually supportive manner. This can be achieved through
establishment of legislative, institutional, and financial frameworks for partnerships and collaboration.
These can optimize the strengths and capabilities of each stakeholder, thereby maximizing their potential
contribution to the shelter delivery process, and reducing costs for particular groups or to the city as a
whole. (3.52) Partnerships can facilitate the supply of inputs to the shelter process — land, finance, material
and skills — as well as outputs — housing, services, jobs and incomes. Therefore, inherent efficiency and
sensitivity to market needs can go hand in hand with both the social responsibilities of the state and the
local knowledge and resourcefulness of communities, resulting in ‘win-win’ situations. (3.53) Therefore,
partnerships are fundamental to the enabling approach and the achievement of adequate shelter for all:
“Partnerships can integrate and mutually support objectives of broad-based participation though,
inter alia, forming alliances, pooling resources, sharing knowledge, contributing skills and
capitalizing on the comparative advantages of collective actions.” (3.54)
Page 193

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
C. Promoting public participation in decision-making in the shelter sector
The global plan of action of the Habitat Agenda is based on enablement, transparency and participation.
(3.55)
It calls on governments to support the efforts of people, individually or collectively, to produce shelter
by facilitating:
“regular dialogue and gender-sensitive participation of the various actors involved in housing
production at all levels and stages of decision-making.” (3.56)
The term ‘participation’ has various semantic and practical meanings, and is also interpreted
differently by different parties. It is commonly used to describe participation in anything from cost
recovery in service provision to political empowerment. Within the framework of the GSS, at least four
ways in which people are able to participate in decision-making on housing can be highlighted. (3.57) These
include:
Participation in national policy-making;
Managing the institutions that provide infrastructure and services;
Participating in all stages of project design, implementation and monitoring of shelter
programmes, e.g., in rehabilitation, resettlement, sites-and-services and upgrading schemes; and
Grassroots participation in the wider political process.
The participation and influence of the poor and their representative organizations is crucial in
developing appropriate solutions for the urgent problems of inadequate access to housing and basic
services. (3.58)
“Perhaps the single most important factor in the limited success or scope of so many housing and
urban projects supported by governments and international agencies over the last 40 years is the
lack of influence allowed groups of the urban poor in their conception, location, design, resource
mobilization, financing, implementation and management, and evaluation.” (3.59)
The capacity of urban poor groups to influence policies will naturally depend on the willingness to
listen and responsiveness of government, at all levels. Therefore this capacity will vary considerably from
one country to another. In Sri Lanka, low-income groups were allowed a greater role in improving
infrastructure and services through the Community Development Councils (CDCs) and community action
planning (CAP) of the Million Houses Programme (MHP), launched in 1984. In Bangalore, India, the
municipal authorities have generally been accountable to low-income groups, although power and
resources were concentrated in the Development Authority, which has little interest in prioritizing their
needs and little accountability to them. (3.60) In Cebu, the Philippines, the city government restricts the
influence that people’s organizations and NGOs have in determining policies and orienting resource use.
However:
“a coalition of NGOs and people’s organizations seeks to ensure the election of mayors with
Page 194

pro-poor policies and to ensure these policies are implemented.” (3.61)
The CAP methodology (see Box 8) in Sri Lanka has attracted the attention of several international
development agencies. One of the most successful methods used in the CAP process was the ‘
Community Contract’ system.
“A community contract was a process whereby, the community became the contractor to the
government and built common amenities or infrastructure for itself. The community contract
system provided employment, ensured better quality and efficient completion of work and the
profits went back to the CDC account for other improvements in the community.” (3.62)
The CAP approach represented a more in-depth and collaborative mode of participation, in which
ownership of project design and implementation was substantially devolved to CDCs and residents. (3.63)
Following a change of government in 1994, however, the CAP approach began to suffer from declining
support from public sector agencies. As a result, CDCs became inactive and were unable to attract the
support of local communities.
The crucial role the urban poor play in the improvement of their own housing conditions is now
well recognized. Policy makers increasingly agree that the experience of the poor themselves is necessary
for the design of more appropriate urban policies. (3.64) For example, in Brazil, the participatory budgeting
process is well known and the participation of women is strong — it is acknowledged as an effective
instrument to respond to women’s needs. (3.65) The question now should no longer be what poor people
“need”. Rather it should be:
“what decision-making powers, access to resources, and political influence should they have to
ensure that their needs are met, rights respected, and priorities addressed.” (3.66)
The ‘enabling concept’ ultimately, implies that:
“the people concerned will be given the opportunity to improve their housing conditions
according to the needs and priorities which they themselves will define.” (3.67)
However, this is not always easy to achieve. South Africa, for example, sought to implement a
people-centred housing policy through developer-driven strategies. However,
“contrary to its participatory rhetoric, communities and other actors have not established a
positive or synergistic relationship, but rather one best defined by a zero-sum perspective: the
private sector interests have hijacked the participatory discourse, and communities’ interests
have been marginalized.” (3.68)
In this regard, the Habitat Agenda emphasizes that:
“empowering all people, especially those belonging to vulnerable and disadvantaged groups, in
particular people living in poverty, to participate equally and effectively in all activities related to
human settlements is the basis for civic engagement and should be facilitated by national
authorities.” (3.69)
Page 195

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
D. Reviewing the legal and regulatory framework governing the shelter sector
Reviewing legal and regulatory frameworks is an important way for governments to play the facilitating
role recommended in the GSS and Habitat Agenda in order to enable the poor and other vulnerable and
disadvantaged groups to access adequate, secure and affordable housing. The overall legal and
regulatory framework for the shelter sector has a significant impact on shelter development and
improvement. Therefore, this framework must imperatively be reviewed on a regular basis if the goal of
adequate shelter for all is to be achieved. The review of legal and regulatory frameworks is also
fundamental to the achievement of MDG 7, Target 11 — that by 2020, to have achieved a significant
improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers. (3.g)
Regulatory frameworks have a significant bearing on urban development in general and, in
particular, on planning, zoning, land use and plot development, space standards and infrastructure
services. In a globalized context, regulatory frameworks stand among the limited number of instruments
enabling governments to influence urban land and housing markets.
In many cases, public authorities do not fully understand the impact of regulatory frameworks on
people’s decision to build housing and the attendant cost. The result has been an increase in the cost of
housing, lower productivity in the sector, benefits unintentedly skewed towards higher income groups,
and an adverse impact on overall economic performance. Government's role in an enabling approach is
to ensure that the right incentives and controls are in place that enable market efficiency while making it
possible for public authorities to intervene where necessary to preserve equity and coherence. Reforming
regulatory frameworks for land, housing and infrastructure markets should remove impediments and
disincentives to access not only for private sector developers, but also for the urban poor and other
vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. Such reform should also improve the ability of the poor to have
recourse to the law, particularly on issues such as land title. (3.70)
Research has conclusively shown that “the ability of homeowners to use their housing to
reduce vulnerability depends on the regulatory environment.” (3.71) However, further research on the
economic impact of regulatory frameworks is still required. Evidence-based research can significantly
influence policy making and pro-poor review of regulatory frameworks in the shelter sector.
Three major groups of legislative and regulatory measures would, if reviewed, likely have a positive
impact on the shelter sector; they have to do with price controls, property rights, and land-use and
building regulations. (3.72) These are discussed in more detail below. In addition to these three groups of
measures, governments are also called on to:
“develop … flexible instruments for the regulation of housing markets, including the rental
market, taking into account the special needs of vulnerable groups.” (3.73)
The rental market, which remains sidelined, is discussed in more detail in subsequent chapters.
Page 196

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
D. Reviewing the legal and regulatory framework governing the shelter sector
1. Price controls
Many factors make the poor and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups unable to gain access to
adequate housing. First and foremost is the ill affordability (or high housing costs relative to income) of
housing currently produced by the formal sector. Those controls with significant impact on the shelter
sector identified in the GSS are land and building price controls, rent controls, as well as controls
affecting interest rates and prices for financial services.
Land prices are a critical factor in access to housing. High land prices, resulting from market forces
and restrictive regulatory frameworks, together with the low incomes of many households, turn land into
the single biggest component of legal housing costs in many developing country cities. (3.74) The problem is
compounded by globalization, which has accelerated the commercialization of urban land markets in
developing countries. For example, in the mid-1990s, land in Mumbai, India, was among the most
expensive in the world — regardless of the fact that a large proportion of the local population live below
the official poverty line. (3.75)
In most countries, all or part of the housing stock is subject to price controls in one form or
another. However, rent control is a contentious housing policy issue in many countries, and opinion is split
as to its merits and demerits. (3.76) Arguments against rent control include:
It encourages withdrawal of capital from rental housing until the value of the dwellings equates
the returns on rents. Measures taken by landlords include removing buildings from the residential
market through changes in use or outright demolition and redevelopment, or reducing dwelling
maintenance with attendant acceleration of physical deterioration of the housing stock.
It encourages landlords to increase other incomes from the property through demanding rent in
advance (to maximise net present value), ‘key money’ as a capital payment at the start of the
tenancy, and side payments in the form of gifts or inflated service charges.
It reduces housing availability and, therefore, labour mobility because rent in advance or key
money weigh on households’ willingness and ability to relocate. (3.76)
A fundamental purpose of rent law, which often includes rent control, is to reconcile the interests of
tenants and landlords. Rent controls look to ensure that tenants are not exploited on the back of an urban
housing deficit, while safeguarding landlords against victimization for charging excessive rents. (3.77) If used
inventively, rent controls can, instead, serve the interests of both tenants and landlords. For example, Sri
Lanka has encouraged private sector participation in housing construction through a review of rent
control and tenant protection legislation. (3.78) In Mumbai, India,
“over 100,000 people have been rehoused under an initiative to allow higher residential densities
in return for better services for tenants and higher rents for landlords.” (3.79)
Moreover, rent controls can protect tenants so well that they achieve the same degree of security as
Page 197

owners enjoy. (3.80) Any debate of the subject must take into account the variation in rent control legislation
and its enforcement in various countries and contexts.
Rent control is one way of ensuring that rental housing remains affordable; an alternative route is
subsidies for tenants. (3.81) In India, various central and state government schemes have provided housing
for targeted beneficiary groups. These include government employees, industrial workers, the so-called ‘
Economically Weaker section’ and ‘Low Income Group’ households, on both ownership or rental basis.
The schemes provide two types of subsidies. Either the price paid for a house is below the going market
rate; or the cost of rental housing is significantly lower than the prevailing market rent. (3.82) Both are
supply-side subsidies that reduce the cost of housing. These are now generally regarded as less effective
than demand-side subsidies that increase a household’s ability to pay. (3.h) Page 198

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
D. Reviewing the legal and regulatory framework governing the shelter sector
2. Property rights
Property rights are a broad subject area. It includes land registration, property transfer procedures,
regularization of informal settlements, protection of owners and tenants’ rights, and more. It is also an
area where the different legal, social and cultural features of individual countries make universal, blanket
solutions unworkable. (3.83) The Habitat Agenda recommends that, in order to ensure market efficiency,
governments at the appropriate level should:
“Employ mechanisms (for example, a body of law, a cadastre, rules for property valuation and
others) for the clear definition of property rights.” (3.84)
The Habitat Agenda also calls for strengthening the capacity and mandates of metropolitan
authorities to deal effectively with, among other things, women’s land and property rights. (3.85) A number
of countries have made notable progress in this direction. The family law acts of Barbados, Belize and
Costa Rica give equal rights to women within common-law unions with regard to property rights, assets
and inheritance. (3.86) Eritrea’s Land Proclamation of 1977 gave women legal rights to own and inherit land,
and in 1999 Rwanda enacted a Law of Succession granting equal access to land and property for both
women and men. (3.87) However, land and property rights are still unavailable to most women. Review of
regulatory frameworks should be a priority in order to promote women’s equal rights to security of
tenure and their right to inherit property, including in particular land and housing. (3.88)
With respect to tenants and landlord rights, Kenya set up a Task Force in 1992 to review landlord
and tenant legislation. The report of the Task Force included a draft Bill that would substantially amend
the existing Rent Restriction Act while liberalising rent controls. However, it may be some time before the
changes are gazetted, as was the case with the revised building by-laws that are discussed in the
following section. Uganda has similarly proposed a ‘Landlord Tenant Law’ to regulate and guide
landlord-tenant relations.
Formal recognition of property rights is among the future shelter initiatives that are suggested for
countries in transition. These should be pursued together with:
“the definition of mixed ownership forms and the analysis of legal conditions of condominiums
and organizational and management frameworks.” (3.89)
In the case of developing countries,
“the experience of upgrading in low-income settlements is regarded by some as confirmation that
collective action can coexist with individualistic desires based on private property rights.” (3.90)
This experience should be used to contribute to policy and strategy initiatives pursuant to MDG 7, Target
11.
Security of tenure need not require recognition of individual tenure rights. It can be granted in
several other ways. (3.91) Indeed, the Habitat Agenda calls on governments at the appropriate levels to
“[e]xplore innovative arrangements to enhance the security of tenure, other than full legalization,
Page 199

which may be too costly and time-consuming in certain situations.” (3.92)
Therefore, research should pay greater attention:
“to alternatives to property rights for securing tenure, including research on innovative land
surveying techniques and land registration procedures.” (3.93)
In relation to this, the Global Campaign for Secure Tenure has a knowledge management component that
deals specifically with collecting, synthesizing and disseminating information and experiences on innovative
approaches to secure tenure. (3.94) Page 200

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
D. Reviewing the legal and regulatory framework governing the shelter sector
3. Land use and building regulations
Realization of housing rights is strongly linked to rights and ability to access and use land, and to the
regulations controlling building housing thereon. For example, minimum plot sizes or maximum densities
can very effectively exclude low-income people. (3.95)
In a context of decreasing availability of suitable urban land for housing development, inefficient
land use is a major impediment to the achievement of adequate shelter for all. “According to accepted
international practices, about 25 percent of the land set aside in the typical subdivision is
wasted.” (3.96) Therefore, another important role for government under the enabling approach is to
promote optimum use of available land. South Africa, through its Urban Development Strategy, (3.97) is one
of many countries taking positive measures to this end.
One way of achieving more efficient use of land is to review plot sizes, in particular in low-income
areas and relocation schemes, as has been done in Kenya (3.98) and Zimbabwe. (3.99) In addition to increasing
efficiency of land use, reducing plot sizes can significantly lower the cost of land, thereby increasing
affordability for the poor. In the case of Zimbabwe, “reduced plot sizes … reduced costs by 29 per
cent per plot.” (3.100)
In many countries, building codes, by-laws and regulations are either an inheritance from a colonial
past, or have been adopted from developed countries. Accordingly, they impose building materials that
are neither produced locally nor readily available. The Habitat Agenda calls for the review and revision
of:
“building codes and regulations based on current standards of engineering, building and planning
practices, local conditions and ease of administration, and [the adoption of] performance
standards, as appropriate.” (3.101)
In line with this recommendation, an increasing number of countries are revising their building regulations
and introducing performance-oriented standards in place of the traditional ‘prescriptive’, material-specific
approach. These new regulations allow particularly low-cost housing developers a wider choice over
which building materials they use. Examples include Kenya’s revised building by-laws, popularly known
as ‘Code ‘95’, (3.102) and Malawi’s Minimum Building Standards. (3.103) In Kenya, the review process began
with the commissioning of a major study of low-cost housing by-laws in 1979. However, it was not until
1995 that the revised by-laws were formally adopted by the Minister for Local Government. (3.104)
Botswana's Enabling Development Control Code (1995) provides for greater efficiency of land use and
available resources:
“It generally allows for increased densities, assumes mixed land-uses and encourages an informal
economy. Its rules for residential development are the same for everyone. Demands are set so that
they can be met by the majority. In this sense the disadvantaged are favoured.” (3.105)
Page 201

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
E. NGO/CBO involvement in shelter delivery
The last two decades have seen significant changes in political, economic, and institutional contexts that
have reshaped the roles of development actors worldwide. Population increases in an environment of
decreasing public resources are straining the capacities of many developing country governments and
local authorities to provide services to the citizenry. Urbanization of poverty is compounding the
problems they face in rapidly growing cities and secondary towns, in particular.
The marginalization and increasing poverty of a growing majority of people in developing countries
have motivated the rethinking of NGO roles in the development process. (3.106) NGOs provide a vital link
between civil society, government at all levels, and the private sector, which can help make development
interventions more accountable and effective. (3.107) In most countries, the NGO sector is extremely
heterogeneous, including service providers in health, education, welfare, shelter, the environment, etc. (3.108)
The emergence of NGOs as significant actors in the shelter process in the last two decades is
especially notable. Although no comprehensive figures track the number of NGOs active in shelter
delivery world-wide, they can be estimated as many thousand. An estimated 300 million people
worldwide are associated in one way or another with the over 2,700 United Nations registered NGOs in
the human settlements movement. Many of these operate as international umbrella NGOs that
co-ordinate activities at regional, national and local levels. Almost 40 per cent of these international NGO
s are members of wider global or regional networks that foster collaboration in the implementation of the
Habitat Agenda, adequate shelter, gender, governance and other urban issues. (3.109)
Rights-based approaches to housing and related services are now gaining ground in the NGO
sector. The Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE), an international NGO that campaigns for
adequate housing and prevention of forced evictions, is a leading example in this respect. CARE, Oxfam
and Save the Children are likewise committed to rights-based approaches and have included them in
their programmes.
Not all NGOs are motivated by purely altruistic reasons. “All NGOs — even those who would
seem to be advocates for the poor — have agendas of their own.” (3.110) Indeed,
“[s]ome NGOs are created opportunistically to advance the interests of narrow and privileged
constituencies, often at the expense of the less vocal and less powerful.” (3.111)
NGOs that claim to campaign on behalf of poor people, as distinct from those with genuine development
agendas, can (in some cases) end up harming the poor. For example, the International Rivers Network, a
human-rights and environmental-protection organization based in the United States of America, has
waged an international campaign against the construction of the Bujagali Dam in Uganda by the World
Bank. The grounds were that the Ugandan environmental movement was severely critical of the project.
However, an investigation revealed that the Ugandan NGO group was very small. What is more, the
villagers affected by the dam were, in fact, happy to accept compensation and resettle to another
location. (3.112),(3.i) Page 202

NGO activities and effectiveness elicit mixed views owing to under-performing projects, unfulfilled
promises, misappropriation of funds (3.113) and, perhaps most importantly, failure to reach the poorest of the
poor. Most governments are generally supportive of NGOs. However, tensions can occur between
government and NGOs in countries where the latter are perceived to be, or are, associated with
opposition politics. In Bangladesh, for example, this factor has strained government-NGO relationships.
(3.114)
A common objective of many NGOs working at the local level is community empowerment. This
is seen as an important component of community development. (3.115) Consequently, NGOs often
collaborate with CBOs. The vital links between CBOs and NGOs are frequently highlighted. NGOs
characteristically assist with the formation, development and capacity building of CBOs. In many cases
they do this by opening up channels of financing for CBO initiatives. They also compile the experiences of
CBOs and disseminate them to policy makers. (3.116)
CBOs are characterized by their concern with local issues and the development of their
constituents. They are often supported by NGOs and donor agencies, which see them as direct
representatives of community groups that provide an organizational basis for community participation and
management of common interests. CBOs and their networks are a major resource for the poor, but often
only as coping mechanisms that substitute for, rather than complement, the role and efforts of
governments. (3.117)
In the past, CBOs have tended to refrain from communicating or collaborating with central and
local government authorities, largely because the latter often perceive the organized poor as a threat. (3.118)
However, this is changing, in line with the principles of the enabling approach. The Indian Government’s
readiness to involve both CBOs and NGOs in housing and infrastructure delivery to poor communities is
reflected in the National Housing Policy, which outlines specific roles for them. (3.119) In Pakistan,
government agencies are working with CBOs and NGOs to replicate the Orangi Pilot Project (OPP) in
160 settlements in Karachi. (3.120) Enhanced CBO participation in housing schemes in various other
countries in Southeast Asia has democratized decision-making with regard to housing and contributed to
the empowerment of urban poor communities. (3.121)
In urban contexts where delivery mechanisms for infrastructure and services increasingly rely on
community participation, CBO capacity is an important determinant of service availability and,
consequently, of health and well-being. This is well demonstrated in a number of cities in India and
Pakistan. (3.122) The strength of CBOs in Belo Horizonte, Brazil has led to the enactment of a ‘Profavela
Law’ that recognizes the rights of informal settlement dwellers and sets the framework for tenure
regularization. This paved the way for the upgrading and development of favelas in the city. (3.123) In South
Africa, CBOs are an essential part of the housing provision process in connection with subsidies, (3.124)
which is widely regarded as one of the more successful examples of housing delivery to the urban poor.
CBOs can become more effective when interacting with government and international development
agencies when they regroup in federations and networks. This does more than reinforce solidarity: it also
increases their knowledge and information base. (3.125) CBO federations have undertaken city-wide
surveys, population counts, and mapping of informal settlements in cities in several countries. These
activities provide valuable information for tenure regularization, upgrading of infrastructure, and housing
improvement. (3.126)
In 1966, a number of urban poor federations and the NGOs working with them put together an
international network known as Slum/Shack Dwellers International (SDI). This has had a major catalytic
effect on improving the conditions of many of the poorest citizens living in informal settlements. SDI
activities, including through affiliates, include local and international lobbying, protecting residents against
forced eviction and displacement, and attempting to securing basic infrastructure and amenities. SDI
Page 203

maintains member federations of urban poor groups across a growing number of countries in Asia, Africa
and Latin America. Table 8 gives some details of SDI member federations and their support NGOs.
In Nairobi, Kenya, CBOs have formed a federation, Muungano wa Wanavijiji (Federation of
Slum Dwellers) to raise awareness among the urban poor about their housing and land rights, give them a
stronger voice against forced evictions and demand secure tenure for residents of informal settlements.
The federation has also launched daily savings programmes to bring its members closer together and
strengthen its leadership and save for land and housing. (3.127) The South African Homeless People’s
Federation comprises over 1,500 community-based savings groups and is one of the most significant
housing movements in Africa. The federation facilitates member group access to government housing
subsidies and housing through loans. (3.128) The Homeless People's Federation Philippines (HPFP) is a
nationwide CBO network advocating secure land tenure and housing as well as improvements in the
socio-economic status of members. By 2003, had 39,000 members nationally, split in groups that that
have been increasingly able to address their land and shelter needs through proactive, effective
engagement with government. emphasises community-managed savings schemes,
community-to-community exchanges and negotiation with government. Similar federations in other
countries, with whom has constant contact, pursue similar objectives, primarily under the auspices of SDI
. (3.129) Experience shows that individuals and the private sector, both formal and informal, are best at
producing housing. However, NGOs and CBOs play an important role as they enable the urban poor
access to housing markets. Governments are responsible for providing legislative, regulatory and fiscal
frameworks that enable the private sector and NGOs to operate under the best possible conditions; but
they need NGOs and CBOs to be involved in the development of shelter policy if it is to be relevant and
effective.
However, a complex question arises regarding the accountability of NGOs and CBOs, because
they deal with several different interest groups. These include their beneficiaries, members, staff,
supporters, trustees, funders and governments at various levels. Indeed,
“donors who work with NGOs also know that they can be as unaccountable and top down to the
low income groups as government and international agencies.” (3.130)
Such many-sided activities can result in either insufficient or excessive accountability. Many of NGO/
CBO stated objectives, in particular democratization and empowerment, are difficult to measure. This
raises additional problems of accountability. Moreover, issues relating to leadership and gender remain a
major challenge.
Page 204

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
F. Specific effects on women and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
“The right to adequate housing applies to all” — irrespective of socio-economic status, gender, age,
group or other such factors. (3.131) Enabling shelter strategies emphasize the need for concerted efforts to
address the housing conditions of people living in poverty and those who are vulnerable or
disadvantaged. (3.132)
International concern with the housing situation of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups can be
traced back to the first Habitat Conference in 1976. Recommendation A.4 of the Vancouver Action Plan
specifically called for
“[m]easures to improve the quality of life of vulnerable groups which have special needs - such as
children, the elderly, the handicapped and the disabled.”
The recommended measures included provision of adequate shelter, in addition to basic social services
and social and physical access to facilities. The IYSH underscored the need to intensify national and
international efforts to improve shelter conditions for all, in particular the poor and vulnerable and
disadvantaged. The enabling approach set out in the GSS provided the framework to:
“produce clear and visible improvements in the shelter and neighbourhoods of the poor and
disadvantaged by the year 2000.” (3.133)
As they committed to the Habitat Agenda, governments took on a responsibility:
“to implement special measures for members of disadvantaged and vulnerable groups when
appropriate.” (3.134)
Within a human rights framework
“[s]pecific groups requiring special attention … include: homeless citizens, citizens without
security of tenure, victims of evictions, vulnerable citizens such as the elderly, children and
disabled, women, and all low-income citizens.” (3.135)
Members of these groups are disproportionately affected by forced evictions, regardless of government
commitment to ensure that there is no discrimination in this respect. (3.136) This is in direct violation of poor
people’s economic, social and cultural rights. (3.137)
This section begins by outlining the differences between poverty, vulnerability and disadvantage. It
goes on to highlight the problems faced by women and members of vulnerable and disadvantaged
groups, in particular with respect to adequate shelter. Finally, the section reviews some of the enabling
measures implemented by various countries to address this situation.
Page 205

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
F. Specific effects on women and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
1. Poverty, vulnerability, disadvantage and discrimination
Poverty and vulnerability are not synonymous. Not all poor people are necessarily vulnerable; and not all
those who are vulnerable are necessarily poor — even the rich can be exposed to risk. However, the
two conditions are, loosely related and often reinforce each other. For example, inadequate incomes are
the primary cause of poverty in cities, but inadequate assets underlie the urban poor’s vulnerability to
adverse economic shocks or the economic consequences of ill-health. However, precarious employment
in the formal or informal sector, together with low incomes, make it more difficult for the urban poor to
save and acquire assets in a monetized economy. (3.138) The linkages between cities and the global
economy, whereby urban economies are affected by national and international macro policies, further
compound the vulnerability of the urban poor. Selling whatever assets they may possess in desperate
times, or removing children from school and lowering nutritional intake, can contribute to greater
vulnerability in the future. Women are generally more vulnerable than men because of the differentials
between the two in terms of access to income, resources and services, as will be seen below.
‘Vulnerability’, ‘disadvantage’ and ‘discrimination’ are also used interchangeably, even though they
are, in fact, quite different. Vulnerability and disadvantage are often the results of economic, social,
cultural, and historical factors, as well as exclusion from decision-making processes and unequal access
to opportunities and resources. People may be vulnerable and disadvantaged because of their social,
economic or educational backgrounds or circumstances, or because of disabilities. Discrimination refers
to behaviour from others that is detrimental to individuals and/or groups, typically as a result of
prejudiced or stereotypical thinking. With discrimination, people are unreasonably disadvantaged or
excluded by practices, procedures or decisions that have an unequal impact. (3.139) People may be
discriminated against for various reasons such as race, gender, religion, ethnicity, language, political,
religious or philosophical beliefs, economic condition, education, social status, physical or mental
disabilities, ancestry, marital status, and sexual orientation. The ICESCR and the Limburg Principles on
the implementation of the same, oblige States to guarantee that the rights enunciated therein are exercised
without discrimination of any kind. (3.140) Among other rights, States Parties recognize:
“the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living …, including adequate food, clothing and
housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions.” (3.141)
The operation of the land market in urban areas, which is typically dominated by powerful
interests, has significant effects on the poor and greatly adds to their vulnerability. Though it has eluded a
few cities so far, widespread ‘commercialization’ has turned land into a tradable commodity open to
speculative profit in the formal market. (3.142) Where competition is high the resulting cost increases usually
exclude the urban poor from access to suitable land. This forces them to live in housing that has been built
on land disregarded by the better-off, typically in slums and informal settlements. The poor often occupy
such land without any form of tenure rights or other protection from forced eviction. In most cases,
housing insecurity in slums is compounded by vulnerability to health risks. These unhealthy living
conditions arise from overcrowding, inadequate water supply and sanitation, deficient services, and/or
Page 206

occurrence of fires, floods, landslides and industrial pollution. The residents often have no protection
against unscrupulous landlords and corrupt public officials. They are, moreover, exposed to higher
incidences of crime and violence and arbitrary arrest than the rest of the population.
In most developing countries, women are discriminated against by unfair legislation and patriarchal
customary norms and practices, as will be explained in more detail below. Some, however, are more ‘
vulnerable’ to these circumstances than others. On the other hand, all young children are ‘vulnerable’ to
environmental hazards, even those who are not ‘disadvantaged’ by class or race. (3.143)
“Vulnerability and disadvantage are often caused by marginalization in and exclusion from the
socio-economic mainstream and decision-making processes and the lack of access on an equal
basis to resources and opportunities. If vulnerability and disadvantage are to be reduced, there is
a need to improve and ensure access by those belonging to vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
to shelter, finance, infrastructure, basic social services, safety nets and decision-making processes
within national and international enabling environments.” (3.144)
As part of a broader set of measures, “housing policy can play a very useful role in combating
discrimination.” (3.145) Addressing vulnerability, disadvantage and discrimination is not simply a matter of
human rights, even though this by itself is good enough justification; it is also an issue of efficiency and
effectiveness, as tackling vulnerability will enable crucial actors to play a part in shelter development and
improvement. (3.146) Page 207

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
F. Specific effects on women and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
2. Women
About one quarter of all households worldwide are headed by women, (3.147) and the number is growing as
the effects of urbanization and globalization transform traditional family and community structures. The
situation is similar in cities and towns in many regions, where the percentage of women-headed
households is increasing as urbanization intensifies. In parts of Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean,
more women than men are found migrating from rural to urban areas, (3.148) thereby increasing the
proportion of women-headed households.
“Women's reliance on land, housing and property for economic security and survival is only
deepening as the number of de facto and de jure [women-headed] households expands.” (3.149)
One of the most significant consequences of urbanization and globalization has been a
compounded feminization of poverty. (3.150)
“In the past decade the number of women living in poverty has increased disproportionally to the
number of men, particularly in developing countries.” (3.151)
The scale of poverty among women is subject to controversy (3.j) and figures across regions show
significant differences. In Malawi, for instance, 75 per cent of the poor were said to be women in 2003.
In Zimbabwe, 72 per cent of women-headed households are living in poverty compared with 58 per cent
of those headed by men. In South Africa, 68 per cent of women-headed households are living in poverty
compared to 31 per cent for men-headed. (3.152) In urban areas of Sub-Saharan Africa, the incidence of
poverty among woman-headed households is considerably higher than among other households, with
nearly 50 per cent of all women-headed households living in poverty. However, the figures are
considerably lower in North Africa and the Middle East, reflecting different social structures. (3.153)
Women provide the main source of income in more than 20 per cent of households in
Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and most of Asia. They are also contributing a higher percentage of
income than before in dual-parent households. (3.154) However, United Nations statistics show that more
women than men work in the informal sector. (3.155) “The rise of female participation in low return,
urban, informal sector activities is also considered evidence of the [feminization] of poverty.” (3.156)
Moreover, informal work, such as street vending, offers few protections. In general, urban women who
work may be more vulnerable to harassment and violence at the workplace than rural women. (3.157) Thus,
“[w]hile cities can offer the prospect of socio-economic freedom to women, the reality is that
women are still more likely to be the poorest among the urban poor and, therefore, more
vulnerable to adverse socio-economic conditions. (3.158)
As stated earlier, the vast majority of urban poor households live in slums. There is thus a high
incidence of women-headed households in slums. Women in slums are in a considerably worse situation
than their counterparts in conventional housing. They have to cope with an almost complete lack of basic
services, such as water and sanitation. This places an enormous burden on women, who are typically
expected to provide these services to their families. They also frequently face harassment from different
Page 208

quarters in their daily livelihood activities. Many urban poor women must raise their children in these
difficult circumstances. Violent forced evictions, a common occurrence in many slums, have a particularly
acute impact on women. The gender disparities that are a feature of both society and the family are often
compounded by forced evictions, involuntary displacement and the resultant social and economic
distress. (3.159) Rape and other forms of brutal intimidation are not uncommon during evictions. Women
rendered homeless by an eviction are additionally exposed to further violence as they lack the security
provided by a home and community and are, consequently, more vulnerable to harassment. Women’s
vulnerability perpetuates their vulnerable and disadvantaged position in society.
Nevertheless, informal settlements are a refuge for many women fleeing difficult situations created
by domestic violence, divorce or marital disputes. (3.160) Yet, as new migrants find out, community support
systems — such as kinship networks and religious groups — may be weak in informal settlements. (3.161) In
such conditions, women-headed households are less likely to escape the vicious cycle of poverty than
those headed by males. Indeed, “slum life for women … is often ’nasty, brutish and short’". (3.162)
Although women do not always rank in the lowest income groups, they suffer widespread
discrimination in access to land, housing, basic services and credit. In many countries, women are not
permitted to own land — either because legislation discriminates against them, or because of social,
cultural and religious traditions. For example, in South Africa,
“the provision of housing under the apartheid regime … doubly discriminated against women,
with regard to allocation, systems of tenure and all the institutions controlling housing.” (3.163)
Tanzania’s land policy acknowledges that under “customary law women generally have inferior land
rights relative to men and their access to land is indirect and insecure”. (3.164) In Swaziland, where
traditions are very powerful, women can only access and own land through a man. (3.165) The Zimbabwean
National Policy Framework Paper notes that
“[d]iscriminatory ownership and inheritance rules biased against daughters and wives and
widows were (and continue to be) the obvious manifestation of … inequities”.
On the other hand, in Botswana,
“the national policy dictates that every household is entitled to at least two plots, one for
residence and the other for sustenance, including women-headed households.” (3.166)
However, even in those countries where legislation and customs do permit ownership of land and
property by women, they are often restrained from doing so for a variety of economic reasons. (3.167) Now,
discrimination in access to land on the basis of gender is in violation of international human rights law “if
it is unable to pass the international standards of ‘objective and reasonable justification.’” (3.168)
Indeed, gender discrimination is clearly prohibited under the ‘Maastricht Guidelines on Violations of
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights’. (3.169)
The need of women to have rights to own, control and manage land and property has become
more critical owing to urban and global trends. These are reducing the emphasis on government
intervention and promoting individual enterprise, personal responsibility and free competition. (3.170) In this
regard, some countries have revised their policies and legislation to enable women to gain access to land
as advocated by the enabling approach. For example, South Africa’s land policy now advocates the
removal of all forms of discrimination against women’s access to land. (3.171) In Rwanda, the new
Constitution passed in 2003 states that women and men should be treated equally. The country has also
passed an ‘Inheritance and Succession Law’ to safeguard the inheritance rights of women married under
statutory law. (3.172)
Under Islamic law, as practiced in some countries for the whole population or, in others, e.g.,
Ghana, only for Muslims, daughters inherit only half as much of a deceased person’s property as sons. (3.k)
“Antidiscriminatory legal, institutional and policy reforms for increasing gender equality have
Page 209

oth instrumental value for development and poverty reduction and intrinsic value for fostering
human rights and well-being.” (3.173)
The right to adequate housing is widely recognized at the international level. The need for a specific
focus on women's rights, in particular with respect to access to land and housing, has received increased
emphasis in recent years. Women's organizations further drew worldwide attention to the issue at the
Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995. The conference emphasized the need for
strategic action in 12 critical areas of concern, including the “lack of respect for and inadequate
promotion and protection of the human rights of women.” (3.174) The Beijing Platform for Action called
on governments and other actors to promote the mainstreaming of a gender perspective in all policies and
programmes.
The Global Campaign for Secure Tenure calls for a specific focus on women; it unequivocally
promotes the centrality of women in the provision of shelter, and in development in general. (3.175) The
Campaign emphasizes that:
“[w]omen’s equal rights to security of tenure (whether through purchase, co-ownership, lease,
rent, occupancy right or inheritance) regarding land, housing and property are now firmly
anchored in human rights law and recognized in various human rights instruments.” (3.176)
Many women are, however, ignorant of their rights, due to a general lack of awareness of existing laws
and regulations. In many cases this is related to continued high illiteracy rates among women and unequal
access to educational opportunities. (3.177)
Several African countries have started to address (at the national level) gender discrepancies with
regards to land rights. The Tanzanian Government, for example, set out a new national policy in 1995
that granted women the right to acquire land. The recent ‘Crown Lands Disposal Act’ in Swaziland has
enabled land titles to be conferred on women, overturning earlier, restrictive, gendered property laws. (3.178)
Ethiopia has recently revised a number of its laws in line with international human rights agreements that
compel it to safeguard the rights of women, including the ICESCR. (3.179)
The enabling approach calls for policy shifts away from governments providing housing to assisted
self-help solutions such as sites-and-services and upgrading schemes. These involve beneficiary
participation in alternative approaches to housing development and improvement, in order to reach out to
a larger number of urban poor households. However, women may be excluded from these initiatives
because of eligibility criteria, planning, design and implementation approaches; or because of criteria for
housing finance. The exclusion of women reduces the range of resources, skills and creativity that are
invested. It also makes ‘solutions’ less relevant and sustainable because they have been designed
according to the interests and priorities of men only./p>
Housing is not, of course, exclusively a ‘women’s issue’. However,
“housing policies, programmes and budgets … must address the realities of women’s lives. The
full and equal enjoyment by women of their housing rights requires that account be taken of
women’s historical, social and economic realities.” (3.180)
Because women-headed households are relatively over-represented in informal settlements, housing
policy must be sensitive to these differences and be clear about both the nature of the problem and the
form of possible solutions. While housing policy documents do make reference to the fundamental
importance of gender equity, reviews of the implementation of these policies conclude that
“performance in relation to gender has been a severe disappointment.” (3.181) Page 210

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
III. The effects of enabling shelter strategies
F. Specific effects on women and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
3. Vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
As stated above, women are not the only ones who suffer from vulnerability, discrimination and
disadvantage. Other members of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups include people with disabilities,
the elderly and children.
“Many categories of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups are actively discriminated against in
law. Others suffer from various forms of discrimination based on the NIMBY
(not-in-my-backyard) principle. Although most urban residents may endorse active support for
various categories of such groups they would very much like to see that they are supported ‘
elsewhere’.” (3.182)
According to the United Nations, (3.183) approximately one in 20 people worldwide, (3.l) or some 300
million in total, suffer from some form of disability. More than three out of four people with disabilities are
thought to live in a developing country, and 82 per cent of them are living in poverty. (3.184) Moreover, this
number is expected to rise, owing to improved survival rates after congenital disabilities, disease or
accidents. The numbers of elderly people (3.m) living longer is also increasing. The elderly population is
projected to rise to 10 per cent of the world population in 2025. This represents over 850 million people,
of whom 70 per cent will live in developing countries. (3.185) Elderly and disabled people are among the
vulnerable and disadvantaged groups that experience the greatest difficulties in gaining access to adequate
shelter. Many of them live in poverty, in slums and informal settlements, and have a low quality of life.
The neighbourhoods where they live are not designed or managed to meet the special needs of these
groups. The problems of elderly and disabled people are compounded because they suffer multiple
deprivations as well as economic and social exclusion.
People living with disabilities are especially vulnerable to exclusion and discrimination. The
relationship between poverty and disability is two-way — disability adds to the risk of poverty, and
conditions of poverty add to the risk of disability. Poor households do not have adequate food, and lack
access to basic sanitation and to preventive health care. They also live in lower quality housing and are
often at more risk in their occupations. The priorities for most poor disabled people — food and clean
water, shelter, healthcare, family life, training and employment, schooling for their children and the means
to earn their livelihoods — are no different from their non-disabled counterparts. However, the barriers
denying disabled people equal access must be broken down, and capital spending on support and
services must enable them to live fulfilled lives. (3.186) People living in poverty with disabilities are often
doubly deprived: they miss out on poverty-alleviation initiatives because they are disabled, and they miss
out on disability assistance because they are poor.
Under the ICESCR, governments and public agencies have an obligation to secure housing rights
for the most vulnerable population in a number of issues, including:
“public expenditure and resource allocation;
Page 211

governmental regulation of the economy, including land and housing markets;
housing subsidies;
monitoring rent levels and other housing costs;
the provision of public housing, basic services and related infrastructure; and
taxation and subsequent redistributive measures.” (3.187)
The South Africa White Paper on Housing of 1994 recognizes disabled people as part of a
broader target group with special housing needs, and makes provision for meeting them:
"State housing policies and subsidy programmes must reflect a constant awareness of and
provision for the special needs of youth, disabled people and the elderly. To this end, special
attention will be paid to the possible modification of the subsidy programme to give effect to this
approach". (3.188)
South Africa’s The Housing Act (No. 107 of 1997) introduced the current housing subsidy
delivery strategy. It is a landmark piece of legislation that sets out the principles underpinning the
realization of housing rights. The act recognizes vulnerable groups as an important constituency. It places
a specific obligation on all sectors of government to prioritise the needs of the poor in housing
development and to promote the housing needs of marginalized women and other groups disadvantaged
by unfair discrimination. The strategy, which is aligned with the objectives of the 1996 Constitution,
promotes provision of special housing needs, including, but not limited to the needs of people with
disabilities at national, provincial and local tiers of government. (3.189) While all households with incomes of
less than R1,500 per month are entitled to a subsidy of R20,300, people with disabilities, old people, and
the very poor receive a higher subsidy of R22,800. (3.190)
The principles underlying the current South African government’s housing policy are the following:
Housing is a right;
Housing should contribute to social equity;
Housing is a critical component of development;
Community control over, and participation in, the housing delivery process is of the utmost
importance. (3.191)
The Habitat Agenda recognizes the importance of issues related to elderly people, and elaborates
on actions to be taken at both national and local levels. By endorsing, governments commit themselves to
promoting shelter and supporting basic services and facilities for education and health for the elderly and
other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. In accordance with this commitment, the Republic of the
Philippines has established a ‘Magna Carta for Senior Citizens’. This is a comprehensive, long-term
national programme that enables older persons to access social services, such as housing, health and
formal and informal education, and empowers them through continued opportunities for employment and
livelihood projects. (3.192) Botswana's Enabling Development Control Code (1995) explicitly addresses the
needs of people with disabilities and the elderly. (3.193) In Morocco, the question of integration of people
with disabilities has become a priority. (3.194)
The Habitat Agenda identifies refugees as one of the vulnerable and disadvantaged groups that
require particular attention. In Africa, in countries in civil war and in countries that host refugees, these are
considered as being vulnerable and disadvantaged members of the population. The Government of the
Page 212

Democratic Republic of Congo has set up a General Commission on the reinsertion of refugees that
mobilizes external and national aid for refugees and internally displaced persons. (3.195)
The ability of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups to effectively to participate in local
decision-making is of utmost importance. Such ability will largely determine whether or not the rights of
these groups are granted, and their interests and special needs addressed through public policies. It is
important, therefore, to ensure that they have a voice, which a number of NGOs are doing.
Page 213

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
There are certain roles in the shelter development process which governments, at various levels, are
better placed to carry out than the private, NGO, community and household sectors. Similarly, there are
roles that these sectors can play in housing development and improvement more efficiently than
government. Therefore, an enabling approach implies a readjustment of roles among the actors involved.
In the past, governments claimed to be direct providers of housing. However, the reality was that most
actually supplied very few of the dwellings that were built. Thus in most cases, the political claims were
not matched by what was actually happening on the ground. The enabling approach recognizes that the
role of government should not be to produce housing directly. Rather, it should be to facilitate an overall
enabling environment that provides what the other actors need if they are to work most effectively in
housing supply. Nevertheless, governments are still required to intervene directly to provide shelter to the
poorest and most vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. They may do this, for example, by direct supply
of subsidized dwellings for people with disabilities. Or they can promote indigenous systems which supply
welfare housing, e.g. the family houses in West African cities. (4.1) Indeed, the Grootboom judgment in the
South African Constitutional Court distinguishes between having a housing policy which should, in time,
allow everyone to be adequately housed and the need for direct action by governments and local
authorities to provide crisis shelter for those in urgent need. (4.2)
This Chapter examines how the roles of the various actors in the shelter process have changed
since the introduction of the enabling approach. It also reviews how effective those actors have been.
Page 214

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
A. Mobilizing human resources in the shelter sector
To achieve the objective of ‘adequate shelter for all’, the GSS deems it necessary “to adopt an ‘
enabling approach’ whereby the full potential and resources of all the actors in the shelter
production and improvement process are mobilized.” (4.3)
It is widely acknowledged that the greatest asset of any country is its human resources. This is
reflected in urban areas in many developing countries, where the greater part of the housing stock has
been built through the efforts of the people themselves. Indeed, it is this very manifestation of the potential
of the human resources that led to the formulation of enabling shelter strategies.
Mobilisation of human resources has a variety of facets. This section reviews four of these.
Page 215

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
A. Mobilizing human resources in the shelter sector
1. Public awareness of shelter issues
Enabling shelter strategies aim to provide adequate shelter for all through harnessing and optimizing the
capabilities and resources of all the actors in the shelter process. The success of the enabling approach is
thus dependent on increasing public awareness of shelter issues and mobilizing widespread active support
and participation. This is unlikely to be forthcoming if different actors in the shelter process do not
understand the issues it is intended to address and the manner in which it is supposed to do so.
Therefore, public awareness is critical to effective implementation of enabling shelter strategies.
The role of awareness raising, public information campaigns and the media is very important in
facilitating information exchange and pressurizing the responsible authorities for action. Observance of
World Habitat Day at national level provides a good opportunity to highlight the issue in a most public
way. (4.a) Many countries use the occasion to raise public awareness and provide information on Habitat
Agenda issues.
The Global Campaign for Secure Tenure is a strategic initiative of UN-HABITAT to raise
awareness about the magnitude of urban poverty and the attendant problems of access to adequate
shelter. (4.b) The Global Campaign was first launched at regional (Latin America and Caribbean, Europe
and Africa) and local (Durban, South Africa; and Mumbai, India) levels.
“It is generally agreed that these launches have not only contributed to giving high visibility to
the Global Campaign — especially when the urban poor where massively involved — but they
also offered unprecedented opportunities to raise awareness among all stakeholders on critical
urban issues, especially those faced by the slum dwellers.” (4.4)
Page 216

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
A. Mobilizing human resources in the shelter sector
2. Availability of information on capacities of government agencies, the private sector and NGOs
If the different actors in the shelter process are to optimize their contribution as required by the enabling
approach, they must have ready access to requisite information. In particular, they need to know which
actor does what, how and where to secure the inputs they need, and from whom to obtain relevant
information. This will enable them to make better-informed choices and decisions about housing
production and improvement. However, because of the nature of the housing sector, particularly in
developing countries, information is seldom accurate or universally accessible. This applies to information
of all sorts, be it on land or house prices, informal sector construction, rental vacancies, or the functions
of the numerous official and quasi-official agencies involved in the shelter process. Lack of adequate data
is an impediment to any effective implementation of the enabling approach. (4.5)
NGOs operating in urban areas can play an important role in providing information, networking
resources and knowledge-sharing to increase the scale and transfer of development initiatives and to
contribute to better informed and more effective decision-making in housing production and
improvement. The Habitat International Coalition (HIC), and similar international network organizations,
provide a focal point for shelter-related NGOs. They are well-placed to strengthen the identification,
documentation and dissemination of lessons learned from experience and new approaches. (4.6) The
African NGO Habitat Caucus (Africaucus) — a collective of African NGOs, CBOs and researchers
working on urban and housing issues formed in 1995 — is playing such a role at the international and
African regional level. Shelter Forum and Civic Forum on Housing are playing similar roles at the regional
and national level in Kenya and Zimbabwe respectively. The former is a membership NGO that brings
together like-minded NGOs, CBOs, faith-based organizations, professionals and other stakeholders. The
Civic Forum on Housing includes representatives of community, finance, construction and technical
organizations and from local authorities.
Some governments have also taken steps to improve information-sharing in their respective
countries. For example, Thailand established the Urban Community Development Office (UCDO) in
1992 to address urban poverty through innovative approaches and processes (see Box 12). Following
the Asian economic crisis of 1997, UCDO developed information-sharing and networking processes to
enable communities effectively to address development issues such as infrastructure, housing, health,
education and welfare. (4.7) In Tanzania, the Government launched an information and data-collection
initiative in the human settlements sector to review and improve its policies related to provision of
serviced urban land and housing production. (4.8)
UN-HABITAT has two key programmes that aim to improve the availability of relevant
knowledge and information to Habitat Agenda partners. These are the Global Urban Observatory
(GUO) and the Best Practices and Local Leadership Programme (BLP). Both have crucial roles to play
in helping countries towards the goal of adequate shelter for all, and also MDG 7, Target 11 (see Box 9
Page 217

for details).
South-South co-operation and networking, and peer-to-peer learning, both involving cities and
NGOs, are other effective means of sharing information and making it more widely available. (4.c)
Networking and appropriate use of information and communication technologies can be an
effective means of making information readily and widely available on the capacities of government
agencies, the private sector and NGOs. The Building Advisory Services and Information Network
(basin), set up in 1988, provides valuable information on the activities and capacities of the various
stakeholders involved in shelter development and improvement. It does so through its website (4.9) and a
journal, basin News. Other networks that are active regionally and internationally in the shelter field
include Asian Coalition for Housing Rights, Asian Women and Shelter Network, Duryog Nivaran, HIC,
Habitat International Coalition Women and Shelter Network (HIC-WAS) and La Red.
Access to information is a recognised human right. (4.d) For this reason alone, the urban poor should
have access to information on the capacities of government agencies, the private sector and NGOs in the
shelter area. This is all the more important as fulfilment of this right can help the urban poor achieve their
right to adequate housing. However, a study found that:
“Poor men and women in urban areas are deprived by a lack of information and knowledge. Not
knowing about their rights, services they could access, or plans for their areas, puts them at a
disadvantage and increases their vulnerability. Not being able to access information also
disempowers and demotivates them.” (4.10)
The urban poor, especially those living in slums and informal settlements, generally rely on a range
of sources, both formal and informal, for their information. These sources include social networks, the
most important of all; intermediaries (key informants and ‘infomediaries’); the mass media (print and
electronic), and more recently, modern information and communication technologies. (4.11) Support should
be given to the urban poor to enable them to improve the methods they use to share knowledge and
information. Indeed, under the Habitat Agenda, Governments have committed to:
“[p]romoting equal access to reliable information, at the national, subnational and local levels,
utilizing, where appropriate, modern communications technology and networks.” (4.12)
Page 218

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
A. Mobilizing human resources in the shelter sector
3. Training in alternative shelter provision options
The mobilization of human resources, as called for in the GSS and Habitat Agenda, has several facets. It
is obvious, first of all, that sufficient numbers of trained and skilled people must be available if all the tasks
of a shelter-management programme are to be carried out. The need for adequate figures applies to the
top-level professional and administrative experts who will design and guide the programme. It also
applies to the entrepreneurs, artisans, process workers and others who will produce, maintain or operate
the physical output of housing and infrastructure, as well as the communities who will participate in
decision-making and implementation processes. Training programmes will, as a rule, gain in efficiency
where they become continuous and where appropriate institutions are made responsible for their
implementation. This implies a very broad-based training effort carried out through a variety of institutions
and using many different methods, including the largest possible support of local training institutions. A
review of the scale of the problem and the resource base will also help to identify the priorities and
appropriate approaches for training programmes. (4.13)
Earlier sections of this report have underscored the crucial importance of training and capacity
building. Although low-income, small-scale builders and providers of housing inputs are well-capable of
producing and improving housing without formal training, skills upgrading is required to enhance their
productivity. The importance of improved craftsmanship — carpentry, bricklaying and other basic
construction skills — available on a larger scale within informal settlements cannot be overstated.
However, other skills are also required, such as the use of innovative building materials and technologies,
organization and motivation, participatory research and planning, communications, etc. Indeed,
"[t]raining is an essential component in strengthening the capacity of different actors in the
shelter process to play their roles effectively.” (4.14)
The Intermediate Technology Development Group (ITDG) is one of many NGOs that have
recognized the need to raise awareness among and provide relevant training to the major stakeholders in
the housing process with regard to alternative shelter provision options. The group has been able to do
this effectively through action research projects in a number of countries. (4.15) In Latin America, EcoSouth
provides valuable training. (4.16) CRATerre-EAG, the Centre for the Research of Earth Architecture in
Grenoble, France, offers a Masters Degree in Earth Architecture.
“Environmentally-sound construction design and techniques, and energy-efficient and
low-polluting technologies should be made more widely-available. And governments, research
institutions and NGOs can play a critical role in disseminating information about these
innovations and providing training and other forms of support to individuals and community
groups in how to use them.” (4.17)
Slum upgrading is now widely recognized as a viable alternative shelter development option which
many cities in developing countries are pursuing. However, capacity building, training, and knowledge
Page 219

sharing have generally received much less attention than they should have in upgrading projects. CARE
International is addressing this deficiency in Zambia through Urban INSAKA (Initiative for Sharing
Knowledge in Action). The scheme acts as a network and provides orientation and training, research,
documentation and technical assistance to new and existing urban programmes. The eight recent
upgrading projects supported by the Japan International Co-operation Agency in Zambia have included a
training component to enable local communities to fulfil their responsibility for maintenance of
infrastructure and enhance sustainability. (4.18) Page 220

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
A. Mobilizing human resources in the shelter sector
4. Training programmes for government agencies and the private sector
The Habitat Agenda calls on Governments to:
“Promote comprehensive training, education and human resources development policies and
programmes that are gender-sensitive and involve local authorities and their
associations/networks…” (4.19)
As stated in the GSS, the in-service training needs of government agency staff and private sector
professionals and practitioners can be met through short courses, workshops and temporary secondment
to performing institutions and agencies. All the actors in the shelter programme have an obligation to
recognize the consequences of their actions — and they should also learn the lessons of experience.
Training and capacity-building in monitoring, data-collection and analysis must therefore include a broad
range of target groups. (4.17) The Society for Development Studies, a not-for-profit research, training and
consultancy institution established in 1984 in New Delhi, India, offers training in major aspects of data
generation, development of indicators, data validation and application of the outputs in national and city
development strategies. (4.20)
UN-HABITAT’s training and capacity-building activities assist local authorities and civil society
organizations to build core competencies in areas such as leadership, financial management, local
economic development, participatory planning and conflict management. These topics are all closely
linked with shelter development. A series of generic training tools have been developed through extensive
engagement of beneficiaries, users and partners over a string of strategy workshops, expert group
meetings and field testing. The manuals are primarily designed for training purposes, but can be used
independently as handbooks and reference material by managers, professionals, and community leaders.
(4.21)
The United Nations Centre for Regional Development (UNCRD) conducts research and training in
local and regional development targeting developing and transition economies. UNCRD’s research and
capacity-building activities inform the design of training strategies for decentralized governance and
training materials. UNCRD uses these materials in its international and country-specific courses. UNDP’s
‘Capacity 21’ and ‘Public Private Partnership for the Urban Environment’ programmes are introducing
capacity-building components on local urban development in their programmes. (4.22) UNESCO’s training
project ‘Growing up in cities’ is an awareness and training programme for municipal elected personnel
and municipal functionaries to take into account children's aspirations regarding urban planning.
“It also enables municipal governments and child advocates to implement the participation
principles of the Habitat Agenda, Agenda 21, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.” (4.23)
Associations of local authorities such as the International Union of Local Authorities (IULA) and
the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) play an important role in raising
awareness, sharing experience and building capacity. The Municipal Development Programme was
Page 221

launched in 1991 to address the problem of pervasive weakness of local governments and the lack of
capacity of municipal institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa. The Programme offers municipalities support in
four key interrelated areas: policy studies and advocacy; training; support to municipalities; and
strengthening associations of local authorities. (4.24)
City-to-city co-operation can be an effective way of exchanging skills and lessons learned from
experience, and increasing understanding of important urban issues. In Tanzania, the Government
launched a programme to extend the successful experience of the Sustainable Dar es Salaam Project
(SDP) — implemented under the auspices of UN-HABITAT’s Sustainable Cities Programme (SCP) —
to nine other cities in the country. National replication was seen as a city-to-city exercise, using staff with
SDP experience to support similar SCP activities in the other cities. The replication programme also
attracted additional international support. The ability of the replication cities to learn from the SDP
experience was considered a distinct advantage. Direct links between the nine cities created a
peer-to-peer city-to-city network for information exchange and comparison of experience. (4.25)
At the local authority and central government level, priority should go to building and enhancing
capacities in innovative approaches to monitoring which involve participatory and qualitative techniques,
and other ways of accommodating the diversity and dynamism that characterize housing processes.
Technical training of this nature must be underpinned by new attitudes on the part of planners and
decision-makers, so that they are able to deal creatively with uncertainty and complexity without being
paralysed into indecision. Short of such attitudes, innovative approaches are unlikely to find a receptive
audience among policy-makers. (4.17) Page 222

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
A. Mobilizing human resources in the shelter sector
5. The involvement of women and their organizations
The Vancouver Declaration states that:
“All countries, particularly developing countries, must create conditions which make possible the
full integration of women and youth in political, economic and social activities, particularly in the
planning and implementation of human settlement proposals and in all the associated activities,
on the basis of equal rights, in order to achieve an efficient and full utilization of available human
resources…” (4.26)
In the past, housing policy was largely ‘gender-blind’ and women were excluded from
decision-making. Policy-makers have consistently failed to recognize the enormous and distinctive
contribution of women to shelter production and improvement. In consequence, policies have often been
inappropriate, ineffective, and even detrimental to the interests of women. (4.17)
The enabling approach recognizes the importance of women in the shelter process — both in their
particular needs and in their potential participation in production and improvement. However, the triple
role of women — reproductive, productive and community managing/political — and the attendant
workload usually combine to prevent women from fulfilling their potential in the shelter process.
“Women construction workers face instability and insecurity of work, poor remuneration, and
discrimination in the payment of wages. Tools, equipment and technologies used by skilled and
unskilled workers are not designed for women’ physiology, and women are also often the last in
line when skills like masonry and carpentry are imparted. Conditions on construction sites also do
not take into account women’s need for privacy and security.” (4.27)
The problem is compounded by gender discrimination, lack of education and training and, in many
cases, severe poverty.
Women … generally have fewer opportunities to share in and benefit from development and
management. More effective mobilization of human resources and institutional capacities is
needed to achieve a more logical and equitable sharing of burdens, benefits, and responsibilities
between women and men. (4.28)
Removing these constraints is important not only because equitable distribution of development
benefits is a fundamental principle consistent with human rights, but also because increasing numbers of
households, especially poor households, are women-headed. Indeed, women have proved to be vital in
participatory planning processes, especially in conflict resolution, and in generating the savings necessary
to undertake regularization in informal settlements. (4.29) Their role in shelter production and improvement is
indisputable.
Women are participating ever-more actively and effectively in CBOs and NGOs involved in shelter
Page 223

development and improvement. In India, the women’s street dwellers organization, Mahila Milan, has
formed savings groups, negotiated with the state for their rights and their basic needs, and for shelter both
in terms of design and location. The Society for the Promotion of Area Resource Centres (SPARC)
supports the women at every stage of the housing process with information, advice, training and technical
assistance. The Punervaas Habitat and Livelihood Movement in Delhi, India was founded to bring
together slum dwellers, NGOs, financial institutions and other development agencies to help the urban
poor improve their living conditions. It sees its role as facilitating access to credit through co-operatives
(which it also supports) to enable members to increase their incomes and build their own shelter. The
co-operative targets women in particular as they are generally regarded to be better at repaying loans
and not easily tempted to sell off their dwellings. (4.30)
The Zimbabwe Women in Construction Association (ZWICA) was formed in February 2004 to
promote greater recognition of the role of women in the construction industry in that country. ZWICA
was formed under the auspices of the Women in Construction project implemented by ITDG Southern
Africa from 2002 to 2004. (4.31) In Uganda, the Masese Women’s Self Help Project adopted an
incremental upgrading approach that enabled women to gain access to property and also take
responsibilities in construction and development. Moreover, women have also had opportunities to
demonstrate their competence in decision-making and management. (4.32)
At the international level, the Women and Shelter Group was created within HIC in 1987. Its
purpose is to recognize the key role of women in HIC’s work for the right to land and housing for those
living in poverty. HIC-WAS works at local, national, regional and international levels, to create public
awareness about the priorities of women and shelter. (4.33) Another such international organization is the
Huairou Commission, which was established in 1995 during the preparations for the Habitat II
Conference. It has since influenced the policy formulation process globally through its mobilization of
women at the grassroots level, in advocacy activities and the strengthening of the capacity of women and
their organizations. (4.34)
Nevertheless, it is important to emphasize that ensuring ‘gender equality’ does not mean focusing
on women alone. Enabling strategies in the shelter sector should include both women and men in all
stages of the shelter development and improvement process. Box 10 provides a good example from
Lima, Peru. Here, an NGO launched a project that focused on gender equality and sought to ensure
participation of both women and men in the planning, training, local production of building materials and
housing construction.
Page 224

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
B. Housing finance
Finance is arguably the most important factor in shelter development and improvement. The reason is that
adequate finance procures the other major housing inputs — land and building materials. However, the
absolute amount of finance available for housing development and improvement in developing countries is
limited:
“[F]ormal housing finance constitutes a very small proportion of current demand in developing
countries, generally accounting for between 5 per cent and 20 per cent of finance for housing …,
and usually covering the top 20 per cent of the income spectrum at the most, and may usually
account for no more than 10 per cent of the annual national housing output on the average.” (4.35)
Most conventional housing institutions serve only middle and upper income groups in the formal
market. They are often averse to lending to the poor, and generally lack sufficient client orientation and
outreach into poorer areas. This is largely because of the perceived high credit risk and transaction costs
associated with screening, monitoring and collecting from the poor. The inability of the poor to provide
the required collateral is another factor. (4.36) Therefore, most conventional housing institutions do not
respond to the needs of a majority of the poorer urban population living and working in the informal
sector. The urban poor are, consequently, compelled to resort to informal housing finance options, which
commonly charge exorbitant interest rates and are short-term only. As a result, access to housing finance
is a major constraint on the achievement of the goals of adequate shelter for all and sustainable human
settlements. Hence the focus of UN-HABITAT’s Global Report on Human Settlements 2005 —
financing shelter and urban development. (4.37)
Housing finance can be extended to more people through a variety of channels. They include
government-led, orthodox regulatory and monetary easing measures (e.g., reducing interest rates, easing
collateral requirements and flexible repayment schedules), and the creation of innovative housing finance
mechanisms. A number of alternative, non-conventional approaches and systems have been tried and/or
are in operation, with varying degrees of success, in several countries. They include savings and credit
systems; housing and multi-purpose community development co-operatives of various scales and scope;
community mortgage programmes; and micro-financing, including community-based microfinance
systems. (4.38) Another alternative is the anticrético system in Bolivia (see Box 27). Government policy
towards savings, interest rates and subsidies, and the financial sector in general, is also a strong
determinant of the availability and direction of housing finance. The following sections examines some of
the measures and programmes that have been put into practice to give the poor and other vulnerable and
disadvantaged groups better access to housing finance.
Page 225

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
B. Housing finance
1. Government and formal sector initiatives to increase housing finance
a. Government banks and state-owned housing finance institutions
Government banks and state-owned housing finance institutions in developing countries are generally
unable to meet all the demand for housing finance. Their operations are also typically inefficient. For
example, in the 1976–1990 period, the Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria extended only 9,000 loans.
Likewise, the National Home Mortgage Finance Corporation in the Philippines became insolvent in 1996
owing to non-performing loans, which accounted for 70 per cent of the total. (4.39)
However, the Government Housing Bank of Thailand (GHB) provides a good example of a
government-managed institution successfully providing affordable housing finance for lower income
groups. Box 11 gives more details on the GHB, which has adhered to the Habitat Agenda
recommendation that:
“In order to mobilize more domestic and international resources for housing finance and extend
credit to more households, it is necessary to integrate housing finance into the broader financial
system and to use existing instruments or develop new instruments … to address the financial
needs of people having limited or no access to credit.” (4.40)
GHB is Thailand’s leading housing-finance lender, with a market share of over 38 per cent. (4.41) It
has achieved this position by mobilizing domestic savings, and stimulating greater private sector
participation in housing finance. (4.42)
“[T]he combination of increased supply of competitive housing loans from GHB and the country’s
responsive housing supply system … contributed to making housing much more affordable to 70–
80 per cent of the Thai population.” (4.43)
Page 226

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
B. Housing finance
1. Government and formal sector initiatives to increase housing finance
b. Commercial banks and housing finance institutions
Given the limitations of government banks and state-owned finance institutions, private commercial banks
and finance institutions are the primary source of formal housing finance in most developing countries.
However, as stated above, they serve mainly the middle- and higher-income groups. Yet they have the
potential to:
“make an important contribution to financing poor households, by moving down-market from
their usual upper and middle-income customers.” (4.44)
One way governments can entice them to do this is through loan guarantee funds. For instance, in
1995, South Africa established the National Urban Reconstruction and Housing Agency (NURCHA) to
support implementation of the housing policy. NURCHA “aims to facilitate delivery of adequate,
sustainable housing by unblocking financial obstacles to the provision of subsidised housing.” (4.45)
It does so by using guarantee funds to mobilise both bridging and end-user finance for low-income
housing projects and home loans. The agency also guarantees rental projects. In this way, NURCHA
shares financial risk with commercial banks, finance institutions and developers in order to encourage
housing development. NURCHA ultimately looks to demonstrate that guaranteeing loans for investment
in housing is not risky, and stimulate finance institutions to take over its role on a commercial basis. (4.46) In
South Africa, four major commercial banks currently deliver more than 70 per cent of housing finance
and leverage the effectiveness of the guarantee scheme. (4.47) Page 227

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
B. Housing finance
1. Government and formal sector initiatives to increase housing finance
c. Lowering interest rates
If more poor people are to have access to it, “[t]he cost of housing finance should be reduced to the
lowest possible level that is consistent with sound financial and economic principles.” (4.48) Interest
rates are among the components that make up the cost of housing finance. The high interest rates charged
by housing finance institutions in developing countries make borrowing very difficult and unattractive for
any urban poor who wish to build or improve housing. They may be unable to afford the monthly
repayments, or may be put off by the total interest paid on the principal sum borrowed. Therefore,
lowering interest rates can make housing finance more accessible, affordable and attractive.
In Asia, many sources of housing credit available to the poor offer below-market interest rates to
facilitate access. One of these is UCDO, set up by the Government of Thailand in 1992. UCDO’s
purpose was to support community organizations with small grants, loans, and technical support. Box 12
provides more information on the origins of UCDO. In India, the Housing and Urban Development
Corporation (HUDCO) set up a credit line for NGOs for onward lending to low-income groups and the
economically weaker sections of society. This has enabled urban poor households with partial security of
tenure to access credit as channelled through NGOs and at reasonable interest rates. (4.49)
In Venezuela, a salary-tax funded housing programme, known as LPH, (4.e) grants below-market
loans to developers for housing projects. Eligible households also receive below-market rate loans to
purchase housing units in these projects. However, of the households that have contributed, only one in
twelve is able to get a unit. (4.50) Moreover,
“subsidies go heavily to the middle class, and the [programme] essentially excludes the bottom
60% of the income distribution almost entirely, mainly because these households cannot afford the
required down payment or mortgage payment for a complete unit even on highly subsidized
terms.” (4.51)
Nevertheless, the traditional housing finance paradigm that interest rates are the key factor in
households’ decision to borrow is coming under challenge. The most recent experience suggests that:
“Access to capital for housing investment, simplicity, flexibility, and speed of disbursal are the
primary factors in households’ decision to borrow. Interest rates are important, but secondary.”
(4.52)
Page 228

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
B. Housing finance
1. Government and formal sector initiatives to increase housing finance
d. Easing regulations on collateral
Conventional finance institutions typically require physical collateral before they extend long-term housing
finance. In most cases, this is in the form of the title of the property to be financed. This is a major
hindrance for the poor who seldom have legal title to the land or housing they occupy. Alternatively,
proof of regular, adequate and secure income may be acceptable. This, again, is a problem for most poor
people, especially those working in the informal sector. Overall lack of information about personal
creditworthiness further contributes to the virtual exclusion of the poor from formal credit markets. (4.53)
Therefore, the Habitat Agenda calls on Governments to:
“Promote access to credit and innovative banking alternatives with flexible guarantees and
collateral requirements for women and people living in poverty, including those who work in the
informal sector, family enterprises and small-scale enterprises” (4.54)
Various alternative institutional arrangements have been developed, mostly by NGOs, to substitute
for individual collateral for the benefit of poor borrowers. In particular, an increasing number of finance
institutions are now extending credit to the poor on the basis of ‘social collateral’. They consider
borrowers’ reputations, or the social networks to which they belong, instead of traditional physical or
financial collateral. Some of these options also provide lenders with low-cost alternatives to imperfect
creditworthiness information. (4.55)
An NGO based in West Bengal, India, and known as VSSU (4.f) offers a variety of collateral and
guarantee schemes. These include guaranteed and character-based lending to individuals and loans to
members in groups. VSSU now serves more that 6,000 clients, with variable loan repayment
performance. In VSSU’s experience, “it is appropriate to reduce or eliminate interest paid to
short-term savers.” (4.56)
In El Salvador, an NGO known as FUSAI (4.g) provides microenterprise, house improvement and
construction loans, but does not subscribe to the idea of a group ‘co-signing’ for its members. Rather, it
uses established bonds of kinship or friendship to guarantee loans: “a loan co-signed by one’s
mother-in-law is unlikely to experience default.” (4.57) On average, FUSAI assists some 5,000
households each year, both technically and financially, to improve their housing conditions and develop
new settlements. (4.58)
The success of the two above-mentioned initiatives points to the potential of alternative sources of
collateral.
Page 229

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
B. Housing finance
1. Government and formal sector initiatives to increase housing finance
e. Flexible repayment schemes
In addition to high interest rates and stringent collateral requirements, most formal finance institutions also
impose rigorous repayment terms. This is both with respect to scheduling and the amounts to be paid.
Admittedly, the income streams of most poor people who earn a living in the informal sector are
inconsistent with these conditionalities. The down payments that are required are also beyond the ability
of most poor people. However, a number of countries have developed and validated models that
overcome those conventional constraints.
Mexico provides a good example of government attempts to improve access to housing finance for
lower income groups. In 1984, the Central Bank of Mexico pioneered the use of dual-index mortgages
as: “a means to improve borrower affordability without sacrificing lender profitability and as a
way to cap subsidies.” (4.59) Dual-index mortgages have the following characteristics:
Indexing against inflation;
Indexing to maintain affordability; and
Adjustable repayment period. (4.60)
Dual-index mortgages are not only more affordable, but also more sustainable. Repayment
amounts and schedules are adjusted according to the borrowers' income, and allow for flexible
repayment periods of more than 15 years. (4.61) However, “[in] Mexico, the dual indexed mortgage
instrument deals inadequately with those most at risk — even among those with access to the
instrument.” (4.62) On the other hand, the dual-index mortgage model has met with success in Poland. (4.63)
Dual-index mortgages are now recommended in many other transitional, as well as developing countries.
(4.64)
In Bangladesh, Grameen Bank offers loans that can be repaid “in very small equal instalments
at frequent intervals — once a week for a whole year.” (4.65) In India, the Housing Development
Finance Corporation (HDFC) offers flexible repayment schemes that include a range of repayment
options. HDFC is the first private finance development institution devoted exclusively to housing. (4.66)
In Costa Rica, FUPROVI, (4.h) a local NGO founded in 1987, supports self-help housing
construction in informal settlements. FUPROVI is subsidized by the Government, and provides interim
construction financing from a revolving fund. This enables people to build their houses while the
regularization process is ongoing. FUPROVI provides assistance at the start of the repayment period
when incomes are lowest and least reliable. To promote scale and sustainability, the NGO integrates
low-income borrowers into the banking system over time. (4.67) Page 230

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
B. Housing finance
1. Government and formal sector initiatives to increase housing finance
f. Earmarking of funds for low income groups
Another way of overcoming the exclusion of the urban poor from formal housing finance is to earmark
funds for use in shelter development and improvement. This approach has proved successful in a number
of developing countries.
Ecuador's Housing Incentive System (SIV) has enabled low-income households to access financial
and technical support to improve their housing. The programme is facilitated by a state agency and
implemented through small construction firms on a market basis. (4.68) The Home Development Fund in the
Philippines similarly provides targeted housing finance to low-income groups. Since its creation in 1981,
the Fund has expanded from simply providing finance for end users to pursuing a more socially active
role. (4.69) In Thailand, the Community Organizations Development Institute (CODI) grants loans for land
acquisition, housing construction and improvement, and income generation. These are available to
networks or federations of community organizations, which then on-lend to their members. (4.70) Such
institutional support to local schemes can help deliver many of the MDGs, (4.71) in particular, MDG 7,
Target 11 on improving the lives of slum dwellers.
However, financial programmes can fall victims of their own success if they become politicized.
For example, in Sri Lanka,
“the repayment rate for the Million Houses Programme fell from 65 to 6 per cent after a
government decision to write off payments for members holding food stamps.” (4.72)
Page 231

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
B. Housing finance
1. Government and formal sector initiatives to increase housing finance
g. Involvement of informal settlements in formal housing finance
As was shown in Chapter I, a growing majority of the urban poor in cities in developing countries live
and work in slums and informal settlements. In most cases, they build and improve their homes as and
when resources allow. Indeed, in many developing country cities,
“[a]n estimated 75% to 90% of all new housing is built outside the official land development and
housing construction process, much of it incrementally.” (4.73)
For most urban households, this process is not only incremental, but also lengthy — between five and 15
years. (4.74) This is largely due to the insecure tenure conditions under which they live, and the level and
irregularity of their income streams. However, they lack access to a type of housing finance that suits their
requirements. Conventional financial institutions rarely extend their services into informal settlements
because of the perceived high costs and risks. (4.75) Thus,
“[a]ccess to credit for the poor is a global policy challenge, which has a direct impact on
incremental shelter delivery as well as local economic development.” (4.76)
Consequently, mobilization of finance for housing that meets the needs of people living and working
in slums and informal settlements is a major concern for enabling approaches. Positive developments in
this direction can be found in a number of countries. In Kenya, for example, two formal housing finance
institutions (the National Co-operative Housing Union (NACHU) (4.i) and K-Rep Bank) have extended
housing improvement and development loans to small-scale landlords in informal settlements in the capital
city Nairobi and some secondary towns. The interest rates they charge are on par with those of other
formal sector financial institutions and are, therefore, unaffordable for the poorest landlords. Moreover,
the collateral requirements may be even more demanding than for other commercial institutions. What is
important, however, is that the informal settlement landlords have been able to access formal housing
finance. They would otherwise have been unable to do so, and would have been forced to borrow from
informal lenders at extortionate rates. Most have demonstrated commitment to meeting their repayment
obligations.
Page 232

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
B. Housing finance
1. Government and formal sector initiatives to increase housing finance
h. Community mortgage programmes
To improve the effectiveness of existing housing finance systems, the Habitat Agenda recommends that
Governments should “[encourage] community mortgage programmes that are accessible to people
living in poverty, especially women…” (4.77) Community mortgage programmes can enable access to
housing finance by the poor through providing loans to community groups for onward lending to
individuals. This can be, and has been, done at low interest rates with long repayment schedules.
Examples of successful community mortgage programmes can be found in the Philippines and Thailand.
(4.78)
The Community Mortgage Programme in the Philippines recognizes the potential of self-help
groups and co-operative movements in mobilizing the savings of the poor to finance shelter development
and improvement. The National Housing Authority (NHA) assists CBOs, which in turn are responsible
for selecting beneficiaries and monitoring repayments. Between January 2001 and April 2002, a total of
106 Community Mortgage Programme loans were issued, from which almost 13,500 urban poor
households benefited. (4.79) Box 13 provides more detail on the way the programme operates.
Page 233

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
B. Housing finance
2. Community initiatives in housing finance
In developing countries, the bulk of housing finance typically comes from outside commercial financial
institutions:
“Households use their own savings, sweat equity, barter arrangements and other sources to build
their homes over [time].” (4.80)
In Indonesia, for example, practically all dwellings in the kampungs are self-financed, with the exception
of a few that were funded by the public-sector Bank Rakyat Indonesia. (4.81) Similarly, in Zimbabwe, the
housing needs of the lowest income groups are addressed through self-reliance and collective support.
Moreover, 60 per cent of Zimbabwe’s housing finance is made of people's own savings. (4.82)
”Ironically, the fact that banks do not deal with the poor means leaving untouched a prime source
of housing finance — the savings of the poor.” (4.83)
Developing community savings and credit schemes can potentially increase the amount of housing
finance available.
Page 234

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
B. Housing finance
2. Community initiatives in housing finance
a. Community savings and loans schemes
Community savings and loans schemes draw people together. Women in particular are drawn to such
groups as savings and lending are quick, simple and related to their daily needs. The savings groups
reduce individual vulnerability by providing an immediate lending facility that is easily accessed. The
groups strengthen community processes, which helps their members address other major issues such as
developing plans for housing and negotiating with external agencies for land, infrastructure and services.
(4.84)
The savings and credit movement has great potential to finance shelter development and
improvement. Examples from Kenya and South Africa show that this potential can be further developed.
Specific examples suggest that shorter-term credit offered by many savings and credit co-operatives
(SACCOs) may suit the needs of the poor better than formal longer-term loans. (4.85)
Community-based rotating savings and credit organizations (ROSCAs) are an important informal
financial source and a worldwide phenomenon. They are known by different names in different countries,
e.g., ‘merry-go-rounds’ in Kenya, susu in Ghana, chit funds or chits in India, tanda in Mexico, and ‘
partners’ and ‘boxes’ in the Caribbean, cheetu in Sri Lanka, arisan in Indonesia, and pasanaku in
Bolivia. (4.86) ROSCAs can take a variety of forms, but when it comes to their use for urban housing and
infrastructure development, they have a number of limitations in common. Many of the incremental
improvements that households make in their individual shelter conditions are financed through ROSCAs.
However, the capital formation that they represent is insufficient to fund capital-intensive developments
such as neighbourhood infrastructure facilities (water, sewage, road and electrical services), slum
upgrading and slum resettlement. They are also limited in their capacity to leverage additional capital from
external sources. (4.87)
Community savings and credit associations have been expanding rapidly in many Asian cities (4.j) and
have significant potential. (4.88) For example, in Thailand, financing of housing through the Urban Community
Development Fund (see Box 12 above) begins with communities accumulating savings. These are then
leveraged with low interest rate loans from the Fund. (4.89) On the other hand, the experience of Sharan, an
NGO based in Delhi, India, shows that,
“Mobilizing, promoting and operating self-help groups that provide financial services is a difficult
and costly learning cycle for each NGO. These early difficulties are, however, resources for skills,
methods and insights that are intrinsic to both working with communities of the poor and
providing financial services.” (4.90)
The issue of the right of urban poor groups to manage their own savings and loans schemes against
the need for independent and transparent auditing also raises a dilemma. Experience shows that where
emphasis has been on strengthening the autonomy of urban poor organizations, ensuring that measures
Page 235

are in place to make savings groups accountable to members and others has been difficult. However, this
problem can be overcome where external support is available. In such cases, savings groups can be
compelled to accept regular audits. (4.91) Page 236

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
B. Housing finance
2. Community initiatives in housing finance
b. Daily savings schemes
Daily savings schemes are a vital part of many community-led organizations. Accumulating small cash
deposits on a daily basis creates a collective financial pot from which members can borrow at low
interest rates for a variety of purposes.
“For poor people who would otherwise be unable to access credit, this can make the difference in
enabling them to build or improve their home.” (4.92)
The whole of Joe Slovo Village in Port Elizabeth, South Africa, is organized around house savings
schemes. The ritual of daily savings has helped organize the community and created a close bond
amongst the residents. (4.93) Also in South Africa, the NGO People’s Dialogue on Land and Shelter has
combined loan finance with social capital in savings schemes to enable local community groups to
implement a housing programme of about 10,000 units. (4.94) The Zimbabwe Homeless People’s
Federation grew out of savings schemes in Victoria Falls, reflecting the priority they gave to the need for
housing and land. The Federation argued that:
“the poor could afford the costs of incremental housing but what was required was that local
authorities change their attitude and become willing to work with the poor.” (4.95)
Examples such as this demonstrate the value in moving to and supporting a savings and loans-based
model.
Funds of federations of the urban poor are currently operating in several countries around the
world. These funds have enabled members to acquire land, build homes, and develop livelihoods.
Governments and external agencies can also use these funds as conduits for support to federation
activities. Most funds are run by boards, comprised predominantly of federation members. As Box 14
shows, these funds can mobilize substantial amounts of money through members’ savings.
The success of the above-mentioned community initiatives disproves assumptions that the poor
lack the capacity to save or repay credit. Despite interest rates which are often comparable to or higher
than those charged by formal sector institutions, most have achieved loan repayment ratios of almost 100
per cent, even though little formal collateral is required. They have achieved this by offering credit on
terms and conditions appropriate to the circumstances of their members. Some have concentrated on
mechanisms to reduce transaction costs and risk, while others have introduced new ways of offering
credit, by auctioning some loans with a `reserve rate’ of interest and others by lotteries among members.
(4.96)
Page 237

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
B. Housing finance
3. NGO programmes
BRAC (4.k) is a leading NGO in Bangladesh that disburses substantial amounts. It grants housing loans to
village organizations members at an interest rate of 10 per cent, compared with 15 per cent for other
purposes. (4.l),(4.97)
Habitat for Humanity International brings the affluent and the poor together, with support of local
leadership, to build adequate and affordable homes. It provides interest-free homebuilding loans, using a
mix of charitable funding from church groups and the private sector in developed countries, combined
with loan repayments from beneficiaries. Habitat for Humanity International has been building houses with
poor households, who also contribute ‘sweat equity’, for almost three decades. Volunteers also
contribute free labour through the International Volunteer Programme. Habitat for Humanity International
currently builds over 20,000 houses per year in some 80 countries worldwide. (4.98)
In South Africa, some NGOs, such as the Development Action Group, initially focused on
government subsidies to support low-income housing development. (4.99) However, they are now also
offering housing finance through the Kuyasa Trust. This organization grants loans designed to reflect the
borrowing patterns already familiar to low-income households who buy furniture and other household
goods on hire-purchase. Using the same short repayment periods (around 24 months) and the ability to
seize household goods in case of default, Kuyasa has granted over 2,600 loans, mostly to
women-headed households with incomes of under R3,500 per month (US$ 570), targeted at financing
the incremental housing process. (4.100)
International experience demonstrates that NGOs require assistance to provide housing finance at
scale — either in some form of partnership with government or institutional support. (4.101) Page 238

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
B. Housing finance
4. Microfinance
Formal sector housing finance institutions have generally not been accessible to the poor, either as
borrowers or savers, for reasons stated above. Moreover, they are often still unable to gain access even
after government intervention in the housing finance sector. In addition, the poor are not adequately
informed about housing finance opportunities. Indeed, the Habitat Agenda recognizes that “local
institutions involved in micro-credit may hold the most potential for housing the poor.” (4.102) In this
respect, it has been noted that:
“[t]he real promise for assisting low-income families with housing finance is … emerging through
one of the most promising financial innovations of recent years — the success of microfinance
institutions in the developing world. This successful innovation offers the possibility of finance for
the poor and is increasingly being used to support housing upgrading.” (4.103)
Microfinance can be broadly defined as:
“the provision of small-scale financial services such as credit, savings and other basic financial
services to poor and low-income people.” (4.104)
The term ‘microfinance institution’ refers to:
“a wide range of organizations dedicated to providing these services and includes NGOs, credit
unions, cooperatives, private commercial banks, non-bank financial institutions and parts of
State-owned banks.” (4.104)
The term ‘microfinance of housing’ refers to:
“small loans to low- and moderate-income households typically for self-help home improvement
and expansion, but also for new construction of basic core units Best practice in housing
microfinance involves loans at unsubsidized interest rates and short terms, relative to traditional
mortgage finance.” (4.105)
Many microfinance institutions offering housing finance began as microcredit initiatives for
microenterprises. However, they noted that many of their clients were diverting the loans they received
into housing improvements. As a result, these institutions expanded their lending portfolio to include
housing finance products for housing improvement and construction. In doing so, they drew on their
experience in microcredit. For example, when Mibanco in Peru launched its Micasa housing finance loans
in 2000, it had nearly 70,000 active clients, an outstanding portfolio of US$ 45 million, and net income of
US$ 1.2 million. (4.106) The transition was only logical given that, in many developing countries, the home is
commonly used as a workplace and is the location of income-generating activities. (4.107) Table 9
summarizes and compares the characteristics of conventional mortgage loans, traditional microenterprise
loans, and housing microfinance.
Since housing loans differ greatly in size and terms from traditional microfinance loans, new analysis
tools are needed. The Cooperative Housing Foundation International is one of a number of organizations
that have evaluated microfinance projects worldwide and are synthesizing and sharing knowledge gained
Page 239

with the broader microfinance community. This is in line with the recommendations of the Habitat Agenda
on sharing of information and knowledge. The Cooperative Housing Foundation International was
founded in 1952 and has worked in nearly 100 countries worldwide. (4.108)
Microfinance programmes have been successful largely because they have been able to overcome
the significant information problems inherent in dealing with poor customers with no banking history and
unknown creditworthiness. (4.109) However, failure:
“to reach the poor, never mind the poorest of the poor, has been a recurrent criticism of
microfinance since its takeoff in the early 1990s”. (4.110)
The reasons for this include that the “poorest are less likely to be creditworthy and to demand
loans.” (4.111) The poorest also tend to be the most risk-averse when it comes to borrowing. In addition,
they have:
“little chance of being accepted as part of a joint-liability group under a situation where
entrepreneurial ability matters less in the screening process than preexisting income.” (4.112)
Therefore,
“There is still a large unmet demand for microcredit and microfinance, and an estimated 400–500
million poor and low-income people worldwide still do not have access to microfinance. Reaching
the poorest poor will be a major challenge.” (4.113)
In Bangladesh, the development and scaling-up of the microfinance industry has been facilitated by
an appropriate enabling environment. (4.114)
“However, in many countries, lack of an enabling policy environment for microfinance continues
to be a major constraint. Hence the issue must be addressed effectively.” (4.115)
Page 240

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
C. Spatial planning and provision of urban land for housing
Land is fundamental to the shelter process. If there is no land on which to build housing, then none can be
built, irrespective of the availability of the other inputs required for shelter provision. In particular, an
adequate supply of land is required in the right place, at the right time, and at an affordable price for the
poor. If not, poor people will continue to be forced into unplanned slums and informal settlements,
developed outside the regulatory framework. This has adverse consequences for orderly urban
development, service provision, and the housing and welfare rights of all urban dwellers, but in particular
the poor and vulnerable and disadvantaged groups.
Problems related to land and secure tenure are among the most contentious and complex in the
world. Urban land issues in developing countries are generally too diverse and complex to classify in any
straightforward way. However, one can split them into five broad categories:
“lack of enough land at the right price and in the right location;
high cost and low affordability of land and housing;
ineffective government programmes and actions in the area of urban
development;
private sector resistance to government land regulations; and
environmental resource constraints to land development.” (4.116)
This section reviews what governments, at various levels, have done and are doing to address
these problems. The focus is on spatial planning and provision of urban land for housing, in particular for
low-income housing development.
Page 241

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
C. Spatial planning and provision of urban land for housing
1. Planning procedures, role of local authorities and increasing public participation in decision-making
Most local authorities control access to land and are responsible for land-use planning and regulation.
Therefore, they have a strong influence on who obtains land for housing development. The ways in which
they define land use and allocate land under their jurisdiction for various purposes, and the extent to
which they enforce zoning and planning restrictions and regulations, will largely determine if and where
urban poor households can legally acquire land on which to build their homes.
In the absence of effective land use planning or other means of development control, cities will
generally expand haphazardly, according to the legal or illegal location of public sector activities,
enterprises, residential areas and households. Therefore, in an ideal world, city and municipal authorities
should devise development plans to ensure that all the actors in the shelter process are working within the
same overall framework of spatial planning and in a mutually supportive way. Housing for the poor
should be part of the overall development plan, not an unco-ordinated exercise.
Inability to access land and fear of eviction represent two prevalent forms of exclusion from
economic, social and civic opportunities, especially for women. This is because ease of access to, and
the location of, available land has significant effects on the livelihood activities of the poor. (4.117) Therefore
the Habitat Agenda calls on governments, in partnership with the private sector, NGOs, CBOs and
co-operatives,
“To eradicate legal and social barriers to the equal and equitable access to land, especially the
access of women, people with disabilities and those belonging to vulnerable groups.” (4.118)
If it is to be more effective within the framework of the enabling approach, and more relevant and
responsive to the needs of the poor, land use planning must be based on participatory decision-making.
All major stakeholder groups should be consulted and actively involved, and their needs taken into
account. In particular, those with the least voice — the poorest, women, tenants, and other vulnerable
and disadvantaged groups, especially people with disabilities — should be included. Furthermore, special
care should be taken to assist rather than prevent or displace women’s informal sector activities through
municipal planning decisions and regulations. This will require a balance of democratic and participatory
decision-making, which should not supersede the democratic obligations of various bodies, though. (4.119)
This qualification refers, in particular, to governmental responsibility to the poorest and most vulnerable
and disadvantaged groups.
As noted in Chapter II , political, constitutional, legislative and institutionnal reforms in many
countries have enhanced the scope for participatory urban planning, civil society participation in urban
development and management, and effective formation and operation of public-private partnerships.
Democratization and decentralization processes have been instrumental in this regard.
Page 242

In El Salvador in 1994, Nejapa Municipality focused its efforts on promoting citizen organizations
and their participation in decision-making and implementation. The aim was to improve access to services
(water supply, electricity, roads, etc.) and amenities, and strengthen local democratic governance. After
six years, the process had not only achieved these objectives, but also facilitated the construction of basic
housing for five per cent of the households in the municipality. (4.120)
In Brazil, the City Statute adopted in July 2001 has expanded the powers of cities to manage
urban development along four dimensions. These include regulating urban land-use and institutionalizing
participatory urban planning processes. While the Statute supports more democratic and accountable
municipalities, its implementation depends on extensive, broad-based civil-society mobilization. (4.121) The
example of Bolivia’s ‘Law of Popular Participation’ which institutionalized a participatory municipal
planning in the country, shows that authoritarian traits may still occasionally mar this type of approach.
Indeed, participatory planning as currently practiced in Bolivia actively involves campesinos (small-scale
subsistence farmers) in the various stages of formulating a Municipal Development Plan. However, the
drafting phase of the Plan is dominated by the planning team’s interpretation of the earlier participatory
planning process with virtually no input from the campesinos. (4.122)
It is worth pointing out that the City Development Strategy (CDS), one of the two key approaches
within the Cities Alliance, can help develop pro-poor urban governance in cities. It involves participatory
decision-making. The CDS process has been implemented in several cities around the world with varying
degrees of success. (4.123) , (4.m)
UN-HABITAT has developed a toolkit to support participatory urban decision-making. It is
based on 15 years of cities’ experience in improving living conditions through participatory
decision-making. (4.124) Page 243

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
C. Spatial planning and provision of urban land for housing
2. Formulation and enforcement of urban planning standards
In many developing countries urban land is in short supply. This often results from a mix of outdated and
inadequate land legislation, laws and regulations, which are complex and expensive to operate. Land
registration procedures are also unnecessarily costly, and unaffordable standards are demanded in land
development. (4.125) As urban land is in increasingly short supply, demand and competition for it keep
escalating. As a result, land is being held for speculative purposes, leading to excessively high sale prices
which lower income groups and the poor cannot afford.
“The continued speculation and commercialization of land …, on the one hand, and unwillingness
to carry out land reform so that more people would have access to land for housing purposes, on
the other, are major factors hindering the achievement of the right to housing.” (4.126)
Urban planning standards are technical specifications with which all approved development must
comply. They include physical requirements for infrastructure provision, plot sizes, road widths and public
open spaces. Therefore, standards entail costs which are not always considered when they are being set.
Consequently, however relevant planning standards may be environmentally or socially, they cannot be
enforced if residents or governments cannot afford them. (4.127)
The planning and building standards in force in many developing countries have been derived from
foreign contexts. Therefore, they bear little relationship, if any, with the realities faced by urban poor
households. They will likely have been designed largely for, and by, an affluent minority with little in
common with the growing urban poor majority. The latter will consequently, in many cases, simply
disregard standards they consider as irrelevant or too costly, in terms of time and money. (4.127)
Cumbersome and costly planning and building standards lead to illegal or informal occupation of land by
poor people, often in environmentally hazardous locations.
The Habitat Agenda calls on governments to “[review] restrictive, exclusionary and costly legal
and regulatory processes, planning systems, standards and development regulations.” (4.128)
Land-use planning and development control can be made more realistic and flexible, and less complex,
by revising standards and procedures and eliminating unnecessary regulations. (4.129)
“Standards must be lowered in order to reduce the production costs of habitable serviced land for
housing, to avoid rendering informal land and housing production processes illegal, and to reduce
procedures which have discriminatory or segregationary effects.” (4.130)
A number of countries have recognized the implications and practicality of lowering standards and
have acted accordingly. The standards for traditional areas in Malawi and the starter standards
developed in Jamaica are good examples. Other countries have opted for multi-level standards. Kenya,
for instance, has Grade I and Grade II by-laws, while Sudan has four classes of residential areas with
different standards for each. Sri Lanka allows municipalities to declare certain settlements ‘special project
Page 244

areas’, where lower standards are allowed. Studies of informal settlements where planning standards are
based on local perceptions and not official ordinances suggest that people are willing to accept higher
densities, mixed land use, and less space for roads than are required by official standards. (4.131)
Planning procedures and standards also need to provide explicitly for the shelter needs of women
and rental housing. Women’s requirements with respect to dwelling size, layout, location and construction
differ from those of men. They can often be discriminated against by insensitive and inflexible planning
norms. This in turn can reduce the potential contribution of women to shelter provision and improvement.
In view of the growing numbers of women-headed households, the consequences can be particularly
far-reaching. Therefore, developing urban professionals’ expertise in gender-sensitive planning (both
women and men) is of vital importance. (4.132)
Many governments have continued to disregard the role of rental housing and ignore it in planning
norms. This is despite the fact that it is an important segment of both the formal and informal housing
markets in cities worldwide. A survey of 21 developing country cities revealed that tenants made up
more than 30 per cent of the population in 16 and more than 50 per cent in eight. In Cairo, Egypt, 63 per
cent of households were tenants in 1996, as were 60 and 82 per cent of households in Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia and Kisumu, Kenya respectively in 1998. In the same year, 41 per cent of households in
Bangkok, Thailand and 46 per cent of households in Quito, Ecuador were renting their homes. (4.133)
A supply of cheap rental housing is essential for maintaining a cheap labour force. However,
“In Delhi, the planning regulations seem to have discouraged every kind of housing construction,
including rental housing.” (4.134)
Similarly, in Benin City, profitable development of rental housing is apparently limited by zoning
regulations. These stipulate that:
“houses can only have eight living rooms on a single storey, 12 on two floors and 15 on three,
with a maximum occupancy rate of two persons per room.” (4.135)
In addition,
“the adoption of extremely low planning standards, especially in relation to plot sizes, completely
closes avenues for housing to be put to productive uses — either renting or home based
enterprises.” (4.136),(4.n)
While governments through their adoption of the Habitat Agenda are committed to increasing the
supply of rental housing, they should also take into account the legal rights and obligations of both tenants
and owners. In many cities, rental accommodation takes the form of a single room occupied by one or
more households, with minimal provision of basic urban services such as water supply and sanitation.
When promoting the development of rental accommodation, any lowering of planning standards must be
very careful lest the quality of rented accommodation, where it predominates, is compromised. The
enabling approach should not be interpreted to mean no planning standards at all. (4.137) Page 245

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
C. Spatial planning and provision of urban land for housing
3. Provision of urban land for housing, particularly for low-income households
Globalization, and related trends, has affected urban land in various ways, including creating a growing
tendency towards speculative investments. Land markets are no exception in this respect. (4.138) In a
globalized economy, with expanding income disparities and escalating land prices, formal land markets
and land development processes tend to serve the interests of the middle-income and upper-income
segments of the population. This leaves the poor with little other choice than obtaining land informally,
often through illegal occupancy. (4.139)
“Informal processes of land development now play a crucial role in making land available to
low-income and disadvantaged groups, …. The high cost to developers and individual households
of acquiring land for shelter through the formal sector as well as the high standards for preparing
that land have made it very difficult, if not impossible, for the poor, homeless and disadvantaged
to gain access to legitimate housing on legally acquired land.” (4.140)
Estimates of the proportion of people excluded from formal land and housing markets vary widely,
but averages between 15 and 70 per cent of the urban population in developing countries. (4.141)
“There is, however, considerable doubt that established informal processes can continue to meet
needs (even if it were desirable to look on informal supply as the permanent de facto policy of
government).” (4.142)
Many governments are ill-equipped to provide land for the urban poor owing to inadequate
policies, inappropriate legal frameworks and ineffective administration. (4.143) Failure to establish land
markets that are able to deliver affordable land has forced the poor to seek accommodation in slums and
informal settlements. (4.144)
The Habitat Agenda underscores that “[a]ccess to land and security of tenure are strategic
prerequisites for the provision of adequate shelter for all.” (4.145) Land in urban areas is generally
expensive, but especially so near the sources of employment where the poor need to live. The availability
and cost of land for housing are important determinants of housing prices and conditions. Indeed, an
essential condition for a well-functioning housing sector is the availability of residential land, in ample
supply and at affordable prices. (4.146)
“Improving access to land markets is thus a prerequisite for improving the housing situation and
economic prospects for low-income populations.” (4.147)
A number of developing countries have created parastatal organizations to take care of land
development. Perumnas) in Indonesia is the world's largest such agency. (4.148) The explicit reasons for
establishing these bodies are to:
Channel land and housing at affordable prices to low- and middle-income households;
Page 246

Ensure that the land value increases associated with infrastructure provision are not appropriated
by private developers; and
Undertake important but risky projects avoided by the private sector.
Two important assumptions underlie these objectives. The first is that the benefits of these bodies'
policies will accrue to low- and middle-income households. The second is that public land development
agencies are efficient. Now this approach to land development has met with little success. However,
where it does appear to work, the land development agencies are locally controlled and managed,
focused on a limited range of objectives, and are well capitalized. (4.149)
Urban land for housing, in particular for low-income households, can also be provided in a number
of alternative ways, as experienced by several countries with varying degrees of success. These
alternatives are discussed in the sections below.
Page 247

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
C. Spatial planning and provision of urban land for housing
3. Provision of urban land for housing, particularly for low-income households
a. Serviced and unserviced land
The GSS notes that:
“the greatest failure of Governments in the housing sector has [probably] been the incapacity to
stimulate a supply of sufficient affordable and officially recognized serviced land to meet
low-income housing needs.” (4.150)
In many African countries, public provision of serviced land and housing, especially to low-income
households, is steadily declining for several reasons. These include the sheer scale of the problem; a lack
of resources; inadequate technical and administrative capacities, especially in the identification of land
rights; widespread corruption and illegal practices; and lack of political will. (4.151)
Governments can readily enable an increased supply of housing by simply removing the
requirement that land for housing must be serviced prior to being built on, and allowing infrastructure to
be installed gradually. In this way, people are allowed to settle on unserviced land while infrastructure is
developed incrementally. This approach reduces purchase and repayment costs to the poor. It has been
used with success in Hyderabad, Pakistan and Bangkok, Thailand. (4.152) A reduction in the level of
servicing required, either initially or in the longer term, would similarly stimulate housing development and
improvement, as would official recognition of housing that has been developed on unserviced land.
In Zimbabwe, in a bid to facilitate the formation of co-operatives that will build houses for their
members, the Government has urged local authorities to provide such co-operatives with serviced or
unserviced land for housing development. Some local authorities have done just that. For example,
Harare City Council has allocated unserviced land to a housing co-operative formed by teachers. (4.153) On
the other hand, in Walvis Bay, Namibia, the municipality is helping the Shack Dwellers’ Federation of
Namibia to purchase unserviced land from fishing companies. The city council favours this approach over
the prospect of a lengthy court procedure to reclaim land from the companies. (4.154)
In relation to this, the New Delhi Declaration (4.o) calls for a drastic change in the mode of public
intervention in land development, away from continued imposition of rules which cannot be implemented.
It recommends that:
“Public authorities should guide and assist informal development, giving due consideration to
environmental criteria. Replication of innovative experiments in guided land-development
schemes, in which a wide diversity of development both formal and informal are encouraged to
produce unserviced sites, should be promoted.” (4.155)
Page 248

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
C. Spatial planning and provision of urban land for housing
3. Provision of urban land for housing, particularly for low-income households
b. Land sharing
Many governments are finding it increasingly difficult to provide serviced land for low-income housing
development; they also realise that eviction is no longer an acceptable method of clearing land for
development projects. In this context, land sharing offers an attractive option. However, one must
remember at this point that eviction is still practiced in many countries around the world, even though few
governments still officially advocate such repressive policies. (4.156) A global survey by COHRE found that:
“nearly seven million persons in 60 countries … were forcibly evicted from their homes in 2001–
2002, and more than six million others in 38 countries [were] under threat of forced eviction at
the time of compiling [the] report.” (4.157),(4.p)
The idea behind land sharing is that the landowner and the occupants (squatters or tenants) agree
that the former develops the most economically attractive part of the land and the latter build houses on
the other part with full or limited land ownership. In this way, land sharing brings gains to both parties: the
landowner retains the most desirable portion of land and dispenses with lengthy and costly legal battles,
while the occupants continue to live on their own portion with the added benefit of secure tenure. The
four basic features of land-sharing projects include: increased density; reconstruction; participation; and
cross-subsidies. (4.158)
Land-sharing has been practiced with varying degrees of success in India, Thailand and the
Philippines. However, it is not widely used, largely because of the many preconditions that must be met.
Replication has also been difficult:
“because of the need for a ‘culture of compromise’ (between the parties) and the high
administrative costs and lengthy negotiations involved.” (4.159)
Still, land sharing is one of the few ways for slum dwellers to gain formal access to land without
substantial subsidies. (4.160) However, care must be taken to ensure that large landowning interests are not
allowed to capture rising property values through land-sharing deals. (4.q) Page 249

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
C. Spatial planning and provision of urban land for housing
3. Provision of urban land for housing, particularly for low-income households
c. Land readjustment
Land readjustment, a variant on land sharing, is a major way of supplying serviced urban land. A number
of countries have used it with some success. (4.r) A locally driven approach, it brings various actors in the
shelter process — the public, private, NGO and community sectors — together in partnerships. (4.161) In
this respect, the Habitat Agenda calls on governments, at the appropriate levels, to
“consider the adoption of innovative instruments for the efficient and sustainable assembly and
development of land, including, where appropriate, land readjustment and consolidation.” (4.162)
The consensus is that land readjustment has three major benefits for urban land development.
Firstly, land readjustment has the potential to work as a self-financing technique for urban land and
infrastructure development. It will likely be a cheaper option than consolidating all project land into single
ownership, whether by expropriation or on the open market. This is because most of the land remains the
property of the original landowners, who contribute a portion of their land for infrastructure and for sale
in order to meet the main costs of the project. The prospect of land readjustment projects being
self-financing is considered particularly appropriate for developing countries, where lack of investment
capital is a major constraint on infrastructure development. Secondly, the original owners retain title to the
greater part of the land. Consequently, they are less opposed to the projects under consideration than
they would to large-scale land expropriation and development. Finally, land readjustment is less
disruptive of the existing community. (4.163)
“Land readjustment is attractive because of the extent to which it mobilizes existing resources
and facilitates development rather than restricting it, as is the case with many of the forms of land
use control that have been derived from western models.” (4.164)
Various approaches to land readjustment have been developed and tried, and have met with
varying degrees of success in supplying serviced land to the poor. In Bangladesh and India, land
readjustment consolidates small plots of land and lays out basic infrastructure, and then returns the land to
the owner on condition that a proportion of the unearned increase in land values is handed back to
government to make more land available to low-income groups. (4.165) Private land owners in India have
been encouraged to build apartments for slum dwellers on some of their land and offered development
incentives for the remaining area. Thailand has used similar approaches with success. Another option
used in India is to lease out government-owned ‘slum lands’ to developers for 30 years at a nominal
price. The condition is that they build subsidized tenements for members of registered slum
co-operatives, etc. (4.166) In the Republic of Korea, local government consolidates and develops large land
plots, and then returns part of the property to the original owners in proportion to their ownership. The
government then sells the remainder at market prices to recoup development costs. (4.167) The latest land
readjustment projects have included a large cross-subsidy for the provision of low-income housing, and
only about 42 per cent of the land has been returned to the landowners. Recent experiences in countries
Page 250

in transition have also highlighted the importance of land readjustment. (4.168)
Governments often have to subsidize some aspect of the readjustment (e.g., financing the servicing
or becoming part owners of the land) for low-income groups to benefit from this approach. For this
reason, it may not be possible to implement land readjustment in very poor countries. Nevertheless, the
technique could facilitate the extension of urban areas into peri-urban areas under an adapted form of
customary land ownership. This is on condition that there is capacity for planning and installation of
requisite infrastructure services. Generally speaking, land readjustment works well with special zones for
low-income people, regularization, infrastructure development, and the legalization of property. (4.169)
However, in Bangkok, Thailand,
there are significant hurdles to successful implementation of land readjustment in built-up
areas…. One is the prevailing public attitude that any cooperation between private interests and
the city government implies corruption; obviously, such attitudes must change if private-public
cooperative development mechanisms like land readjustment are to be successfully introduced. A
second hurdle is that landowners often distrust government (including local government), and are
therefore reluctant to turn over their land for replotting purposes. (4.170)
On the other hand, approximately 30 per cent of the urban land supply in Japan has been
developed through land readjustment. Developing countries can draw on the experience of Japan in
implementing land readjustment to provide the urban poor access to serviced land. (4.171)
In developing countries, traditional authorities often insist on keeping control of a portion of their
land for the sake of local practices such as honouring ancestors. Land sharing provides a way of using
some land more intensively while leaving some in the hands of its traditional owners. Compensation for
the land used can take the form of infrastructure and other urban services.
Page 251

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
C. Spatial planning and provision of urban land for housing
3. Provision of urban land for housing, particularly for low-income households
d. Land expropriation and banking
Most countries have legislation that enables governments to purchase or expropriate private land in the
interests of the community at large, either at or below market prices. This is known as the “power of
eminent domain” which, in many developing countries, is a colonial inheritance. (4.172) In India, the Delhi
Development Authority (DDA) owns a substantial portion of the land acquired through the compulsory
large-scale land acquisition policies that have been implemented since 1957. (4.173) Against this background,
an alternative way for governments at the local and national level to grant the human right to adequate
housing is to
“Encourage positive uses, in full conformity with human rights standards, of land expropriation
in order to enhance the supply of affordable land.” (4.174)
Some countries are unable to make full use of land expropriation owing to deficiencies in statutory
frameworks. For example, in Brazil,
“the implementation of housing programmes…suffers from the lack of legal instruments to
facilitate land expropriation.” (4.175)
In the Favela Bairro upgrading programme in Rio de Janeiro,
“The tradition of ignoring favelas means that there is little information available on who owns
land and the procedures for regularisation and expropriation are out-dated and inappropriate.”
(4.176)
In some instances, government agencies have abused this power by expropriating peri-urban
agricultural land at below-market prices, re-zoning and developing the plots, and then selling them to
urban investors at much higher prices. For example, in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo, public
officials working with cadastral maps have gained substantial power through running a parallel market for
land expropriation. (4.177) This is not only inequitable, but also ignores the notion of common public interest
that is at the core of the power of eminent domain. In addition, expropriation of land by government
supposedly for public utility needs, but without any type of compensation to the affected persons, acts as
a threat to security of tenure.
Land banks are created by governments when expropriating or purchasing rural lands around the
city. The primary purpose of land banking is to acquire land for urban development, public or private,
and ahead of averred needs so that it can be obtained relatively cheaply. A secondary purpose is to
influence the direction of land development. Land banks can be used to guide urban development,
contain land speculation, redistribute land to the poor, and to finance infrastructure investments. (4.178) In
Hué, Vietnam, a policy to keep land for future residential projects and infrastructure held on at least until
the year 2000. (4.179) In Haiti,
“urban development schemes have been prepared for major cities with emphasis on municipal
land banking for immediate and future shelter development.” (4.180)
Page 252

In relation to this, a study on best practices analysis on access to land and security of tenure recommends
that:
“Land banking should be started where land for relocation/resettlement of informal settlers, is
identified and acquired.” (4.181)
However, the feasibility of land banking is largely dependent upon those administrative capacities
which many developing country local authorities lack. Land purchases also presuppose adequate financial
resources. On top of this come the uncertainties of advance planning, land management and price setting,
as well as the increased risk of illegal occupation. In some countries the land acquisition and purchase
process may take up to 20 years, and developing and allocating the land to the public another five to 10
years because of government bureaucracy. Therefore, while land banking is in principle a relatively good
idea, it may actually restrict the amount of developed land in the market. Experience has shown that most
land banks have failed to keep land prices low and prevent speculation. (4.182) In practice, the extensive
delays in completing the acquisition process and the development of the land tend to exclude poorer
households. Moreover,
“there is a tendency to realize the full commercial value of the sites acquired, rendering the
approach irrelevant to the needs of the urban majority.” (4.183)
Therefore, while land readjustment is considered as effective, land banking is no longer seen as the way
forward. (4.184) Page 253

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
C. Spatial planning and provision of urban land for housing
3. Provision of urban land for housing, particularly for low-income households
e. Resettlement and transfer of titles
Resettlement embraces a wide range of strategies. However, most are, based on a bid to enhance the
use of the land where slums have developed. If undertaken, resettlement generally creates more problems
than it solves, as is the case with forced eviction and demolition of slums. In particular, resettlement
destroys a substantial stock of housing affordable to the urban poor. This housing, in most cases, is either
close to their job location or in one that is particularly convenient for their income-earning activities and
networks. Governments in many countries have played a major role in such resettlement programmes,
which are often motivated by the incentive of redeveloping prime real estate for a more profitable land
use than low-income housing. This is how a government that should protect the poor acts as an agent
against them on behalf of the better-off. For all the change in government attitudes, in some countries
housing conditions in slums and informal settlements are still viewed with nothing but scorn. In India, for
instance, the belief remains that “the slums [have] to be demolished and slum dwellers re-housed in
new, modern housing.” (4.185)
Resettlement has been successful in several cases, as will be seen in section V.B.3. However, the
alternative housing provided has often been unaffordable or too distant from employment opportunities,
causing resettled households to move back into slum accommodation. (4.186) This was the case of Bassac in
Phnom Penh, where, in mid-January 2002, more than 200 families returned to the original site from which
they had been relocated following a fire outbreak in November 2001. (4.187)
Women, in particular, are greatly affected as their productive, reproductive and community
management roles are closely interlinked. Their childcare responsibilities make long journeys to work
problematic. On top of this, they are also often involved in home-based enterprises or other
income-generating activities in the slums in which they live. This may include income-earning attached to a
community management role, such as the operation of water kiosks.
Therefore, resettlement is best avoided, unless it is absolutely inescapable or justifiable. This
includes cases where settlements are located on hazardous sites, or densities are so high that basic
infrastructure, in particular, water and sanitation, cannot be laid out. (4.188) For instance, under the Holistic
Upgrading Programme in Medellin, Colombia, the issue of housing quality is addressed by resettling
those households living in high-risk areas, and strengthening stability and habitability of sites in order to
reduce environmental vulnerability. (4.189) Similarly, in Phases 2 and 3 of the Slums Clearance Project being
planned and implemented by the eThekwini Municipality in South Africa, which addresses a combination
of housing, health and safety needs of the identified informal communities, over 70 settlements have been
earmarked for complete relocation while another 50 will be upgraded in situ. (4.190)
“[R]esidents of all such settlements should be offered priority for relocation to sites that offer
close access to existing livelihood opportunities (e.g. street trading) and services (i.e., not out of
Page 254

the city).” (4.191)
Reducing or eliminating the practice of forced eviction would demonstrate that governments and
local authorities are on the side of the people, especially those most in need of protection. Partnerships
with slum communities to develop strategies that prevent eviction are, therefore, consistent with the
enabling approach. In some cases, slum communities themselves have identified preferred resettlement
locations and negotiated with the landowner. Two well-known examples occurred in Bangkok in the
resettlement of the Soi Sutiporn and Rachadapisek communities. However, specific factors also played a
part in their success, including access to free land, political involvement and community cohesion. Such
factors are often specific to a particular situation, and therefore may not be replicable. (4.192)
The Inter-American Development Bank has formulated principles and strategies which
Bank-financed development projects must adhere to and that result in involuntary relocation. These
include specific guidelines on the preparation of resettlement plans, including relocation sites and housing
solutions and mechanisms and procedures for transfer of title. (4.193)
In the Philippines, the Homeless People’s Federation has been exploring various options to
develop comprehensive, city-wide land and housing options that work both for the poor and for the city.
It has been doing this in collaboration with the national and municipal governments, private landowners,
financial institutions, international organizations and NGOs. One of the options is the regularization of
informal settlements on government land in those areas where land is not in danger zones or earmarked
for development, through transfer of title, subsidized sale or long-term leasehold. (4.194)
Security of tenure is enshrined in the cultures, social beliefs and religious teaching of the Arab
countries, where it is seen and treated as a fundamental right. (4.195) Individual ownership of land is a
well-recognized right in Islamic society. As a result, various instruments enabling access to land for all
classes in urban society without the need for formal transfer of title have been created over centuries. (4.s) Page 255

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
C. Spatial planning and provision of urban land for housing
4. Recognition and use of informal land markets: Integrating them into formal procedures
“The urban land sector is a complex set of formal and informal processes and organisations that
cut across a number of other sectors.” (4.196) The development of informal settlements is a most
conspicuous manifestation of the way land markets work in developing countries. The root cause lies in
an urban land market which, as a result of government decision-making, fails to allocate land to the poor
for housing. The failure of government policies in this area and the inability of the formal private sector to
provide land for housing the poor have strengthened the role of informal land markets. Although several
studies have focused on informal land supply systems, significant gaps remain with regard to informal
land markets. These are a constraint on the formulation of appropriate policies. (4.197)
Bogotá, Colombia, is a case in point. Most of the housing of the urban poor in the city has been
developed by the informal sector, usually landowners with underhand support from some local politician.
These landowners typically control large unserviced plots, often on the outskirts of the city in locations
prone to environmental hazards, landslides or flooding, or land that has been set aside for infrastructure
development. Informal land developers sell the plots to the community using non-conventional payment
systems. These disregard the buyer’s financial status and instead rely on intimidation. However, these
developers often give advice on how to pressure local authorities and politicians to provide infrastructure,
services and amenities, on top of legal title to the land. It is not uncommon to find informal land
developers collaborating with elected local councillors, who promise infrastructure in return for votes. (4.198)
Similar practices can be found in other developing country cities. Indeed, the operation of the land
market is as much a governance issue as it is a market and administrative one, as Box 15 shows.
Page 256

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
D. Provision and operation of infrastructure and services
Infrastructure and services are failing poor people in developing countries and on three counts: access,
quantity and quality. This has a serious effect on human health, productivity and quality of life, especially
for people living in poverty. In 2000,
“about 2 of every 10 people in the developing world were without access to safe water; 5 of 10
lived without adequate sanitation; and 9 of 10 lived without their wastewater treated in any
way.” (4.199)
Such statistics challenge the achievement of the MDGs, in particular Goal 7, Target 10, namely “to
halve the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic
sanitation by 2015”. The right to adequate water and sanitation at an affordable price is implicit and
acknowledged in various international declarations, covenants, conventions and statements. (4.200)
Provision and operation of infrastructure and services has traditionally been, and in many countries
still remains, the responsibility of government, at one level or another. In many cases this has been city or
municipal government, with the support of central government. However, the Habitat Agenda identifies
other actors that can participate in service provision and management. These include the private sector,
NGOs and communities. The sections below review their respective roles and effectiveness.
Page 257

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
D. Provision and operation of infrastructure and services
1. Changes in service providers and operators
a. Changing role of government
The enabling paradigm does not diminish public authorities’ role in the provision of infrastructure and
services. Rather, government’s role, at all levels, has shifted from provider to enabler, with an emphasis
on the capacity to act as:
Regulator: monitoring service quality, ensuring equitable access and reining in monopolistic
pricing;
Catalyst: providing incentives and streamlining procedures and regulations;
Partner: contributing to project finance either directly or through incentives and credit
enhancements.
Page 258

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
D. Provision and operation of infrastructure and services
1. Changes in service providers and operators
b. Privatization
The enabling approach calls for the creation of an enabling environment and incentives to motivate private
sector participation in infrastructure and service delivery. Private sector participation was forcefully
promoted on the water and sanitation policy agenda for developing countries in the 1990s as a means of
achieving greater efficiency and expansion in the water and sanitation sector. (4.201) This sub-section
discusses the commercialization and privatization of services, with a focus on water services.
Many countries have seen substantial privatization of infrastructure and services since the structural
adjustment era of the 1980s, though not in ways that fit easily with World Bank or IMF prescriptions. (4.202)
In Sub-Saharan Africa, cities typically have very large poor urban populations, with most of them relying
on informal water and sanitation provision (see Box 16). However, by 2003, at least 14 countries in the
region had adopted some form of commercialization or privatization. In the Middle East and North
Africa, privatization is limited to Jordan, Morocco and Palestine. The Southeast Asia and China region
has one of the greatest concentrations of private sector participation and investment in the water and
sanitation sector. However, Latin America has privatized the water and sanitation sector more than any
other region. It has also seen several initiatives to improve services for low-income groups through
private sector participation. (4.t),(4.203)
“But the commercialization and privatization of water services are controversial. On one hand,
there is strong opposition from large segments of society that question the treatment of water
purely as a commodity, rather than as a human right. On the other hand, water fee increases as a
consequence of reforms are predictably unpopular, and users have voiced their concerns,
sometimes violently, often bringing reforms to a halt. Moreover, increases in water fees tend to be
regressive, hurting the poor more than other segments of society.” (4.204)
The primary aim of private service providers, as in all private enterprises, is not the provision of
service, but maximization of profit. Attempts by private operators to serve low-income groups have
seldom been successful from a commercial perspective. For example, the La Paz concession in Bolivia,
designed to be pro-poor, was operating at a loss only three years into the contract. This was largely due
to low domestic water consumption and lack of demand for new connections. (4.205) The experience of
privatized water and sanitation in Buenos Aires, Argentina shows that, if private provision is to meet the
needs of the poor, especially in informal settlements, partnerships between communities and providers
must be forged. (4.206) On the whole,
"After nearly a decade of experimentation with commercialization and private sector
participation in water systems around the world, the results are disappointing.” (4.207)
Privatization has achieved neither the scale nor the benefits anticipated — private utilities serve only
five per cent of the world’s population. Consequently, the role that they can play in achieving the MDG
Page 259

target of halving the number of people without access to water and sanitation by 2015 inspires
pessimism. Although private water utilities constituted a relatively small proportion of all utilities in 2000,
pressures in favour of privatization are increasing worldwide. If this trend continues, access to safe water
will increasingly become a human rights issue. (4.208)
From a human rights perspective, three important lessons are drawn from the experiences and
shortcomings of the privatization of water services, relating to the (a) over-emphasis on
profit-making or cost-recovery; (b) extent of the quality and coverage of services to the
vulnerable groups; and (c) accountability of operators. (4.209)
Based on these experiences, mechanisms and guidelines should be developed and installed to
ensure that privatization does not exclude or disadvantage the poor and other vulnerable groups. These
may include cross-subsidization and safety nets. (4.210) A number of studies have assessed the impact that
privatization of water services has had on access by the urban poor. However, further research is needed
into those participatory policies allowing active involvement of local communities (the users) and
representatives from central and local government (the policy and decision-makers).
Page 260

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
D. Provision and operation of infrastructure and services
1. Changes in service providers and operators
c. Partnerships and community involvement
NGOs and CBOs along with small-scale private enterprises are playing a growing role in providing basic
infrastructure and services. Moreover, the links between the state and the voluntary sector are becoming
more, not less, important for service provision. (4.211) In many cities and towns in Africa, Asia and Latin
America, small-scale private sector and NGO providers of water and sanitation are playing an important
role in delivering infrastructure and services. Contrary to expectations, these are good-quality, low-cost
services. (4.212) The Habitat Agenda recommends a strengthening of partnerships and participation through
capacity-building. NGOs are playing an important role in this respect, as described in Chapter III, and
further below. This sub-section deals with involvement by NGOs, CBOs and small-scale private
enterprises.
There is great potential to generate both employment and local income multipliers through the
supply and maintenance of services. Furthermore, the experience of CBO service provision can have a
very positive effect on community cohesion. In many cases, CBOs have demonstrated their ability to
provide and maintain roads, paved areas, sanitation, water and solid waste disposal in labour-intensive
and community-based ways. (4.213) However, they have a long way to go. In times when finding gainful
work is the most important issue for many poor households, labour-intensive service provision should
rank high on the agenda of those authorities encouraging the enabling approach.
WaterAid, an international NGO, works with local partner organizations in Asia and Africa. The
NGO helps communities in informal settlements mobilize and organize to gain better access to water and
sanitation. (4.214) In India, the National Slum Dwellers Federation and Mahila Milan, with the support of the
Indian NGO SPARC, have implemented a programme of community-designed, built and managed toilet
blocks that has reached hundreds of thousands of poor urban people. (4.215) Shelter Associates, a local
NGO in Pune, India, is working on a similar initiative with urban poor communities, albeit on a smaller
scale. (4.216)
In Chile, the ‘Participatory Paving Programme’ initiative has leveraged community contributions
with city and national funds and, using private-sector expertise, has effectively addressed the shortage of
paved roads in poor urban areas. (4.217) In Pakistan, the Orangi Pilot Project-Research and Training
Institute (OPP-RTI) Low Cost Sanitation Programme enables low income families to construct and
maintain a sewerage system with their own resources and under their own management. OPP-RTI
provides social and technical guidance, tools and supervision of implementation. This experience shows
that people can finance and build underground sanitation in their homes, their lanes and neighbourhoods
— i.e., ‘internal’ development. However, “external” development remains out of their reach as it involves
trunk sewers, treatment plants and long secondary sewers which only public authorities can provide. (4.218) Page 261

The Community-led Infrastructure Finance Facility (CLIFF) supports and reinforces
community-led approaches to infrastructure provision (see Box 33). It does so by providing urban poor
groupings with direct access to capital, enabling them to demonstrate that they can develop their own
creative, sustainable solutions to the problem of slums. Initiatives are tested first on a small scale, prior to
scaling up. Feasibility studies for the application of CLIFF operations have been carried out in Ethiopia,
Ghana, Uganda and Zambia. (4.219) Page 262

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
D. Provision and operation of infrastructure and services
2. Mobilization of financial resources from infrastructure and services users
The provision of infrastructure and services, particularly at the municipal level, requires substantial
resources, including financial, which central and local governments in most developing countries lack. The
Habitat Agenda emphasizes the need to mobilize new and additional financial resources from various
sources to meet the rapidly rising costs of shelter, infrastructure and services. The Habitat Agenda calls
on governments to provide an enabling framework which aims to:
“Strive for full-cost recovery for urban services, with the exception of public safety services,
through user charges, while at the same time addressing the needs of the poor, inter alia, through
pricing policies and, where appropriate, transparent subsidies.” (4.220)
The following discussion reviews past and current efforts to mobilize financial resources through
user charges, cost recovery and subsidy mechanisms.
Page 263

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
D. Provision and operation of infrastructure and services
2. Mobilization of financial resources from infrastructure and services users
a. Cost recovery
Cost recovery takes many forms although the principle remains the same: ‘those who use a service
should pay for it.’ This serves several mutually reinforcing purposes. Cost recovery ensures better
financial control over projects, reduces demands on government resources and makes the 'user pays'
principle explicit and transparent. It also ensures, in principle, that the availability of investment capital
remains intact, thereby increasing the potential for sustainability and replicability.
“At community level, financing and cost recovery mechanisms are influenced by degree of
demand responsiveness, but also by the mechanisms in place for payments and contribution.” (4.221)
Based on country experiences, the most important pre-conditions for effective cost recovery are as
follows:
“(i) provision of accurate information to project participants;
(ii) development of effective sanctions in cases of default;
(iii) establishment of clear procedures for billing, collection, payments,
recording, etc.;
(iv) determination of the level of satisfaction with services rendered by
management; and community pressure.” (4.222)
Direct recovery of infrastructure costs can be problematic, as explained in Box 17. Local
authorities have been more successful at indirect cost recovery. For example, ‘valorization' taxes have
been levied on water supply and other local public services. With valorization, costs are apportioned to
the affected properties in proportion to expected benefits. (4.223)
In a growing number of countries, federations of urban poor groups are demonstrating new ways
of developing programmes which, in turn, improve the lives of thousands of their member households. In
the process, they manage unit costs that are far lower than those of conventional government or
international agency programmes. Many of their initiatives also recover costs, with the proceeds funding
further community programmes. (4.u)
Enforcing cost recovery can have adverse consequences for urban poor communities, though. For
instance, when municipalities in South Africa cut off water supplies to whole communities for failure to
pay, one upshot was an outbreak of cholera in Kwazulu. According to NGOs, the epidemic started in a
community that had its water cut off for inability to pay. Of the approximately 106,000 people infected,
most had no access to water. Following the outbreak, and in line with African National Congress policy,
Page 264

free minimum allowances of water and electricity have been guaranteed in several cities. (4.224) This is in line
with Habitat Agenda recommendations on targeted subsidies and safety nets for the most disadvantaged
and vulnerable groups.
Page 265

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
D. Provision and operation of infrastructure and services
2. Mobilization of financial resources from infrastructure and services users
b. Targeted subsidies, cross-subsidies and other support mechanisms
Subsidies are a contentious issue in housing across the world. The arguments against them are strong.
They are often introduced for non-housing reasons, such as redistributing income, creating employment,
generating savings, starting up the economy, assisting the construction industry, maintaining peace and
political stability, etc. (4.225) In addition, poorly targeted subsidies can be very damaging to housing supply
and markets. They distort space use, physical quality, physical conditions as well as property rights,
infrastructure and location. (4.226)
However, use of targeted subsidies is not inconsistent with the principle of enablement — in fact,
enablement and subsidies are complementary. As noted earlier (see section II.C),
“it is only by enabling the not so poor to help themselves that governments can make resources
available to assist the poorest groups.” (4.227)
The Habitat Agenda emphasizes the need to:
“[p]rovide, where appropriate, targeted and transparent subsidies … and various types of safety
nets to the most vulnerable groups. (4.228)
It also calls for the establishment of:
“support mechanisms to enable people living in poverty and the disadvantaged to have access to
basic infrastructure and services.” (4.229)
Subsidies can be implemented in several different ways. However, the largest single element of
subsidy, in terms of value, is invariably of a financial nature. This is followed by land, an element which, in
urban areas, can be of major importance. (4.230) A few examples of such practices are available. In 1977,
for instance, Chile pioneered the up-front capital subsidy approach, whereby subsidies helped poor
households to purchase dwellings developed by the private sector. Though gradually modified and
improved over the years, the original model is recognizable in Chile’s current programme. Colombia
adopted a variant of the Chilean model in 1990, and the defining elements remain after subsequent
amendments. Generally speaking, both countries have aimed subsidies at the poor, and for that matter at
families rather than single-person households, including aspiring home-owners and nationals rather than
foreigners. (4.231) Egypt provides subsidies through soft loans to individuals rather than directly towards the
cost of the house, the ownership of which can be sold or otherwise transferred. However, such schemes
are only sustainable if accompanied by income-generating initiatives and employment opportunities if loan
defaults are to be avoided. (4.232)
South Africa has used a wide range of targeted subsidies as part of its new housing policy. Since
1994 the Government, in collaboration with various civil society actors, has provided subsidies to more
than 1.3 million households in both rural and urban areas. (4.233) When the policy was launched in 1994,
there was only one subsidy mechanism, but alternative mechanisms have since been introduced. These
Page 266

include:
The ‘individual’ subsidy (for the individual credit-linked purchase of a completed house);
The ‘institutional’ subsidy (by far the largest programme, where NGOs or contractors build for
groups of subsidy recipients);
Social housing (mainly used to renovate inner-city property and upgrade migrant worker
hostels); and
The ‘People’s Housing Process’ (for self-help construction on conventionally-delivered serviced
sites, or with some community participation in servicing). (4.234)
Explicit cross-subsidies from sites and services schemes and commercial land development to
finance slum upgrading were part of early World Bank-funded urban projects. This worked fairly well in
urban development projects in Jordan, Madras and Tamil Nadu. (4.235) In India, government intervention in
land development regulations facilitates Mumbai's strategy of demolishing existing slums and resettling
slum-dwellers in new, cross-subsidized, on-site housing. (4.236) Differential price zones for land or different
plot sizes in a cross-subsidized project or programme can make access more affordable for various
income groups. To avoid external subsidies, commercial developments should generate sufficient
surpluses to cover any deficit resulting from the community's inability to pay for much of the cost of land,
infrastructure and possibly housing. (4.237)
In 1978 in Brazil, legislation on water and sanitation rates envisaged that all segments of society —
including low-income communities — would benefit from water supply and sanitation service
improvements. Consequently, public administrations were thus allowed to include specific regional and
socioeconomic features in utility rate structures. A system of cross-subsidies whereby rates were based
on category and consumption volumes was introduced:
“The users with low levels of consumption (assumed to be poorest) were cross subsidized by those
with higher levels of consumption (assumed to be richest).” (4.238)
However, in the first Water and Sanitation Project for Low-Income Communities Project
(PROSANEAR I), launched in 1992,
“requirements for cost recovery through tariffs and connection fees were not clearly and
consistently established, leading to mixed signals among the communities, local governments and
water agencies. The reliance on internal cross-subsidies to finance service expansions for the poor
is also not sustainable and could constrain future replication of the program.” (4.239)
Page 267

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
The previous chapters have highlighted the urban housing challenge that central and local governments are
facing in developing countries. However, most public authorities are taking positive measures to address
this challenge. As they endorsed the Habitat Agenda, they declared that:
“[T]heir objective is to achieve adequate shelter for all, especially the deprived urban and rural
poor, through an enabling approach to the development and improvement of shelter that is
environmentally sound.” (4.240)
In the context of an enabling approach, governments are expected to withdraw from the direct
provision of housing and facilitate and support shelter production and improvement by other actors. In
practice,
“[Governments commit themselves] to the strategy of enabling all key actors in the public,
private and community sectors to play an effective role — at the national, state/provincial,
metropolitan and local levels — in human settlements and shelter development.” (4.241)
The sections below briefly examine how effectively this strategy is being implemented.
Page 268

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
1. Shelter production by public organizations
Many governments have withdrawn from direct delivery of housing as recommended in the GSS and
Habitat Agenda. However, in a number of countries, public organizations are actively involved in shelter
production in one way or another. They include government agencies, financial bodies and specialized
institutions. These are among the actors whose participation in shelter production and improvement
should be enabled through the formulation of appropriate strategies as well as legislative and regulatory
frameworks, according to the Habitat Agenda.
India, for example, has continued with a strategy of demolishing existing slums and resettling
slum-dwellers in new, cross-subsidized, on-site housing. This is facilitated by government intervention in
land development processes and regulations. The strategy is feasible largely because state governments
own substantial amounts of urban land, enabling to implement a variety of housing schemes. These
include: provision of sites for housing development, of housing-related services and of finished housing
units. State governments also provide loans and/or capital grants for house construction and upgrading
and relocation of slum dwellers. All of these are implemented through housing boards and corporations,
municipal bodies and public works departments. (4.242)
HUDCO is one such organization. Established as a government agency under the Companies Act
in the mid-1970s, it provides financial support to those state governments, housing boards and local
authorities implementing housing and urban development projects. HUDCO has been the primary
government agency through which the major portion of public capital spending on housing has been
channelled. The agency delivers housing and services through a variety of schemes. These point to the
variety of ways in which public organisations can be involved in shelter production. Many of these are
recommended in the Habitat Agenda. They include:
Co-operative housing;
Construction loans;
Rental housing for employees;
Rehabilitation and upgrading;
Night shelters for pavement dwellers and other homeless people;
Condominium ownership for working women;
Housing delivery through NGOs and CBOs;
Housing delivery through the private sector; and
Page 269

Individual housing loans.
HUDCO has a specific mandate to improve the housing conditions of lower-income groups and
the homeless. However, for all its efforts, the contribution of all the public housing programmes together
is no more than 16 per cent of the total housing stock in India as a whole. (4.243)
Other government agencies in India are also involved in upgrading. One of these is the Municipal
Corporation of Visakhapatnam, which has primary responsibility for slum upgrading in that city. This
particular experience is notable for the consistency of its well co-ordinated, integrated approach. The
Corporation’s strategy entails comprehensive development of slum communities by harnessing resources
and programmes, and co-ordinating various organizations. (4.244) This has proved an effective way of
optimizing resources, as advocated in the enabling approach.
In Brazil, municipal districts have found various ways of reducing the housing shortage: building
new housing units; housing improvement; self-help building programmes through savings groups; basic
building materials kits; and slum upgrading. (4.245) The São Paulo Municipal Housing and Urban
Development Department (SEHAB) slum action plan co-ordinates housing policy and poverty alleviation
(see Box 18). The plan also recognizes the link between slums and social exclusion. The social housing
programme focuses on resettling households living in environmentally hazardous locations. It also
provides alternative sites for households displaced by infrastructure upgrading works. Over 5,000
households have been allocated new housing units under programmes funded through the Municipal
Housing Fund, state and federal programmes, and external sources. (4.246) SEHAB also manages the
participatory housing budget instituted in São Paulo in 2000. (4.247)
Political will was evident when the country’s president pledged to secure government support for
the programme. Box 18 gives more details of the President’s and the Government’s commitments.
However, while poor households have no doubt benefited from SEHAB’s programmes, the funding
arrangements are difficult to replicate in many developing countries. Moreover, they are likely to be
difficult to sustain over the long term, especially if reliance on external sources remains heavy. This was
the case with Mexico’s FONHAPO (4.v) initiative, which Box 19 describes in more detail.
The National Housing Authority of Thailand (NHA) was created in 1973, through the merger of
three housing agencies and the development activities of the GHB. Its explicit responsibilities were to
build homes for people; to clear slums and resettle those affected by the clearing operations; to provide
dwellings and estates for rent, sale and hire-purchase and to manage them; to subsidize tenants and
buyers; and to conduct urban community development. The core activity of the NHA in Bangkok is now
the management of its low-income rental housing estates and various sites-and-services schemes where
evicted slum dwellers can resettle. NHA also assists evicted slum dwellers to resettle in
sites-and-services schemes selected and bought by the slum dwellers themselves.
“Housing experts have pointed out that most of NHA’s activities are an anachronism at a time
that housing production tends to be left to the private sector and the individual family, and the
government acts as an enabler and a facilitator.” (4.248)
In South Africa, the National Housing Forum set out national policies during the transitional period
(1990–1994). A critical question was whether the government should be involved in direct production of
housing, or whether an alternative approach, with self-help at its core, should be pursued. (4.249) After much
debate, it was agreed that the best strategy to adopt was one whereby the “government facilitates a
framework in which the private sector carries out the delivery of ‘incremental housing’.” (4.250) As a
result, South Africa’s housing policy revolves around the enabling approach, with the state acting as
facilitator rather than supplier of housing.
Page 270

The cornerstone of the South African housing policy is the national subsidy scheme. (4.w) It offers a
lump sum or one-off ‘capital’ subsidy to eligible households, and on a sliding scale in relation to income.
Consideration is also given to those with special needs. This enables them to secure a site, basic services
and a core or starter house consisting of a permanent top structure (foundation, walls and roof) of 30–42
square metres. Individual households are then expected to extend their houses incrementally, as and
when they can afford to. “The focus of the one-off ‘capital subsidies’ is on width rather than
depth.” (4.251) However, many people claim to be unaware that the subsidized dwelling is intended to be a
starter house, and some feel they were ‘robbed’ as they are unable to extend the minimal dwellings. This
underscores the importance of ensuring that beneficiaries have adequate information about intended
development interventions that directly, or even indirectly, affect them. Unaffordability of housing inputs
has indeed undermined the achievement of the objectives of the policy. (4.252)
Box 20 describes the People’s Housing Process which the South African Government launched to
address the housing needs of the urban poor. In line with the principles of the enabling approach, the
People’s Housing Process supports people wishing to build their own homes. The majority of the
households it supports are unable to access credit or accumulate significant savings to enhance their
subsidies. This is again in line with the principle of direct intervention by governments to support the
poorest and most disadvantaged groups. Many NGOs are involved in the People’s Housing Process in
addition to the People’s Housing Partnership Trust.
Under South Africa’s subsidy programme, 1.5 million new housing units were built between 1994
and mid-2003, with a further 300,000 under construction at that point. But for all the achievements of
this programme, a substantial housing deficit remains, estimated at 2.3 million households in mid-2003.
(4.253)
Despite the declared intention of the new housing policy, and the efforts of the People’s Housing
Process, the poorest and most disadvantaged groups are not benefiting, at an adequate scale, in the face
of macroeconomic and institutional realities. (4.254) These are precisely the groups that should be targeted
and supported in the enabling approach.
Page 271

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
2. Support to informal sector and small-scale housing producers
As shown in Chapter I, a growing majority of the urban poor live in slums and informal settlements. The
lack of an effective formal housing supply system that can meet the demand for low-cost housing is a
major problem in many developing countries. As a result,
“The bulk of the low-income housing in developing countries is produced by the informal sector.”
(4.255)
However, the informal sector, which is currently the most effective housing supplier, presents
opportunities to improve the supply of adequate and affordable housing. The Habitat Agenda recognises
this as it recommends that governments should:
“Make use of contracts with community-based organizations and, where applicable, the informal
sector for the planning, design, construction, maintenance and rehabilitation of housing and local
services, especially in low-income settlements, with an emphasis on enhancing the participation
and, thus, short- and long-term gains of local communities.” (4.256)
The contractors who work on house construction as part of self-help schemes, sites-and-services
and upgrading projects are almost all small-scale. Given the severely limited technical, financial and
managerial capacity of small-scale informal entrepreneurs, national institutions have an important role to
play in strengthening the technological capacity of the industry. In Kenya, the Housing and Building
Research Institute (HABRI) of the University of Nairobi and the Kenya Building Research Centre in the
Ministry of Lands and Housing play such a role. Small industry development organizations can also
provide extension services to small-scale producers to complement the technical support provided by
research and development institutions. (4.257)
“Supporting small-scale producers and community organizations makes sense both as a
pragmatic response to state and market failure, and as a creative response to the ability of other
actors to produce housing at lower economic cost and higher social benefit.” (4.258)
The majority of small-scale housing producers have no choice but to operate informally. This is
because the construction they undertake does not conform to planning standards or building regulations.
Complying with building codes would increase the cost of construction and make it unaffordable for the
majority of the population. Official building permits are thus seldom obtained. Moreover, the
administrative procedures to obtain building permission and approval are time-consuming and often
difficult to understand and follow. The registration process for firms is, likewise, complex and costly,
often due to corruption. As they operate informally, small-scale housing producers cannot participate in
competitive tendering. Even if they were allowed to bid, they would likely not be able to afford the
insurance and/or bonds. By the same token, they would be unable to secure sufficient working capital
and/or materials credit to finance a project in the event of delay in payment by the client. This is why the
Habitat Agenda calls on governments, in partnership with all relevant stakeholders, to:
“Promote contracting and procurement that … facilitate the involvement of the local private
Page 272

sector, including small businesses and contractors, and, when appropriate, the informal sector…”
(4.259)
Another way of supporting small-scale housing producers is to remove the legislative and
regulatory barriers that prevent their legitimate participation in shelter delivery. Some countries have done
just this. Botswana's ‘Enabling Development Control Code (1995)’ “bases its approach on an
enabling strategy, calling for regulative reforms to remove unnecessary constraints.” (4.260) Kenya’s
revised building by-laws, ‘Code 95’, likewise enable small-scale housing producers to participate in
shelter production. As mentioned earlier, the introduction of performance-oriented building standards has
enabled the use of a wider range of building materials and technologies. This has facilitated the legitimate
participation of small-scale housing producers in the shelter process.
Page 273

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
3. Support to the development of appropriate building materials and construction technologies
A major reason why housing is unaffordable for the urban poor majority in developing countries is the
high costs of inputs, in particular land and building materials. The problem with materials arises because
of the insistence by governments, at central and local levels, on the use of conventional building materials
and technologies. These are set out in building codes and regulations, many of which have been inherited
or adopted from foreign countries. These regulations prevent the use of more appropriate, readily
available local building materials as well as of cost- and environmentally-effective construction
technologies.
To improve shelter delivery systems, the Habitat Agenda recommends that governments, in
co-operation with all other interested parties, should:
“Encourage the development of environmentally sound and affordable construction methods and
the production and distribution of building materials, including strengthening the local building
materials industry, based as far as possible on locally available resources” (4.261)
The local building materials industry, in Africa in particular, has many shortcomings. They include
poor productivity and inability to diversify into new product lines. A main reason for this is poor
technological capacity, especially in the small-scale sector. (4.262)
Policies are needed to increase access to cheap and appropriate building materials, and support
research and development into innovative technologies. Equally urgent is the need to improve the quantity
and quality of skilled workers in the informal housing sector. Environmentally-sound construction design
and techniques, and energy-efficient, low-polluting technologies should be made more widely available.
In this respect, user-friendly technical literature is already available regarding innovations such as
compressed earth blocks, dome construction, ferro-cement channels, rammed earth and vault
construction. (4.263) UN-HABITAT and appropriate technology development organizations (4.x) have actively
promoted wide-scale production and use of these appropriate building materials and construction
technologies.
Governments, research institutions and NGOs can play a critical role in disseminating information
about these innovations and providing training and other forms of technical support to individuals and
community groups. (4.264) The Kenya Building Research Centre and the Housing and Building Research
Institute at the University of Nairobi, Kenya have been established by the Government for this purpose.
In Bangladesh, where the technical quality of housing is generally low due to the use of traditional skills,
the country’s engineering colleges and technology institutes are training graduates to keep the housing
sector technically sustainable. They recognize that technical sustainability depends largely on affordability.
For the majority of poor urban households, this means that housing construction techniques must be
Page 274

simple and low-cost. (4.265)
The use of appropriate building materials and construction technologies in shelter production can
also have a significant impact on poverty. Because they are typically labour-intensive, these materials and
technologies can create job opportunities for unemployed or underemployed skilled and unskilled
workers living in poverty. They can also have multiplier effects by creating income-earning opportunities
for people involved in other housing-related micro- and small enterprises, including home-based
enterprises. (4.266) In addition, cost comparisons of houses using these alternative materials and technologies
suggest that they have the potential to enable a 30 per cent reduction in building costs. (4.267) Page 275

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
4. Support to self-help efforts by community groups and housing co-operatives
Appropriate national housing policies can potentially create a productive link between the shelter sector
and the macro-economy, as mentioned in Chapter I, if they are effectively implemented. This can be
achieved by involving actors at all levels of government as well as those NGOs and CBOs active in
housing development and improvement as recommended in the enabling approach. The emphasis should
be on the incremental improvement of existing shelter for the majority, rather than on the production of
new high-standard housing for a minority. (4.266) Therefore, an enabling strategy should support the efforts
of all these actors to enable them to play a more effective role in their shelter production and
improvement activities.
Page 276

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
4. Support to self-help efforts by community groups and housing co-operatives
a. Community groups
The important role that urban poor communities themselves are playing in shelter production and
improvement is evidenced in slums and informal settlements. In a number of countries in Africa and Asia,
the self-help efforts of the communities can, to some extent, be ascribed to traditional patterns of
community participation. A strong participatory culture is also associated with the strength and increasing
assertiveness of CBOs. (4.268) The democratization processes highlighted in Chapter III have contributed to
the creation of a favourable political climate that has given CBOs a louder voice.
For instance, in Nthutukoville in KwaZulu-Natal , South Africa, households have contributed to
the provision of their housing through ‘sweat equity’, i.e., by providing labour in the installation of
infrastructure and construction of parts of the housing structures. Women, particularly those who were
involved in the mutual self-help project, participated actively in building their houses from start to
completion. Those without construction training provided unskilled labour. Moreover, the government’s
housing policy acted as a catalyst for the empowerment of women, as it enabled them to access the
funding needed to develop serviced sites. (4.269)
In Namibia the City of Windhoek adopted a participatory capacity building strategy to implement
its Build-Together Programme (see Box 21). The focus was on strengthening community self-reliance,
organization and partnerships, in addition to securing access to land and affordable housing. Households
were responsible for constructing the superstructure (floors, walls and roofs) of their houses which, in
most cases, meant dealing with a small-scale contractor. (4.270) Page 277

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
4. Support to self-help efforts by community groups and housing co-operatives
b. Co-operatives
Co-operative housing is not a new development. Indeed, it has long been practiced in developed
countries, where it provides a substantial share of the housing stock. However, the co-operative housing
movement has been gaining momentum in developing countries in recent years. This is, in part, due to the
failure of other housing delivery systems to provide adequate and affordable urban housing. In addition,
the tradition of collective support in rural areas, though not nearly as strong in cities and towns, retains
some influence. This section focuses on the role of housing co-operatives and the support they receive. In
the Habitat Agenda,
“[t]he co-operative approach is given a pre-dominant role with regard to the principles of
strengthening enabling strategies, participation and partnerships.” (4.271)
Co-operative housing provision is available either through government channels or independently.
Housing co-operatives serve three basic functions towards the overall goal of adequate shelter for their
members:
they enable households to pool resources to acquire and develop land and housing;
they facilitate access to finance; and
they enable groups to join forces and reduce construction costs. (4.272)
In Zimbabwe, the co-operative movement has contributed significantly to housing provision for
many years. According to Housing People of Zimbabwe, a local NGO, over 1,200 registered housing
co-operatives are operating in the country. Between them, they have managed to build a total of over
45,000 housing units. (4.273) However, housing co-operatives can only borrow from building societies.
According to Zimbabwe's fragmented and specialized banking system and the legislation governing it,
these are the only finance institutions authorised to provide mortgages for house construction or purchase.
However, by-laws now make it possible to allocate land in urban areas to housing co-operatives, a
significant boost to enabling policies. (4.274) Nevertheless,
“[h]ousing cooperatives have expressed concern over the slow progress in getting land for
housing development under the National Housing Delivery Programme.” (4.275)
In Kenya, most of the early co-operatives were sponsored by the Central Organisation of Trade
Unions through the formation and registration of NACHU in 1979. Since then, NACHU has continued
to represent and support housing co-operatives. (4.276) Its main objective is to assist housing co-operatives
through the provision of technical and financial services at a cost-effective rate. Therefore, NACHU does
not fall within the domain of conventional financial institutions. Nevertheless, NACHU has played an
important role, as its projects have demonstrated that “granting loans to low-income households for
Page 278

shelter improvement is a viable undertaking.” (4.277) Yet, NACHU has experienced difficulties in its
operations owing to its heavy reliance on external funding. Currently over 400 housing co-operatives are
active in Kenya. More liberal legislation has enabled co-operatives to seek credit from a wider variety of
financial institutions – although the change does not significantly alter the terms on which money can be
borrowed. (4.278)
In South Africa, co-operative housing models are a relatively recent phenomenon although they
come as a major alternative to conventional housing delivery. Co-operative housing is supported by
tenants’ groups looking to redress inadequate housing conditions, along with a network of local and
international NGOs. Absence of an enabling legal framework had long been identified as a constraining
factor in the development of co-operative housing in South Africa. However, registration of housing
co-operatives has become possible following negotiations with the Government. (4.279)
In India, the co-operative housing movement has spread all over the country and is making an
important contribution to housing supply. The number of housing co-operatives increased from 5,564 in
1959/1960 to 72,040 in 1993/1994, an almost fifteen-fold increase. The co-operatives have built an
estimated 700,000 dwelling units, with another 800,000 units at various stages of construction. Because
they are considered so useful for urban poor households, housing co-operatives are given preferential
treatment in terms of allocation of land, credit and other subsidies. In New Delhi, the development of
housing co-operatives is dependent on the DDA. As mentioned in section IV.C.3.d), the DDA owns
large areas of land in Delhi and has allotted a substantial amount to housing co-operatives. However,
most of the co-operatives have not catered to low-income households. (4.280)
Housing co-operatives are also playing an important role in increasing and improving the housing
stock in transition countries, as illustrated in Box 22. While the models presented may not be applicable
in most developing countries, they offer important lessons with respect to what an enabling approach can
achieve.
However, so far registered housing co-operatives have been responsible for only a very small
proportion of new housing across the world. (4.y) Rather, their contribution has been more significant in
terms of introducing innovative concepts and practices. (4.281) In most cases, co-operatives have found it
difficult to mobilize and access funding, which is derived from four principal sources:
internal funding from members' own savings (sometimes augmented by informal borrowing)
contributed as share capital or through similar mechanisms augmented by informal borrowing;
external funding from co-operative financial institutions (such as SACCOs and co-operative
banks);
external funding from other formal financial institutions (such as building societies, banks or
special government programmes); and/or
international finance.
Page 279

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
5. The role of NGOs in supporting shelter development
As mentioned earlier, a huge number of NGOs are playing an important role in shelter development and
improvement. Not only are they involved in the direct production of housing, but also, more importantly,
they support shelter development. This section examines how effective some of these NGOs have been
in their supporting role.
South Africa’s People’s Housing Process (see Box 20) is a major initiative addressing the shelter
needs of the poorest and most vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. The People’s Housing Process
makes particular efforts to involve women in decision-making and to draw on their special skills and roles
in the communities. Like most of the current housing initiatives in the country, this approach relies on
targeted government subsidies. The People’s Housing Process also receives technical, financial, logistical
and administrative assistance from NGOs and other support agencies. In this respect, NGOs help the
beneficiaries of housing subsidies to form savings groups and to contribute ‘sweat equity’ towards
infrastructure development in new neighbourhoods. (4.282)
In Peru, NGOs have also played an important support role in the participatory planning and
budgeting process in Villa El Salvador, Lima. On top of mobilizing resources for the consultation process,
NGOs have had a principal function of supporting development of working methodologies. (4.283) In
Indonesia, NGOs have played a crucial role in mobilizing the resources of urban poor communities to
facilitate the implementation of KIP. (a.z),(4.284) Sponsored by international agencies, local NGOs have also
made substantial efforts to train local communities in a variety of skills such as house construction, acting
as community contractors and the running of housing co-operatives. (4.285)
Many NGOs maintain extensive contacts with slum communities on a daily basis. This puts them in
a good position to provide valuable insights into the various factors that can improve slum dwellers’ lives
pursuant to MDG Goal 7, Target 11.
Page 280

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
5. The role of NGOs in supporting shelter development
a. Organization and representation
NGOs have an important role to play in mobilizing and organizing communities, building capacity, forging
partnerships, etc. This has already been mentioned in Chapter III, and is discussed further below with
some examples.
In Kenya, effective organization and capacity building is demonstrated in the instrumental role of
ITDG in the creation of the Nakuru Affordable Housing and Environmental Co-operative (NAHECO).
This is an apex body formed to co-ordinate CBOs in informal settlements in Nakuru, Kenya. NAHECO
also facilitates their developmental activities, networking, savings initiatives and access to credit.
NAHECO has over 450 individual members, a majority of whom are women. ITDG has also played a
significant role in organizing former employees of the Cone Textiles factory to form the Cone Textiles
Housing Co-operative, and enabling them to access land and develop housing for members. (4.286)
At the first World Social Forum — held in Porto Alegre, Brazil in 2001 — various social
movements, municipalities, national governments, universities, professional associations and NGOs
launched the drafting of a ‘World Charter on the Right to the City’. All were concerned with the need for
more democratic, equitable, human and sustainable cities. The Charter outlines the responsibilities and
measures to be undertaken by national governments, local authorities, and civil society, as well as
international organizations, to guarantee that all people live with dignity in the cities. (4.aa) Article II of the
Charter declares:
“All citizens have the right to participate directly or by representation in the control, planning and
governance of the cities in order to increase transparency, efficiency and autonomy of the local
public administrations and popular organisations. All citizens have the right to participate in the
planning, layout, control, management, rehabilitation and improvement of the cities.” (4.287)
NGOs play an important role in the fulfilment of this ‘right’. (4.bb) They often represent the interests of
poor people, especially those living in slums and informal settlements, who are unable on their own to
have this right granted. India provides a good example of effective representation. When the Government
launched a good governance campaign in 2001, an alliance between SPARC, Mahila Milan and the
National Slum Dwellers Federation linked good governance with universal access to sanitation, which
ultimately resulted in the establishment of a National Sanitation Programme. (4.cc) The programme provides
city administrations with a 50 per cent central government subsidy for community toilets. (4.288)
Many NGOs have also played an important representative role in the PRSP process mentioned in
Chapter I. However,
“the process was [often] limited to a select group of NGOs invited to events at which the
intentions of a government were outlined for their agreement.” (4.289)
Page 281

Moreover, there is concern that consultation with NGOs is no guarantee that poorer communities have
actually participated themselves. (4.290) Page 282

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
5. The role of NGOs in supporting shelter development
b. Mediation and facilitation
NGOs often play significant intermediary roles between the demands of local communities for adequate
shelter and other needs, and the local authorities to whom these demands are addressed. In practice, this
role comes down to mobilization, advocacy and technical, social, legal and administrative assistance. The
sphere of action of international and national NGOs extends beyond the local level. (4.291)
The use of non-governmental intermediaries is not uncommon in Africa. In Francophone countries,
in particular, ‘social intermediation teams’ have been linking local governments and donors with
communities. The Tanghin Local Economic Development project in Burkina Faso is a case in point. With
funding from the French overseas co-operation agency, a French NGO, known as AFVP, (4.dd) provided
the link between the local community and the government and donor-funded project managers. The
World Bank-funded Third Urban project (1996–2001) took a similar approach. However, the use of a
foreign NGO as an intermediary accounted for nearly 40 percent of total project costs. Indeed, it is not
uncommon for such organizations to charge exorbitant wage and overhead costs. Nevertheless, French
donors have continued to use AFVP and other foreign NGOs in other West African countries. (4.292)
However, donor funding is increasingly being channelled directly to governments, which in turn are
decentralizing some resources and responsibilities to local authorities. This eliminates the intermediary role
of NGOs. (4.293) Indeed, there is a view that:
“it is necessary to eliminate the monopoly of professional NGOs as intermediaries for aid money,
in favour of broader-based people-to-people mode of development (‘the de-professionalizing of
the aid business’)” (4.294)
If this happens, more aid money will support the intended purpose and reach the targeted beneficiaries,
thereby increasing the impact on poverty.
On the other hand, international NGOs are generally in contact with local NGO networks and are
often familiar with both their range of activities and respective degrees of success. The workshops,
training courses and exchange programmes that they organize provide forums for local NGOs to learn
from each other. They also facilitate dialogue between the NGO community and local and central
government. Therefore international NGOs can play important roles in the promotion of enabling shelter
strategies.
Page 283

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
5. The role of NGOs in supporting shelter development
c. Participation in policy and decision-making
NGOs are actively involved in a diverse range of activities related to shelter development. These include
policy dialogue support and facilitation; public policy research; direct lobbying of governments;
rights-based and interest-group advocacy; and, more radically, activities outside of the boundaries of
conventional politics or the domestic legal order. (4.295)
Regarding formulation and implementation of policies that promote the enabling approach to shelter
development and improvement, the Habitat Agenda calls on governments to:
“[e]mploy broad-based participatory and consultative mechanisms that involve representatives
from public, private, non-governmental, cooperative and community sectors, including
representatives of groups that are considered to be living in poverty, at all levels in the policy
development process.” (4.296)
NGO involvement in development should be seen as a two-way process including not only
implementation but also policy-making. The example of Zimbabwe in Box 23 explains this in more detail.
NGOs have also been involved in formulating policies for international funding agencies. For
example, the Asian Development Bank has been involving NGOs more and more in projects focused on
education, health, and housing (e.g. human development projects). This is in addition to the other,
perhaps more traditional, areas of NGO involvement, such as water supply and sanitation, agriculture
support services, and irrigation. (4.297)
“Consultation with NGOs has been a part of the Bank’s policy development process for a number
of years. These consultations involved soliciting NGO comments on draft working papers or issue
papers and during workshops and conferences where proposed Bank policies are discussed. NGO
consultations have taken place in the development of policies for … population, involuntary
resettlement, … and gender and development.” (4.298)
Page 284

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
5. The role of NGOs in supporting shelter development
d. Demonstration projects
A demonstration project is a relatively small-scale, self-contained capital expenditure or technical
assistance project that serves to ‘demonstrate’ a particular approach. Demonstration projects are also
effective when it comes to forging partnerships between the public, private, NGO and community
sectors, and developing new ways of working together (learning by doing). NGOs have also made
effective use of such projects to demonstrate the implications of regulatory change and generate tangible
results on the ground. (4.299)
In Pakistan, an NGO known as OPP has been working with poor households and community
organizations in Orangi, the largest unauthorized settlement in Karachi, since 1983. OPP’s early work
demonstrated what could be accomplished through investments made by the poor households themselves
with minimal external funding. It also showed local governments how they could use their limited
resources more effectively through initiatives such as these. Over time, what originated as a small
community-funded initiative, supported by a local NGO, was replicated and scaled up to serve tens of
thousands of households. It still sets an example today for government agencies, NGOs and CBOs in
other parts of Karachi and other cities in Pakistan. (4.300)
Another example of improvements achieved with minimal government support is the initial
development programme in Barrio San Jorge, in the municipality of San Fernando, Argentina. This was
supported by a local NGO, with some foreign funding. Here too, once the programme demonstrated
tangible achievements, the local government became more supportive. The San Fernando municipal
government and other local authorities subsequently developed similar programmes for other low-income
settlements, with Federal Government support. (4.301)
The Indian NGO SPARC and its alliance with Mahila Milan and the National Slum Dwellers
Federation are together engaged in many different projects in various locations to improve housing, basic
services and overall living conditions. These have already benefited hundreds of thousands of poor urban
dwellers. Largely through demonstration projects, the alliance has shown how community-led initiatives
can contribute to poverty reduction. These initiatives include community-based and community-managed
savings and credit groups; house construction; community-designed, built and managed toilet blocks; and
community-managed resettlement programmes. (4.302) In Dharavi, Mumbai, the Rajiv Indira housing scheme
is a community led-rehabilitation initiative involving two housing co-operatives. It has demonstrated the
communities’ capacity to alleviate poverty in partnership with municipalities, NGOs and other
development actors. The scheme has paved the way for several other community-controlled and
managed projects in Mumbai. (4.303) Also in India, the Sustainable Chennai Project in Chennai (formerly
Madras) emphasises the involvement of NGOs and communities in planning and implementing projects. It
has taken a Local Agenda 21 approach, (4.ee) and uses demonstration projects to pilot and promote
Page 285

solutions to the problems identified. (4.304)
All the above examples underscore how demonstration projects involving NGOs can effectively
influence local and central government approaches and policies. Demonstration projects should be
designed and implemented along sustainable lines and provide perceptible benefits. In addition to financial
viability, the above examples point to other elements which demonstration projects need to address:
Partnerships: between key stakeholders.
Economy: cost-effectiveness, savings.
Society: capacity building; co-operation; poverty reduction.
Technology: practicability; operability; manageability; scalability.
Environment: health and environmental benefits.
Page 286

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
5. The role of NGOs in supporting shelter development
e. Shelter delivery
Some NGOs are involved in the physical delivery of housing. For example, In Bangladesh, the
Government is supporting the largest NGO in the country — BRAC (4.ff) — to build rental accommodation
for female industrial workers in Dhaka. (4.305) In South Africa, COPE is involved in building and renovation
to provide low-income housing in down-town Johannesburg. Other NGOs in the Urban Sector Network
build housing for vulnerable and disadvantaged groups such as people with disabilities (the Urban
Services Group in Port Elizabeth) and adults and children affected by HIV/AIDS (BESG in
Pietermaritzburg). (4.306) Page 287

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
6. Contributions of the formal private sector to stimulating low-income housing development
The formal (or corporate) private sector has typically not been interested in investing or participating in
low-income housing development. The main reason is that businesses do not see this as profitable — and
their own very purpose is to make a profit.
In addition to providing housing to high- and upper-middle income groups in developing countries
(who can afford formal sector housing), the formal private sector can help the urban poor through a
variety of ways: non-discriminatory employment; safe workplaces; extending services to informal
communities; facilitating access to credit for shelter improvement and micro- and small-scale enterprises;
and investing in low-income rental housing. (4.307) For example, in the Manshiet Nasser Upgrading Project
in Egypt, the private sector has created jobs in the form of microenterprises. The private sector should
also be further encouraged to participate in slum upgrading. Indeed, there should be increased efforts in
this direction given the magnitude of the challenge of slums, and to make it possible to achieve MDG 7,
Target 11. El Salvador provides a good example in this regard as the national housing policy promotes
legalization of land tenure and the participation of private sector developers in urban upgrading. (4.308)
In the Comprehensive Urban Environmental Renovation in Chengdu, China, the bulk of financing
for redevelopment was mobilized from the private sector. On this occasion, real estate companies made
bids for leases on land and development rights for new housing estates and commercial areas based on
agreed land-use plans and zoning. (4.309) This shows that the right incentives can stimulate private sector
participation.
The Habitat Agenda is based on enablement, transparency and participation. Under this strategy,
government efforts are based on establishing legislative, institutional and financial frameworks that will
enable the private sector to contribute to shelter production and improvement. The Chilean experience
provides valuable insights into the potential benefits – and the limitations – of an enabling approach. The
experience confirms that government intervention can create an enabling environment that can attract
private sector involvement. However, while the private sector is indeed more willing to invest in housing
development, it is reluctant to develop housing for the low-income segment of the market. This is where
the problem is particularly acute, and this segment remains a primary target of enabling shelter strategies.
(4.310)
In Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam, the enabling approach and, in particular, new
government-introduced financing schemes, have worked to the benefit of the private sector, rather than
the poor. This situation has been further reinforced by government neglect of its regulatory functions in the
land market, which largely favour private sector interests. (4.311) The experience of a partnership between
HUDCO and a private housing developer to build Parshwanath Township in India shows that:
“enabling strategies focused on market actors are treacherous and can produce highly uncertain
outcomes. Private developers directly supported by public initiatives and strategies may end up
Page 288

developing housing for more affluent income groups than initially planned. Conventional,
market-driven, enabling strategies can reduce their flexibility and incentives to provide housing
for low-income groups.” (4.312)
Page 289

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
IV. The changing roles of actors in the shelter sector and workable elements of enabling
strategies
E. Shelter production and improvement
7. Rental housing
Rental housing is the focus of a recent UN-HABITAT report. (4.313) Therefore, it will be given cursory
attention in the present report, with only some of the major issues highlighted in the context of the
enabling approach.
In most developing country cities, homeownership remains out of reach for a majority of poor
households, and informal rental housing is the only mode of affordable housing. Consequently, social
programmes, appropriate regulations and fiscal incentives for affordable rental housing are essential if the
housing needs of the poor are to be met. Policies and regulations should be carefully tailored to facilitate
the development of this sector.
“Within the framework of a rights-based approach to housing and the full and progressive
realization of housing rights as elaborated in international instruments, particularly in the Habitat
Agenda, more governments may consider how to improve the housing conditions in general and
of tenants in particular.” (4.314)
For several decades and in many countries across the world, rental housing, both formal and
informal, has played an important part in housing the urban poor (see Table 10). In most cities of
developing countries, home-ownership remains out of reach for a majority of poor households, who have
no access to affordable rental accommodation in the formal housing sector. The informal rental housing is
the only mode of housing within their means.
For a long time, most developing country governments have neglected the rental housing sector in
their respective national housing policies and strategies. In 1989, a United Nations expert group
recommended that:
“governments should review their housing policies and devise appropriate strategies for rental
housing which remove biases against non-owners.” (4.315)
In Central and Eastern Europe,
“At the end of the [19]90s most countries in the region recovered from the transitional recession
and realized that housing is an important and neglected area of politics. National housing
programs were prepared where the role of the rental sector had a high importance.” (4.316)
Production of rental housing by both the public and private sector should be encouraged. Box 24
provides some justification for this. As part of their enabling role in national shelter strategies,
governments should encourage and facilitate rental housing production by the private sector, in particular
through the formulation of appropriate policies, strategies, and legislative and regulatory frameworks.
They can do this through a range of measures. These include promotion of a favourable legal and
regulatory environment such as introduction of fiscal and property tax concessions; streamlining of
Page 290

planning standards and building codes; and relaxation of rent control measures. (4.gg),(4.317) As noted earlier
by the above-mentioned expert group meeting,
“[r]esearch needs to be done to find out how best to move from controlled to uncontrolled rents
with minimum costs and maximum benefits.” (4.318)
The numbers of tenant households in slums and informal settlements is increasing rapidly. In order
to achieve MDG 7, Target 11, more attention must be given to improving rental accommodation in these
areas. Contrary to popular belief,
“upgrading programmes give a positive boost to the creation of tenants and there is little
evidence of tenants being displaced. The only problem is that the officials who are directing
upgrading programmes are all too often insufficiently aware of the presence and needs of
tenants.” (4.319)
GHB in Thailand (see Box 11 above), recognizes that home ownership is beyond the means of the
lowest-income groups. Consequently, GHB provides loans to developers for construction of low-cost
rental apartments. (4.320)
“If governments are reluctant to become involved either directly or indirectly in rental housing,
then the alternative is to produce an environment conducive to commercial involvement.” (4.321)
Page 291

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
V. Assessing the implementation of enabling shelter strategies
The preceding chapters have laid out the background and underlying rationale of enabling shelter
strategies. They have also outlined the way in which the roles of the various actors in the shelter process
have changed since adoption of the GSS. Furthermore, the report has highlighted the significant shift in
government attitudes towards slums and informal settlements, and in national approaches to the challenge
they present. This description has shown the evolution from negative policies such as forced eviction and
involuntary resettlement, to more positive, rights-based policies such as negotiated resettlement, tenure
regularisation and slum upgrading. Moreover, a number of examples have illustrated the more workable
elements of enabling shelter strategies.
The present Chapter revisits some of these examples, introduces some more and discusses them in
more depth. The purpose is to scrutinize examples of both good and bad practice in enabling shelter
strategy implementation and to draw lessons from both. Accordingly, the sections below revisit core
issues, including: inner-city rehabilitation, access to land, provision of basic infrastructure and services,
slum upgrading, shelter production, and national policy and strategy formulation.
As shown in the examples below, shelter policies do not achieve any better results through
additional layers of strategic planning. The focus instead must be on incentives for effective
implementation. These include proper rewards and penalties for performance, along with empowering
staff to make decisions and take some risks. Effective implementation also calls for a re-focusing of
bureaucracies, which must view policy-making as a learning process rather than a mechanical
responsibility or a political game.
Page 292

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
V. Assessing the implementation of enabling shelter strategies
A. Inner-city rehabilitation
The Habitat Agenda calls on governments to
“Adopt an enabling approach to shelter development, including the renovation, rehabilitation,
upgrading and strengthening of the existing housing stock in both rural and urban areas.” (5.1)
The proliferation and expansion of slums and informal settlements, as was discussed in Chapter I,
has received increasing attention in recent years. This has culminated in government commitments to
achieving significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers by the year 2020 (
MDG 7, Target 11). By contrast, the simultaneous deterioration of the existing housing stock, particularly
in the inner-city areas of developing and transition countries, has been largely disregarded. Inaction in the
area of inner-city rehabilitation furthers this deterioration and is turning former good-quality housing into
slums. As a result, valuable assets are lost and the housing conditions of the urban poor and other
vulnerable and disadvantaged groups, is worsening. What is particularly ironic is that,
“in many cities, much of the public housing built between the 1950s and 1970s to re-house the
residents of central city slums and squatter settlements, typically in four- to five-storey tenement
blocks with minimal, if any, community amenities, has itself now joined the stock of slums.” (5.2)
The inner-city slums of Mártires and Santa Fé in Bogotá, the ‘hostel‘ accommodation in South
Africa, the chawls in Mumbai, India, the cortiços in Brazil and the mesones in El Salvador, are all
examples of housing-turned-slum. (5.3)
Inner-city rental tenements and slums have the significant advantage of centrality and accessibility.
However, this makes residents especially vulnerable to commercial pressures. The high and rising values
of centrally-located land and real estate in most cities makes inner-city areas attractive propositions for
redevelopment. At the same time, tenants want to retain their central locations, which on top of (usually)
cheap accommodation provide easy access to employment opportunities. The conflict of interests arising
from this situation is a very difficult one to resolve. The central strategic location of the inner-city slums,
and their evident physical and socio-economic degradation, have drawn political attention to these areas
and prompted intervention. (5.4)
Two major types of rehabilitation programmes are available: rehabilitation of buildings, and
integrated rehabilitation of areas or neighbourhoods. Two main reasons usually militate in favour of
rehabilitating individual buildings. The first is to prevent deterioration, and/or extend the ‘life’, of a
building. The second reason is to improve the quality of the dwelling, typically through provision of
services and amenities such as running water, bath, toilet, etc. However, the inner-city housing stock must
not be seen as a mere collection of individual buildings and dwellings. They are part of a larger
neighbourhood inhabited by communities. Consequently,
“emphasis should be placed on a broader concept of rehabilitation aimed at upgrading entire
areas.” (5.5)
Page 293

In developing and transition countries alike, a number of cities have experienced some success
when rehabilitating inner-city rental tenements with government support. However, these are the
exception rather than the rule. (5.6) In Bogotá, “remarkably effective actions involving urban
regeneration and recuperation have been conducted in the central areas.” (5.7) In Lublin, Poland, the
City Council launched a participatory planning process in 1990 to engage residents of two neglected
inner-city districts in the rehabilitation and re-development of their neighbourhoods. The consultation was
extensive, leading to new development plans. Several unauthorized buildings were also regularized, giving
residents security of tenure. This initiative led to the rehabilitation of existing buildings, improved
infrastructures, new housing and the establishment of shops and businesses. (5.8)
A notable experience in rehabilitation is the Programme for Integral Urban Renewal. The
municipality of San Salvador has implemented it with financial and technical support from GTZ. The
programme sought to rehabilitate the mesones through a replicable participatory and integrated
approach. As Table 11 shows, the programme also takes in many of the elements of the enabling
approach as articulated in the GSS and Habitat Agenda.
Two fundamental problems tend to make inner-city rehabilitation a complex assignment in most
cities. Firstly, because the value of land in many inner-city areas is often considerably higher than the
value of the buildings, it is in the interest of the landlords to try to sell their property. As they would rather
sell than rent, they have little interest in maintaining the property. Rent control legislation often compounds
the problem. Indeed, in San Salvador, El Salvador, one of the first problems the rehabilitation of the
mesones ran into was that:
“the owners were not interested in renovating the buildings in order to continue to hold rented
stock. With negative or marginal returns, they were happy to dispose of the properties. Equally,
the regeneration of the inner-city areas in Lima demonstrated that the commercial viability of
renting was relatively low. In circumstances such as these, low rents and non-existent
maintenance leading to a general deterioration of the buildings appears to be common.” (5.9)
Secondly, for a majority of tenants living in inner-city slums, the location of the accommodation is
far more important than the quality. Any improvement in quality is liable to result in rent increases and
create affordability problems for the existing residents. This, in turn, will likely lead to gentrification — the
process by which the poorest existing tenants are displaced by better-off newcomers. The rehabilitation
of inner-city areas can effectively contribute to overall urban economic development and social inclusion.
However, adequate safeguards against gentrification are in order. (5.10)
Legislative and ownership issues can adversely affect the implementation of rehabilitation initiatives.
For example, in Budapest, Hungary, inner-city rehabilitation was much less successful in the early 1990s
than before. The early building rehabilitation programmes met with only partial success, owing to the
economic depression in the middle of the decade along with legal and ownership problems. However, the
subsequent rapid and extensive divestiture of rental apartment buildings (around 300,000 units were sold
by 1995) and statutory changes laid the basis for private sector-led inner-city rehabilitation. (5.11) This
experience shows how the removal of inappropriate legislative and administrative barriers can stimulate
private sector participation in shelter development and improvement as recommended in the enabling
approach.
Public-private partnerships and civic engagement are important contributory factors to successful
urban renewal in general. They can provide for the competing needs of promoting economic
development, stimulating the resource investments required for urban rehabilitation, and preserving cities’
cultural heritage. (5.12) Page 294

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
V. Assessing the implementation of enabling shelter strategies
B. Access to land
1. Shelter improvement without de jure security of tenure
As noted in the Habitat Agenda:
“Access to land and legal security of tenure are strategic prerequisites for the provision of
adequate shelter for all…” (5.13)
Indeed, shelter policies will not work properly without the long-term certainty provided by secure tenure.
However,
“lack of progress in promotion of security of tenure still continues to be one of the most pressing
problems for the urban poor.” (5.14)
Security of tenure is a critical factor if the right to adequate housing is to be fully granted over time.
The notion applies equally to formal as well as informal housing, to owner-occupied and to rental
housing. Countless examples demonstrate that security of tenure increases individual, household and
community savings and expenditure towards improvement and development of homes and
neighbourhoods. This, in turn, helps improve standards of living and the achievement of housing rights. (5.15)
Undoubtedly, security of tenure is a significant factor in the willingness of people, especially
informal settlement residents, to invest in their housing. However, it has long been recognized that de
facto security, rather than legal security, is more important. (5.16) Security of tenure is, in essence, ‘a state of
mind’. It is about an individual, household or community feeling safe in the knowledge that they will not
be forcibly evicted from the land which they occupy or the homes in which they live. Indeed, the
establishment of informal settlements through illegal occupation of land and the ensuing consolidation
process in many developing countries is evidence that:
“the poor invest in permanent housing when they perceive their tenure to be secure de facto not
necessarily de jure.” (5.17)
Box 25 presents examples from India, Jordan, Pakistan, Turkey and Francophone Africa illustrating that
perceived or de facto security of tenure can be based on a variety of factors. (5.18)
UN-HABITAT has long maintained that the conventional view of:
“land ownership can be replaced by a comprehensive view of [human beings’s] relationship to
land as consisting of a set of rights. Those rights can be held by individuals, by groups of
individuals, by companies, by specific public agencies or by the Government at large … The
variety of rights can be distinguished as rights of use, rights of development, rights of transfer,
rights of lease or rental, rights of mortgage and the like. (5.19)
Figure 1 illustrates how different types of land rights can be viewed as existing along a continuum,
with some settlements complying with legislative and regulatory requirements better than others. As
endorsed by some governments, this perspective includes people with the weakest tenures in the notion
of ‘having legal access.’ Since most of those affected belong to the poorest and most vulnerable and
disadvantaged groups, broadening the scope of legal rights implies that the rights of these groups to be on
Page 295

the land will be recognized. This recognition of rights is the first step towards security of tenure. This
implies that secure tenure can derive from aspects and instruments other than formal laws and legal
documents such as title deeds. (5.20)
Enhanced rights of use, occupancy, development, etc., improve de facto security of tenure. A
formal announcement is all that is required, dispensing with, or reducing, the administrative burden. In
these circumstances, residents are less tempted to sell out to higher income groups, and other urban poor
and disadvantaged groups can access urban land for housing development. (5.20) Box 26 on land
proclamations in the Philippines provides a good example of this approach.
Nevertheless de facto security is not without its limitations and shortcomings. Perhaps most
importantly, few financial institutions will accept it as collateral for loans, and equity criteria are also badly
served.
“Occupants are exposed to the worst of exploitation and abuse and often pay substantially higher
costs for services than higher income residents in formal tenure categories.” (5.21)
In a number of countries, landowners, informal developers and governments have been offering
various innovative ‘intermediate’ tenure options, which fall short of providing full title and de jure security
of tenure,. These are pragmatic, medium-term enhancements of security of tenure, which improve access
to services and enable housing development and improvement. Examples of this approach include the ‘
anticrético’ tenure system in Bolivia (see Box 27), the Certificate of Rights in Botswana, (5.a) Temporary
Occupation Licences in Kenya, and temporary land rental in Bangkok. (5.22) In Colombia,
“A range of intermediate tenure systems such as ‘Declarations of Possession’, buying and selling
rights for future use’ and ‘communal tenancy’ all provide stepping stones with increasing rights
and levels of protection from eviction, enabling poor households to obtain secure housing at
affordable costs.” (5.23)
Intermediate tenure systems feature wide-ranging benefits and adventages. These include enhanced
tenure security, which encourages expenditure on housing and neighbourhood improvements while
discouraging poor householders from selling out to higher income groups. Intermediate tenure also
mitigates land and housing market distortions, and facilitates access for future low-income groups.
However, intermediate tenure options may prove difficult to replicate. They may also take a long time to
introduce where they require statutory reform. Moreover, and as is the case with de facto tenure,
financial institutions do not readily accept intermediate tenure options as collateral for loans. (5.20)
Communal or co-operative ownership is a growing phenomenon in a number of countries. The
success or failure of this form of tenure is largely dependent upon the effectiveness of local community
organization. (5.24) A good example of the former is the community land trust model (CLT) adopted in Voi,
Kenya. The CLT reflects many principles of the enabling approach and strategic innovations. It is
described in more detail in Box 28.
The major limitations of the CLT system are that administrators do not understand it well, and it
requires lengthy documentation. “Communal land ownership may also be a disincentive to invest,
especially when people are not free to sell directly.” (5.25)
In the ‘Building Together’ project in Bangkok, Thailand, the land was initially developed under
co-operative ownership. After moving in, residents received individual titles, which they were then free to
dispose of as they wished. In 2001, a fire destroyed 200 houses in Bonkai, a long-established squatter
community of 566 households living on land owned by the Crown Property Bureau in central Bangkok.
The crisis led the community to form a co-operative and negotiate a (renewable) 30-year land lease —
the first community lease contract in Thailand. (5.26) Page 296

The potential of co-operative land ownership as a pragmatic approach to the progressive
realization of full legal status and tenure rights is recognized in the New Delhi Declaration. (5.b)
Recommendation 25 is that:
“Community, collective, or cooperative land ownership can provide a permanent or intermediate
form of secure tenure. Within such a community-controlled and managed land, a range of tenure
arrangements suitable to community needs can be accommodated including rental, short- and
long-term tenure.” (5.27)
As an alternative approach to enabling the poor to improve their housing conditions, several
countries have attempted large-scale regularization programmes. These look to provide de juresecurity
of tenure through individual titling to residents of informal settlements that have developed on public land.
But most have failed to provide sufficient coverage and to reach the poor. Indeed,
“Regularization is often a difficult, costly, complex process, beset by corruption, which leads to
situations in which the poorest residents may be squeezed out through market pressures after
housing areas have been ‘formalized’.” (5.28)
This finding is supported by a research study based on best practice analysis of access to land and
security of tenure. The study has shown that, in many cases,
“informal settlement residents do not gain from regularisation/upgrading programmes, especially
where registered rights such as freehold and leasehold are allocated during regularisation.” (5.29)
Moreover,
“formal titling does not necessarily guarantee security in a policy environment that favors
eviction and resettlement.” (5.30)
De jure tenure for all socio-economic groups is, without doubt, an honourable aim. But it is likely
that some potential beneficiaries are unable to afford any form of legal tenure requiring payment. (5.31)
Moreover,
“in some cases even titles are not enough to give the poor security of tenure and allow them to
enjoy the market value of their property. The regulatory framework on land development and
taxation, and political contexts, are the important determinants.” (5.32)
For the urban poor, the provision of flexible legal guarantees for secure tenure — flexibility being a
fundamental aspect of the enabling approach — is more useful and affordable than a focus on individual
freehold and formal land registration systems.
Page 297

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
V. Assessing the implementation of enabling shelter strategies
B. Access to land
2. Land sharing
Rapid urbanization and globalization are intensifying the competition for land between different needs and
uses, such as infrastructure, housing, industries, commercial use and recreation. In particular, land for
low-cost housing development in suitable locations, near employment opportunities is becoming
increasingly scarcer. As many slums have developed prime-location sites, land sharing can provide a
win-win situation. Indeed, it “has become a realistic compromise between landlords and slum
dwellers.” (5.33) As noted in section IV.C.3.b), it has proved to be a good way of avoiding forced
evictions in Hyderabad, India, and Bangkok, Thailand. (5.34)
In short, land-sharing requires an agreement between the land owner and the land occupants
(tenants or squatters). Under this agreement, the land owner develops the most economically attractive
part of the plot and the dwellers build houses on the other part with full or limited land ownership. The
system is based on the principle of densification, whereby an existing parcel of land is used more
intensively. For land sharing to be successful, cross-subsidies must be maximized. (5.35)
Land-sharing was one of the strategies adopted in the ‘Partners in Development’ (5.c) Programme in
Naga City, the Philippines. Other strategies included various modes of land acquisition such as direct
purchase, land swapping, community mortgage and resettlement. The programme brought a number of
benefits: it institutionalised a functional mechanism for resolving landowner-occupant disputes; living
conditions were improved through in situ upgrading; and victims of eviction and demolition were
relocated to appropriate sites. Livelihood opportunities were also provided. The programme thus
developed innovative strategies to mitigate the adverse impacts of urbanization. (5.36)
In Phnom Penh, Cambodia, the community in Borei Keila has worked with architects from the
Urban Poor Development Fund (UPDF) to explore a variety of land-sharing redevelopment options.
These involve rebuilding the community on a small portion of the land and returning the rest to the
Ministry of Sport and Youth, which owns the land. (5.37) In Cape Town, South Africa, the Marconi Beam
Development Trust has developed a relocation site (Joe Slovo Park) under an innovative land-sharing
agreement. The project, which is located on a major transport route seven kilometres from the city
centre, has demonstrated that
“the poor can be integrated (at least spatially) into a well-located middle-income area, close to
the city and income generating opportunities.” (5.38)
Land sharing has already been used successfully to improve security of tenure in Bangkok,
Thailand. Between 1982 and 1994, seven land-sharing projects benefited 6,800 households. (5.39)
“In Thailand's land-sharing projects, local authorities act as catalysts in order to reach negotiated
agreements between occupants and land owners, while the National Housing Authority prepares
new plans for land allocation, and the central government adopts special regulatory measures,
exempting settlements where projects are implemented from existing planning and development
Page 298

egulations and permitting them to use lower norms and standards.” (5.40)
Although land sharing has proved to be an innovative and effective solution to the eviction problem
in Bangkok, one crucial issue persists — payment default. (5.41) Other practical problems relate to
availability of land, community cohesion, and the complexity and duration of project activities. Still, one of
the four principal components of a nationwide slum-upgrading programme launched in Thailand at the
beginning of 2003 is an infrastructure subsidy that enables communities to rebuild on a portion of the land
they now occupy under a land sharing agreement. The programme aims to improve security of tenure and
living conditions for 300,000 households in 2,000 low- income communities in 200 cities within five
years. This represents some 60 per cent of the country’s urban poor population. (5.42) However, Box 29 on
Pom Mahakan, Bangkok, provides a good example of what could be regarded as bad practice with
respect to land-sharing initiatives.
Land sharing is not easy to implement. It requires an appropriate regulatory framework, a high
degree of community organization, intervention of intermediaries (such as NGOs), involvement of local
authorities, financial resources, administrative efficiency, effective negotiation procedures, and
transparency. But above all else, land-sharing requires sound political will, especially at the local level. (5.43)
Lengthy, and therefore often costly, negotiations among landlord, tenants and local authorities over
compensation and other terms and conditions typically combine to slow down the process considerably.
Land sharing is also unworkable in certain circumstances, for example where land parcels are too small
for satisfactory splitting. Development costs may also be too high for poor tenants, even at subsidised
prices. (5.44)
“Land sharing techniques raise two additional questions. First, scaling up remains a major
problem. Second, because significant financial contributions are required from beneficiary
households, land sharing may not respond to the needs of the poorest slum dwellers.” (5.45)
Page 299

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
V. Assessing the implementation of enabling shelter strategies
B. Access to land
3. Resettlement
Adoption of the enabling approach to national shelter strategies forms the basis of the GSS and Habitat
Agenda. This has expanded the conceptual framework of the human right to adequate housing. As they
look to set up an enabling environment to promote the right to adequate housing, governments have
become increasingly aware that concerted action is required in the promotion of secure tenure, replacing
arbitrary forced evictions with negotiated resettlement.
However, some governments are still implementing such anti-poor policies and strategies as
eviction and resettlement. One main drawback of resettlement arising from compulsory acquisition of land
by the government is that,
“it sets up a confrontation between the government and the people so that needed public
redevelopment runs the risk of being stigmatized as something undesirable before it even gets off
the ground.” (5.46)
Nigeria, for example, has a history of forced evictions and resettlement, which is still continuing. In
one instance in 1990, 300,000 squatters were forcibly evicted from the settlement of Maroko in Lagos.
(5.d)
The official reason was that they were occupying government land that was only 1.5 metres above sea
level and, therefore, liable to flooding and complete submergence. Moreover, the overall environment
was unhealthy. Therefore, the government, cleared Maroko in the ‘over-riding public interest’ and,
supposedly, to enable better planning so as to improve the lives of the evictees. However, research
suggests that the real reasons behind the eviction were that elite groups wanted to use the central and
highly desirable location for themselves. (5.47) A survey by COHRE of selected Nigerian newspapers
published in 2004 found that in the course of the year, over 30,000 households (that is, more than
150,000 people) were forcibly evicted. Since 1990,
“over two million Nigerians have been forcefully evicted from their homes, many without proper
notice or prior consultation and without compensation or provision of alternative accommodation
after being evicted.” (5.48)
In Africa, in general, the record on resettlement in upgrading projects is distinctly mixed. The
Nylon project in Cameroon has an especially poor record. Almost 2,000 households were displaced in
the first phase of the project, rising to a total of 3,700 households — or 30 per cent of those living in the
neighbourhood — by the end of the project. Only 20 per cent of the households displaced were ever
resettled, which was one of the reasons why the World Bank cancelled the loan and closed the project in
1994. A particular problem was that some of the resettled households never received the financial
compensation they were promised or the title to their new land. In Mali, the District of Bamako’s Save
Our Neighbourhood Project (1992) was plagued by similar problems. Evaluations show that displaced
households ended up paying more for the land in order to obtain legal title, while the residents who
remained in squatter areas were less concerned with obtaining formal titles and did not pay.
“There are thus important equity implications when rates of cost recovery are higher for resettled
Page 300

households than for those who are not even displaced.” (5.49)
By contrast in Mumbai, India, 60,000 people were moved without coercion to make way for
improvements to the city’s railway system. The squatters were resettled with their full agreement and
co-operation and in conjunction with SPARC, the National Slum Dwellers Federation, Indian Railways
and the World Bank. The resettlement programme benefited from high degrees of community
organization among the population that was to be relocated, with particular attention paid to reducing the
costs for those who were resettled. (5.50)
Examples of negotiated resettlement can also be found in Latin America, where land invasions and
occupations have become a well-honed practice in cities. In Curitiba, southern Brazil, some 50 homeless
households organized themselves in the face of stubborn official indifference to their claims and, with the
help of MNLM (the National Movement for Housing Struggle), occupied a derelict downtown bank
building. A compromise was reached whereby they would give up the building for a plot of land on the
periphery designated by the authorities. However, two months later they were still waiting, and started
building shacks on the promised plot, only to be forcibly removed. Following intense discussions and
negotiations, the parties involved came to an agreement in October 2003. The Curitiba Municipal
Government allocated a small plot of land for the 50 households involved to share between themselves.
A federal programme gave each household an equivalent US$2,000 to meet basic infrastructure and
construction costs. The State Company, COHAPAR, (5.e) managed the construction jointly with the
households, while the MNLM designed plans for multi-storey housing that freed up land for other
activities. (5.51)
In Delhi, India, resettlement programmes with varying tenure conditions and standards of
development have been implemented since 1960, providing housing for substantial numbers of
households. However, approaches to resettlement have shifted over the years. In principle, all land and
development rights in Delhi are publicly owned and vested in the DDA. The DDA uses development of
more valuable, central sites to subsidize low-income housing schemes in cheaper, peripheral locations.
After the 1998 State elections, the Government ruled that, in order to provide land for resettlement, the
DDA would allocate 20 per cent of the land in all its urban development projects. Since then, over
11,000 plots have been developed. Relocation has provided the only form of secure tenure for squatters
in Delhi since the 1960s, and more than 230,000 plots/tenements have been allotted. However, this has
only been possible because of public ownership and, therefore, availability of land. (5.52)
In Jamaica, the programme for resettlement and integrated enterprises is one of the Government’s
major strategies for improved housing conditions in informal settlements. Communities are mobilized
through the creation of formal and legal bodies, and participate in the planning, financing and
implementation of housing improvement and development projects. Residents are required to contribute ‘
sweat equity’ in the form of unskilled labour towards programme implementation. The approach also
provides designs, technical assistance, and professional guidance and supervision during implementation,
in order to increase effectiveness and efficiency and to reduce costs. (5.53)
In Mavoko, Kenya, the resettlement of slum dwellers after their homes burned to ashes offered a ‘
window of opportunity’ to pilot proposed changes to the regulatory framework for land allocation and
development. An action research project carried out by ITDG recommended smaller minimum plot sizes
and decentralized land allocation procedures. The plan was implemented through a consultative,
participatory process involving the affected community and the local authority. In the resettlement of the
210 affected households, only 10 were not allocated plots. Previously, a large proportion of households
were excluded in allocation procedures, as these determined plot sizes in accordance with what was
deemed appropriate for residential development within the council’s jurisdiction. What is more, the
allottees considered the procedures that were adopted — community consultations, neighbourhood
planning, secret balloting and issuance of allotment letters — to be democratic. (5.54) Page 301

The Philippines’ Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992 provides a good example of
national legislation that comprehensively addresses the issue of forced evictions. It affirms that eviction
and demolition shall be discouraged, but also stipulates the conditions under which it may be allowed.
These include occupation of hazardous sites; or imminent implementation of funded government
infrastructure projects; or when there is a court order. However, the Act also states that:
“In the execution of [an] eviction or demolition order involving underprivileged and homeless
citizens, the following shall be mandatory:…
2) Adequate consultations on the matter of resettlement with the duly
designated representatives of the families to be resettled and the
affected communities in the areas where they are to be resettled;… and;
8) Adequate relocation, whether temporary or permanent.” (5.55)
In Trinidad, a ‘Certificate of Comfort’ similarly protects the holder against eviction from their plot,
unless it is necessary for them to relocate. Should this happen, an alternative plot on which they can settle
is designated. (5.56)
In addition to the physical infrastructure and human settlements problems that arise, any
resettlement process must address basic human needs and rights. In this regard, access to appropriate
procedural protection and due process has been highlighted as essential aspects by the CESCR (see Box
30).
The Global Report on Human Settlements, 2003, entitled ‘The Challenge of Slums’, (5.57) affirms
that in situ slum upgrading, which is discussed in section V.D below, is a far more effective solution to
improving the lives of slum dwellers than resettlement.
Page 302

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
V. Assessing the implementation of enabling shelter strategies
C. Basic infrastructure and services
The preceding chapters have shown that one of the major challenges facing developing countries today is
the growing number of poor urban households in need of housing and basic infrastructure and services.
As defined in the Habitat Agenda, basic infrastructure and services at the community level:
“include the delivery of safe water, sanitation, waste management, social welfare, transport and
communications facilities, energy, health and emergency services, schools, public safety, and the
management of open spaces.” (5.58)
Theses are crucial components of shelter, the absence of which can have a significant adverse impact on
human health, productivity and the quality of life. Those most affected are people living in poverty and
members of other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups.
“Ironically, the urban poor groups not only pay a higher proportion of their total incomes for
water and sanitation than higher income groups but they often pay much higher prices per litre
for water and for access to sanitation — and this is so even when provision is much worse than
for richer groups.” (5.59)
In most countries, local and state/provincial authorities have primary responsibility for providing or
enabling delivery of services, under appropriate legislation and standards. Their capacities to plan,
implement, operate, maintain and manage infrastructure and services must be supported by central
governments. However, as the Habitat Agenda underlines,
“There are … a host of other actors, including the private sector, communities and
non-governmental organizations, that can participate in service provision and management under
the coordination of Governments at the appropriate levels, including local authorities.” (5.60)
Many local governments lack the resources — financial, human and institutional — and capacity to
provide costly infrastructure systems. Therefore they may be required to provide alternative appropriate
facilities to lower-income communities. In some cases, the needs and socio-cultural preferences of
communities may, in fact, be averse to complicated, imported technologies and instead favour more
appropriate, affordable and sustainable systems. In addition, experience shows that, if scale and
sustainability are to be achieved, local governments must forge new relationships with other stakeholders,
including the private, NGO and community sectors. (5.61) However, given the limited success of
privatization efforts, as seen in Chapter IV, governments will likely have to turn to NGOs and CBOs.
The roles that some of these actors are playing in the provision of basic services have already been
briefly highlighted in section IV.D. This section focuses on those innovative approaches to the same
problems where the roles of the various actors have changed.
The construction of community sanitation blocks in Pune, India (see Box 31) is in line with the
Habitat Agenda recommendation that governments, at the appropriate levels should:
“Where appropriate and feasible, establish partnerships with community groups for the
construction, operation and maintenance of infrastructure and services” (5.62)
Page 303

Pune Municipal Corporation has been responsible for the construction of community toilet blocks
in slums for more than 30 years. However, compared to the needs, the number of blocks built was
insignificant. Costs were also extremely high because of the involvement of contractors. Most of the slum
areas’ 2,500 or so toilet blocks, which had been built 25 to 30 years earlier, had fallen into disuse and
disrepair. This was largely through lack of community involvement in the development and maintenance of
the blocks, and the inability of the Pune Municipal Corporation to maintain them. As a result, people
were forced to defecate in the open, leading to a higher incidence and spread of diseases like diarrhea in
slum areas. In 1999, the Pune Municipal Commissioner decided to tackle the problem head-on. This
initiative illustrates a change in the role of public authorities, in this case Pune Municipal Corporation, in
service delivery from one of provider to one of facilitator. The partnership approach is validated, with
NGOs and CBOs for the first time, playing a leading role in the design, construction and maintenance of
basic infrastructure and services at the community level.
A number of lessons can be learned from the Pune initiative. The project has highlighted the
efficacy of a partnership approach to provision of basic infrastructure and services, where the roles of the
various partners are clearly identified, and the capabilities and resources of each are optimised. The
specific targeting of the poor and the effective use of subsidies to provide them with basic infrastructure is
worthy of note. The Pune experience also shows that women have a valuable role to play, and their full
and equal participation in development initiatives is an important means of empowerment. Above all, this
example underscores the importance of political will — in this case, the personal commitment of the Pune
Municipal Commissioner.
The Slum Networking programme of Indore City, India, exemplifies non-conventional delivery of
basic infrastructure, while also embodying many of the principles of the enabling approach (see Box 32).
The initiative disproves the widely-held belief that only city and municipal authorities are capable of
providing trunk infrastructure, and that communities cannot participate effectively in city-wide
infrastructure improvements and developments.
Two recent initiatives in Brazil and Colombia similarly demonstrate the important role communities
can play in the provision of basic infrastructure and services. The ASAS system (settled sewerage) is a
simple low-cost alternative to conventional sewerage developed in Colombia specifically for crowded
urban areas. (5.f) For only 30 to 35 per cent of the cost of a conventional system, ASAS encourages a high
degree of community participation in construction as well as operation and maintenance. The
Condominial Sanitation System in Brazil was conceived in the 1980s to provide universal sanitation
service to crowded cities where it had been unavailable to the majority of poorer residents. Today it
serves over one million Brazilians. The two main features of the Condominial System are community
participation and appropriate technology — both of which are emphasised in the GSS and the Habitat
Agenda. These make the system more appropriate to the country’s diverse physical and socio-cultural
situation, and also more sustainable. In addition, the combination of community participation and
appropriate technology provides greater efficiency of service and reduces costs. Savings of up to 60 per
cent over the construction costs of conventional networks can be achieved. (5.63)
Scaling up of community-led infrastructure interventions is a major challenge, as indeed is scaling
up other community-led interventions in other sectors. Box 33 provides details of CLIFF, which seeks to
address this challenge. Table 12 shows the main ways of scaling up through mobilization of communities.
One of the major objectives of CLIFF is to support urban poor groupings as they implement and scale
up community-driven infrastructure, housing, and urban services initiatives in partnership with local
authorities and the private sector. In this way, CLIFF provides funding for locally developed projects to
enable leveraging of additional funds from other sources and recovery of the original capital for
reinvestment. CLIFF is managed by Homeless International under the auspices of the Cities Alliance. (5.g) Page 304

The first pilot CLIFF began in India in 2002, where it is being implemented by SPARC Sumudaya
Nirman Sahayak, (5.h) in partnership with the National Slum Dwellers Federation and Mahila Milan. The
implementation approach recognizes the importance of partnerships for efficient and cost-effective
provision of infrastructure and basic services, as well as in housing development and improvement.
The need to overcome a number of institutional and administrative obstacles has tested the
commitment and flexibility of all stakeholders to learning and adapting practices to make CLIFF and
similar community-driven development initiatives work for the urban poor. Some progress has been
made on the financial aspects. Two banks are supporting CLIFF-related projects. One is providing loan
capital and the other a loan guarantee to the Mumbai Municipal Corporation. However, the banks’
involvement must not be seen as the beginning of financial sector support to community-led local authority
development initiatives. Rather, it should still be seen as an exception, although dialogue with the
commercial banking sector has improved in the recent past.
Important lessons are being drawn from the CLIFF initiative in India. These will be used to inform
replication and expansion of the approach in other countries. (5.64) Feasibility studies for the adoption of
CLIFF-type schemes in Sub-Saharan African countries have been carried out in Ethiopia, Uganda,
Ghana, and Zambia. (5.65) Such studies are recommended before embarking on capital- and/or
labour-intensive development initiatives, in order to ensure good use of scarce resources.
Page 305

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
V. Assessing the implementation of enabling shelter strategies
D. Slum upgrading
Slum upgrading is by no means a novel approach to shelter improvement and development. As Table 5
shows, this was one of the major housing policy instruments in developing countries between the
mid-1970s and the mid-1980s, along with sites-and-service schemes. However, by the mid-1980s, both
slum upgrading and sites-and services came under severe criticism from the World Bank and others,
largely because of the limited reach and impact of slum upgrading projects. Subsequently, new policy
prescriptions were formulated that advocated a programmatic approach. Accordingly, the focus shifted
to establishing efficient housing markets, decentralizing authority to local levels, developing appropriate
regulatory frameworks and building local capacity. However, subsequent studies showed that despite
their recognized weaknesses, slum upgrading projects had had a significant impact on the housing stock
and the lives of the urban poor. As a result, at the 1996 Habitat II Conference, governments committed
to:
“… promoting, where appropriate, the upgrading of informal settlements and urban slums as an
expedient measure and pragmatic solution to the urban shelter deficit.” (5.66)
In its narrow sense, the term ‘slum upgrading’ refers to physical improvements in shelter and
infrastructure. However, in its broader sense, upgrading also includes economic and social interventions
that enable such improvements (see Box 34).
Slum upgrading improves inadequate living and housing conditions in existing slums and informal
settlements. It recognizes that the majority of people living and working in these areas are close to local
employment opportunities, have established livelihood activities, and have developed strong social
networks. Many have also invested heavily in the dwellings and physical (neighbourhood) environment
that they occupy. Forced eviction or involuntary resettlement to another location would therefore have
significant adverse effects on their livelihoods and lives.
“In some instances, however, in situ upgrading is not appropriate, particularly in cases where
slums are sited in hazardous locations (such as in close and unshielded proximity to railway tracks
or on land prone to flooding or landslides). In such cases, relocation may be necessary, but must
still take into account residents’ needs such as social networks and proximity to sources of
livelihoods.” (5.67)
The KIP in Indonesia is widely acknowledged as the world’s most successful upgrading
programme. It is often used as a compelling case of good practice. It is also highly regarded as “an
example of a sustained, indigenous settlement upgrading programme.” (5.68) Indeed, the very fact that
the programme is still being implemented more than three decades after it was first introduced is evidence
of its sustainability. To date, some 800 cities countrywide have been implementing KIP, reaching almost
20 million people. (5.69) Box 35 provides some background to the KIP, which exemplifies the main
principles and elements of the enabling approach. It is, therefore, worth reviewing again in some detail.
A crucial factor in the success of KIP has been official recognition of, and support to, the
Page 306

economic potential and productivity of slum upgrading. This provides exceptional opportunities for
labour-intensive economic growth that can raise incomes and reduce poverty. Slum upgrading creates
potential for public capital expenditure and community contracting in infrastructure provision; it provides
official encouragement to small-scale producers and entrepreneurs of housing inputs, and enables the use
of dwellings for micro- and small enterprises, including home-based enterprises. There is evidence that
labour-intensive public works can compete with more capital-intensive approaches on cost and quality,
though not necessarily in terms of completion time. (5.70) However, it is important to find ways of ensuring
that slum dwellers themselves are able to capture, retain, and re-invest the economic benefits that derive
from slum upgrading. These include the higher land and property values that result from upgrading, along
with consolidation and commercialization. (5.71) Where the poor fail to capture those benefits, they remain
vulnerable to pressures forcing them to sell their property (often cheaply) and the ensuing gentrification,
as mentioned in Chapter III (and in the introduction to this chapter). If this happens, they will be unable to
take advantage of the economic potential their housing represents.
KIP has been able to achieve a significant, sustainable improvement in kampung environments.
This has been largely a result of effective awareness creation, community mobilization, and knowledge
and information-sharing. Capacity building in the community has been another fundamental component of
KIP, and a crucial factor in its success and sustainability. It has enabled the community effectively to
participate in the planning, implementation, operation, maintenance, and management of project
intervention. This is especially important with respect to infrastructure sustainability.
Community cohesion has played a significant role in social sustainability. Kampungs have remained
socially stable communities despite the diverse mix of income groups. Although many of the residents
belong to the lowest income groups, middle-income households are far from absent, whose heads are
formally employed in the government, trade or service sectors. Moreover, increasing numbers of people
from high-income groups have been moving to some of the kampungs. This is evidenced by the
construction of large, high standard houses. Improved infrastructure and services have had positive
environmental and health impacts. KIP has also demonstrated the potential of low-income communities
to provide sustainable support to public interventions for mutual benefits and over extended periods.
Naturally, KIP is not without problems of its own. It is one of the many slum upgrading models
worldwide where land tenure issues have not been fully resolved because of complex land ownership
structures and a contentious legal framework. Consequently,
“third generation families now inhabit settlements, and many still have no rights to the land. But
the areas have nonetheless improved dramatically, suggesting that the provision of services and
access roads have, in themselves, increased de facto security and encouraged local investment.”
(5.72)
Another problem faced by kampung residents is that the common perceptions of some local
authorities remain quite negative towards squatters, informal settlements and NGOs. (5.73) Nevertheless,
“Because of its pragmatic nature, the principles of the approach are simple and easily replicable.
It managed to stimulate other communities in Surabaya and other Indonesian cities and towns,
and raised awareness at the international level of the fact that more can be achieved in a cost
effective manner through effective partnerships.” (5.74)
Many governments have adopted slum upgrading as a strategy for improving the shelter conditions
of the urban poor living and working in slums and informal settlements. This number is also set to rise with
the introduction of the ‘Cities without Slums’ initiative, and governments’ commitment to the achievement
of MDG 7, Target 11. In addition to KIP, many slum upgrading projects have proved successful, some
of which are highlighted below. These demonstrate that slum upgrading can be an effective strategy if the
critical principles of enablement, as articulated in the GSS and Habitat Agenda, are followed. The
Page 307

successful projects also offer important lessons. Therefore, governments and development agencies
should be encouraged to document their experiences and submit them to the BLP database, in the
process sharing valuable knowledge and information with others.
In Bangladesh, the National Housing Policy commits the Government to take measures to avoid
forced evictions and involuntary resettlement, and encourage slum upgrading. (5.75) Several NGOs and
CBOs are involved in small-scale upgrading interventions with limited components. Many of these use the
poor households’ capacity and willingness to build for themselves. (5.76) The lessons learned from India and
Brazil show that for slum dwellers to get security of tenure on private land often requires pressure from
the local government. This may call for unconventional interpretations of the law. In addition,
decision-makers need information about the slums, their location, who occupies them, rights and claims,
existing infrastructure and services, etc. This information must be structured in an appropriate land
information system, and should include land use rights, claims and disputes over land. It should also be
user-friendly for the slum dwellers themselves, as well as help city managers engage with the slum
dwellers in the upgrading process.
The quality of information, and therefore of the upgrading process, along with the capacity to
establish links between different analytical levels, can be significantly improved through the use of
technology-based and computer tools, especially Geographical Information Systems (GIS).
Technology-driven ‘solutions’ to upgrading have been developed and taken to scale in Brazil. Other
Latin American countries are beginning to replicate them, and they are adopted by other governments
and the World Bank. These approaches use aerial photography, remote sensing and GIS technologies to
develop a new type of master plan that is more appropriate for informal settlements. These systems help
plot the complex spatial patterns of dwellings and other structures typical of informal settlements,
including when it comes to demarcating, boundaries, and are adequate supports for upgrading
approaches based on land regularization. (5.77) GIS has been successfully used in São Paulo, Brazil, to
develop a statistical and spatial database covering more than 2,000 slums with over one million
inhabitants. (5.78) Such databases can help countries towards achievement of MDG 7, Target 11.
In South Africa, an upgrading programme launched in 2003 at New Rest in the Cape Town
municipal area serves as a pilot project for the upgrading of informal settlements. The New Rest
programme, under implementation by an impoverished community of 10,000, is probably the first outside
Latin America that draws heavily on Brazil’s upgrading experience. The programme seeks to place the
concept of ‘integration of the informal city’ at the core of the upgrading process. (5.79) In Tanzania, the
Community Infrastructure (Upgrading) Programme launched in 1995 works closely with communities to
enhance their planning, implementation and monitoring activities. It also collaborates with the City Council
to improve its capacity to implement infrastructure projects in partnership with communities. Community
participation and responsibility are critical to the long-term sustainability of the programme. (5.80)
Some countries in Africa have pursued national upgrading policies based on nationalization and
redistribution of urban land. For example in 1984 in Burkina Faso, the Land Tenure Reform Act
nationalized land and established official prices for land to be sold by the central government. In Cote d’
Ivoire, land without legal title or that has been vacant for more than 10 years belongs to the Government
by law. Such land can be seized under the power of eminent domain for future upgrading. Swaziland has
developed innovative schemes for the transfer to individuals of Swazi Nation Land held in trust by the
King. (5.81)
A major success factor for upgrading projects across the world is the role played by NGOs. For
instance, in Ethiopia, Concern, Oxfam, Norwegian Save the Children Fund and Emmanuel Baptist
Church have all been actively involved in slum upgrading and working with communities in poverty
alleviation efforts. (5.82) In Kenya, the NGO sector has been helping poor communities in informal
Page 308

settlements to improve their living conditions through a wide range of upgrading interventions. These
include provision of basic urban services (water supply, sanitation and solid waste disposal), shelter
improvement, health, education, training as well as micro- and small enterprise development. (5.83)
New institutional and governance structures are making slum upgrading strategies more relevant, as
well as more efficient and cost-effective when it comes to improving the housing conditions of a growing
urban poor majority. (5.84) For example, decentralization of responsibilities and revenues to local authorities
has helped Brazilian municipalities to become leading lights in terms of upgrading. Two of the largest
upgrading programmes in the world— Favela-Bairro, in Rio de Janeiro, and the Recife Pro-Metropole
— are implemented in Brazil. Hundreds of other upgrading initiatives, of varying scales, are in the course
of implementation in municipalities countrywide. (5.85)
In Nigeria,
“Nassarawa state government and the Karu local government are committed to stepping up slum
upgrading through a city development strategy as an integral part of their commitment to adopt
pro-poor policies to tackle urban poverty and growing inequality.” (5.86)
Given Nigeria’s track record on forced evictions, this is a very positive development from which other
governments can learn and adapt to their own context.
When addressing the issue of slum upgrading, it is critical to include a specific focus on women, as
well as vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. In poor urban settlements, women predominantly remain
the managers of homes and communities, and providers of services. A large proportion of female slum
dwellers work in the informal sector, often in or close to their homes. As a result their engagement in
public life is very often through CBOs that are linked to, providing, or negotiating for, services such as
accessible clean water and sanitation, refuse removal, spaces for commercial activities and safer public
transport. (5.87) People with disabilities and the elderly living in informal settlements typically face great
difficulties in accessing water and sanitation services, in addition to suffering from social and economic
exclusion.
As noted above, networking and the exchange of information, expertise and experience based on
successful informal settlements upgrading initiatives should be promoted. They can be an effective way of
assisting local governments and their partners to create an enabling framework for the promotion of
security of tenure, formulating/revising legislative and regulatory frameworks, and institutionalizing
effective administrative arrangements. (5.88) Page 309

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
V. Assessing the implementation of enabling shelter strategies
E. Shelter production
The withdrawal of governments from the direct production of housing in many countries suggests that
they abide by the recommendations of the GSS and the Habitat Agenda. Governments recognize that
they can play a more effective role in meeting housing needs through facilitation and support of shelter
development and improvement by other actors and through partnerships, rather than trying to provide
housing directly themselves. However, as noted earlier, governments retain an obligation with respect to
the housing rights of the poorest and most vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. This section reviews
two approaches to shelter production that exemplify the principles of the enabling approach in shelter
production.
In the overall context of an enabling approach, governments are repeatedly called on to:
“take appropriate action in order to promote, protect and ensure the full and progressive
realization of the right to adequate housing. These actions include [the mobilization of] innovative
financial and other resources — public and private — for housing and community development.”
(5.89)
Box 36 provides a good example of such action: the ‘Luanda Sul Self-financed Urban Infrastructure
Programme’ in Angola. On top of the land title issue, the Government of Angola was also faced with a
frequent problem in many countries, namely, distrust of government and public authority. Many believed
that private developers were simply given land. Since then their doubts have been dispelled as they can
see the benefits of the infrastructure and facilities provided, and the social benefits of resettling refugees.
An important lesson from this experience is that the public and private sectors can work together
effectively to deliver vital urban infrastructure and amenities and stimulate local economic development.
Other cities in Angola have already shown interest in implementing similar schemes. The approach also
has potential in cities in other countries where the private sector may be interested in involvement in such
joint ventures.
One of the reasons why two of the private companies got involved in the Luanda Sul programme
was to provide good quality housing for employees. In this regard, it is worth drawing attention that one
factor behind slums and informal settlements in many countries is that they are home to a huge cheap
labour force. They provide accommodation for large numbers of poorly paid factory and construction
workers, other private sector employees, and civil servants. The International Labour Organization (ILO)
‘Recommendation No. 115 on Worker's Housing’, adopted in June 1961, states that:
“it should be an objective of national housing policy to … [ensure] that adequate and decent
housing accommodation and a suitable living environment are made available to all workers and
their families. A degree of priority should be accorded to those whose needs are most urgent.” (5.90)
Therefore, governments should encourage the private sector to invest in infrastructure to improve the
unhealthy living conditions in slums and informal settlements. After all, a healthy workforce is more
productive.
Page 310

Box 37 provides another example of effective housing production according to the principles of the
enabling approach. The ‘Popular Habitat Programme’ in San José, Costa Rica, offers a number of
lessons on how participatory housing development projects can be improved. Firstly, there is no single
model. A study of the community where the project is to be implemented must be carried out first. This
will ensure that project design and subsequent development are aligned with the conditions and defining
features of the target group. The working model must also be subject to a continuous technical, financial,
and social review in full view of the conditions of the community and the context. Costs should be
reduced as far as possible, and likewise the amount of time spent and any demands on households that
participate in building their own houses. (5.91)
The San José programme also shows that participation can be elicited through awareness
enhancing and training. In this respect, information is critical to better awareness and responsibility among
participants and with facilitating partners. Community participation must also be considered when it
comes to evaluation and follow-up of any development action. Whatever the participatory model, any
entity supporting a community must recognize that it is external to the said community. Therefore, a
supporting body’s role is to make it possible for the community to carry out the activities it has committed
itself to, and in the most efficient, effective and sustainable way. (5.91)
Participation in self-help construction does not just involve contributing labour. More importantly, it
also improves skills and strengthens community cohesion. Therefore, construction techniques should
facilitate participation and be technologically appropriate in terms of quality, costs and time frames.
Adequate training, advice and technical assistance enable communities to manage the construction and
administration process. Models should be reviewed and adapted according to the socio-economic
circumstances and possibilities of the households participating in the process. Self-help construction can
be implemented in a variety of ways in order to make the process easier. (5.91)
Finally, community management structures must be developed if they are to mobilize resources,
kindle relationships with other actors and facilitate self-help housing production. More specifically, it is
imperative to foster relationships with local authorities, share information on initiatives, and encourage
their participation in their areas of competence. In all situations, target communities must always be
involved in decision-making. (5.91)
Perhaps the most ambitious shelter production programme to date is Sri Lanka’s MHP. (5.i) The
MHP urban sub-programme started in 1985 with three objectives:
making a substantial and lasting impact on the housing situation of the urban poor;
placing the poor at the centre of the process (through a devolved approach); and
ensuring that the approach was sustainable in the longer term.
Page 311

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
V. Assessing the implementation of enabling shelter strategies
F. National policy and strategy formulation
Chapter II showed that national housing policies and strategies have shifted significantly over the past few
decades. However, when it comes to highlighting the most significant innovations in housing policy in
developing countries over the last two decades, the following five deserve particular attention:
development of national shelter strategies by many governments, broadly pursuant to GSS and
Habitat Agenda guidelines;
the higher priority given to in situ upgrading and the development of new approaches to
upgrading;
an increasing concern to tackle discrimination against women as well as ‘gender-blindness’ in
housing and service provision;
enhanced attention to human rights;
a recognition by governments of the potential positive role of rental-housing, with a number of
initiatives to support its development. (5.92)
Prior to the GSS, relatively few governments had developed comprehensive national shelter
strategies. The GSS (5.93) focused on four broad complementary areas around which such national shelter
strategies should be organized:
formulation of clear and measurable objectives;
review and reorganization of the shelter sector;
rational mobilization and distribution of resources; and
investment of these resources in large-scale shelter production and improvement.
The Habitat Agenda emphasizes that:
“Policy formulation and implementation by Governments should be guided by the principles of
accountability, transparency and broad-based public participation. Accountability and
transparency are imperative in order to prevent corruption and ensure that the available
resources are used to the benefit of all people.” (5.94)
PRSPs (as discussed in section I.C) look to link national policy formulation, planning and
budgeting in a participatory manner. In the process, PRSPs are expected to spur economic growth
through development that is consistent with people’s priorities, and to alleviate poverty. However, as was
mentioned earlier, the degrees of effective participation and the lack of an explicit rights-based approach
to development are a matter of concern.
Page 312

Consequently, governments should ensure the right of all members of society, including the poorest
and most vulnerable or underprivileged, to participate in community affairs. Governments must also
ensure and encourage participation in policy-making at all levels. (5.95) In relation to his, one of the
components of UN-HABITAT’s strategy for enhanced youth engagement is:
“catalysing demand for youth to be part of national policy formulation, and strengthening
recognition among youth groups that they can have an important influence on local
development.” (5.96)
As urbanization gains ground in most developing counties, “a more harmonized and urban
approach to national policy formulation and development” (5.97) is in order. Therefore, it is for central
government to formulate and implement national urban and housing policies, while enabling local or
sub-national governments to carry out their own mandates based on the commitments made in the
Habitat Agenda. Central government can achieve this by improving local authorities’ ability to generate
local financial resources, while still supporting those with a low revenue base. Central government must
also reform local authority rule-making powers to provide for greater inclusiveness and participation.
Furthermore, as they devise and implement enabling shelter strategies, central governments must scale up
and replicate successful experiences. However, in a context of ever-greater globalization,
“their principal task is to position their country in the global system to permit economic growth
and development that can benefit all citizens and not just a few.” (5.98)
As mentioned in section II.B.4, the international community reviewed implementation of the Habitat
Agenda in 2001 at the “Istanbul +5” conference. Governments confirmed that the Habitat Agenda would
remain the basic framework for adequate shelter for all and sustainable human settlements development in
the years to come. Many countries participated in the review process and presented their best policy
initiatives. Over 1,500 cases were reviewed through the BLP database. The large and growing number of
documented innovations, best practices and lessons learned is testimony to the widespread endorsement
of the Habitat Agenda and to the way it is implemented. However,
“as witnessed by the limited number of cases selected and many being from local initiatives,
lessons learned and their capacity building implications have yet to be mainstreamed in critical
national policy formulation and decisions. Given the scale and pace of urbanization and the huge
urbanization of poverty, there is an urgent need to go to scale and to establish learning networks
such as the South African City Network to disseminate and transfer best practices experiences at
the national and regional levels.” (5.99)
The South African Cities Network has been able to wield significant influence over national
policy-making in the region in general, and South Africa in particular. The Cities Alliance has supported it
since its launch in October 2002. As a knowledge-sharing organization promoting strategic thinking in
cities and various spheres of government, the SAC network demonstrates a unique capacity to combine
local and national authorities in critical policy areas. The network is also contributing to national policy
dialogue on housing and slum upgrading issues. As the South African government pursues its own
objective of ‘moving towards a shack-free society’, the South African Cities Network is collaborating
with the Department of Housing to develop a national strategy for informal settlement upgrading.
Underscoring the network’s contribution in June 2004, the South African Minister for Housing remarked:
“The difference now is that we are not dealing with intent, we will now be operational. There will
be visible results within the timeframes we set ourselves.” (5.100)
Page 313

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
The preceding chapters have reviewed experiences in enabling shelter strategy implementation. Various
examples have highlighted not only positive developments and successes, but also shortcomings and
failures. They were drawn from various countries, reflecting diverse political, economic and social
contexts. This highlights the need to recognise that what has worked in one situation may not necessarily
do so in another. Similarly, the role played by actors in the shelter process in certain circumstances may
not be as effective in others. Indeed, the recommendations in the Habitat Agenda are to be followed
“where appropriate.” This is emphasized throughout — both with respect to the recommended actions
to be taken, and the actors to undertake the actions.
However, this report has identified certain basic principles and practical elements of enabling
shelter strategies that are universally applicable. Some priorities for action at the local, national and
international levels also emerge in a clear-cut way. The following are some of the most relevant
observations and conclusions drawn from the discussion in earlier chapters. This is followed by some
recommendations regarding improvement of the more practical elements of enabling strategies in the
shelter sector. The final section outlines a few directions for future research.
Page 314

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
1. Overall progress
Many countries have made progress in implementing elements of enabling shelter strategies since the
declaration of the IYSH in 1987 and subsequent adoption of the GSS in 1988. (6.1) These important
milestones were reviewed in Chapter II. Adoption of the Habitat Agenda in 1996 has strengthened the
focus and progress of the implementation of the GSS and enabling shelter strategies. It has especially
promoted the principles of decentralization, participation and partnership. (6.a) A significant number of
national housing policies have been reviewed and revised, and reflect a shift in the role of government
from that of producer to enabler. In addition, the change in attitude of many developing country
governments towards slums and informal settlements has enabled the urban poor — a priceless resource
in the housing process — to participate more effectively in shelter development and improvement. Their
participation has further been facilitated by reform of regulatory frameworks. This has removed
inappropriate planning and building regulations and standards, together with burdensome administrative
procedures. There has also been a shift in policy away from forced eviction and demolition towards
rehabilitation, resettlement and slum upgrading. (6.b)
With the recognition that housing is a human right, some governments have made notable efforts to
ensure full if gradual fulfilment of the right to adequate housing. A prime example is South Africa. (6.c)
Access by low-income groups to major elements in the shelter process — land, finance and building
materials — has also improved in some countries. However, governments have been slower in revising
shelter strategies with a view more effectively to address the needs of the poorest of the poor and other
vulnerable and disadvantaged groups, including people with disabilities. Thus,
“[w]hile the majority of the world’s population lives in some form of dwelling, roughly one half of
the world’s population does not enjoy the full spectrum of entitlements necessary for housing to
be considered adequate.” (6.2)
Part of the reason for this has been:
“the inability of many governments to formulate the enabling policies that would have created the
necessary political, economic, and social frameworks to allow government and non-governmental
actors in the field of human settlements to use fully their potential and resources.” (6.3)
However, the biggest constraint to improving the housing conditions of the poor and vulnerable and
disadvantaged groups is, arguably,
“the lack of genuine political will to address the issue in a fundamentally structured, sustainable
and large scale manner.” (6.4)
Page 315

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
2. Intervention v. liberalization
Chapter I discussed how globalization and urbanization have caused considerable changes in the political,
economic, and environmental spheres in countries the world over. They have also heightened the dilemma
that underlies the GSS, the Habitat Agenda and the enabling approach in general. This is the dilemma
between intervention and liberalization. UN-HABITAT’s earlier evaluation of practical experience with
enabling shelter strategies also highlighted this quandary. (6.5) In other words:
“The introduction of enabling shelter strategies in most countries during the last two decades has
implied a change from policies of intervention to policies of liberalization. Consequently, land and
housing markets have been increasingly commercialized. In any commercial market, choice is a
positive function of income. The consequence is that the very poor often have no choice in
housing at all, and have to live where no one else chooses to live.” (6.6)
On the other hand, the history of intervention in shelter, chiefly through the provision of subsidized
housing, is marred by almost universal lack of capacity and inappropriate allocation. Indeed, one of the ‘
don’ts’ if housing markets are to work, as advocated by the World Bank and summarized in Table 7, is
“don’t build subsidized public housing.” Finding and maintaining the right balance between
intervention and liberalization is a major challenge.
Page 316

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
3. Operationalizing the right to adequate housing
Section II.B reviewed the evolution of housing policies and strategies, and underlined governments’
reaffirmation, at Habitat II, of their:
“commitment to the full and progressive realization of the right to adequate housing, as provided
for in international instruments.” (6.7)
The Istanbul Declaration and the Habitat Agenda constitute a framework within which human
settlements development is linked to the realization of human rights, in general, and housing rights, in
particular. Of the 241 paragraphs in the Habitat Agenda, 33 make reference to human and/or housing
rights. The Habitat Agenda spells out governments’ commitments and details the actions they and other
stakeholders must take to promote, protect and ensure the full if gradual realisation of the right to
adequate housing. Box 38 shows those elements of the right to adequate housing that have been
identified as being inherently justiciable (i.e., they can essentially be decided according to legal principles
or by a court of justice).
In many developed countries, the right to adequate housing relates largely to avoidance of
homelessness. Consequently, policies and strategies focus more on financial assistance aimed at securing
accommodation in existing dwellings, and on provision of social services. On the other hand, in
developing countries, housing rights relate more to improving the living conditions and lives of slum
dwellers. (6.8) Slums and informal settlements are not only the most conspicuous manifestation of the
urbanization of poverty. They are also the most visible manifestation of the denial of housing rights, which
include access to basic infrastructure and services for the urban poor and other vulnerable and
disadvantaged groups.
Chapter I.A pointed to the need for a rights-based approach to human development in light of the
substantial increase in urban poverty. A rights-based approach to development in the housing sector can:
Empower people living in housing poverty and the homeless;
Promote security of tenure, particularly for women and vulnerable and disadvantaged groups;
Strengthen protection against forced evictions and involuntary relocation, and against
discrimination in the housing sector; and
Promote equal access to sufficient resources to persons whose housing rights have been violated
and judicial redress.
However, the ‘housing rights framework’ does not imply an absolute requirement for governments
to provide free housing to all their citizens. But governments do have responsibility for the gradual
Page 317

introduction of an enabling environment where the potential and capacity of all the actors in the shelter
process can be mobilized and used to a full extent. In addition, they have a specific obligation to ensure
that the housing rights of the poorest and most vulnerable and disadvantaged groups are respected and
promoted. (6.d) Page 318

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
4. The changing role and capacity of government
Enabling shelter strategies call for a fundamental shift in the role of government, from provider to enabler.
This is clearly spelt out in both the GSS and the Habitat Agenda. National reports on the implementation
of the two documents confirm that several governments have revised, or are in the process of revising,
their housing policies and strategies in this direction. They are also reviewing institutional, legislative and
regulatory frameworks. (6.e) In many countries, the role of government is gradually shifting from provider to
facilitator through public-private partnerships, and to supporter of community-based housing initiatives.
However,
“Little international assistance has been provided so far for the implementation of national plans
of action. The need to enhance sharing of information through international cooperation,
especially in documentation of best practices and technology transfers with priority to south to
south cooperation, is … identified in several national reports.” (6.9)
This issue is exacerbated by a problem of human resource capacity. This arises in part from the
traditional professional training of long-serving, senior staff and many more recently trained junior staff. In
the times of direct provision of housing by government, many among the staff of urban-related ministries
and municipalities had engineering and architectural backgrounds. However, enabling processes require a
variety of professional profiles. Staff skilled in management, networking, and with experience in
team-building, community development and other ‘softer’ activities are likely to be more suitably qualified
than structural engineers and housing managers. Therefore, architecture, engineering and planning courses
must include training in ‘softer’ skills for effective implementation of the enabling approach. The report
has pointed to ways in which the in-service training requirements of government agency staff can be met.
(6.f)
Page 319

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
5. Participation and partnerships
Decentralization, participation and partnerships are cornerstones of the enabling approach, as the
discussion in section III.B made clear. Indeed, the Habitat Agenda recommends that in order to:
“formulate and implement policies that promote the enablement approach to the development,
maintenance and rehabilitation of shelter … Governments at all levels, as appropriate, should …
[facilitate] participation and partnership arrangements at all levels.” (6.10)
Decentralization and democratization processes have enabled increased participation of
non-governmental actors in the shelter process, and facilitated partnership formation and operation.
These are all crucial features of successful enabling strategies.
Partnerships can improve access to adequate housing by the urban poor and other vulnerable and
disadvantaged groups in a number of ways. These include optimising the capabilities, strengths and
comparative advantages of various partners, and making the diverse elements of the shelter process more
readily available. Partnerships can also integrate and support the objective of broad-based participation
in shelter development and improvement.
Page 320

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
6. Gender
Gender-blindness in policy and practice has commonly led to adverse outcomes for women with respect
to their access to, and control over, resources — especially land and housing. (6.g)
“Since the endorsement of the Habitat Agenda, some countries have reformed laws, adopted land
policies to facilitate women's access to land and ownership of property. At the international level
resolutions on women's rights to land, property and adequate housing have been adopted. But in
some countries women continue to suffer discrimination because of customary and religious
practices.” (6.11)
The above observation summarizes the progress with respect to enabling strategies to improve
women’s access to adequate shelter. Overcoming discrimination against women remains a major
challenge in some countries. This is especially the case in those societies and cultures where women
themselves do not believe that they are being wronged.
The international community has affirmed and reaffirmed its commitment to ending discrimination
against women and to women's empowerment and gender equality in several documents, as was seen in
section III.F.2. The commitments of the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination
Against Women were reaffirmed in the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action. In the latter, the
international community also committed to strengthen women's position and role in development. These
commitments are further reinforced by the Habitat Agenda, which articulates the principle of gender
equality in human settlements.
The enabling approach recognizes the important role women can play in shelter development and
improvement, which policy-makers have consistently failed to appreciate. Indeed, women and their
organizations are participating ever-more effectively in shelter development and improvement. (6.h) Page 321

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
7. Reaching the poorest and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
The way in which people living in poverty are perceived can be as important as the resources devoted to
efforts to improve their access to adequate shelter. Even in the People’s Housing Process in South
Africa, (6.i) only a very small proportion of housing subsidies reaches the poorest to support them as they
develop their own homes. The reasons cannot be lack of political will or resources. Both have been
present in very substantial amounts in the housing subsidy programme. Rather, failure to reach the
poorest is related to the way politicians and bureaucrats, and their political and administrative structures,
perceive ‘poor people’, and who has a role or rights in the process of significantly improving their lives.
Many governments continue to view the ‘poor’ as ‘clients’ or ‘beneficiaries’, not as agents requiring
support to improve their lives. Thus, although many claim to have adopted enabling shelter strategies,
“few have actually changed to really enable low-income groups and their organizations to
develop their own homes and neighbourhoods.” (6.12)
Moreover, many governments still consider housing for the poor as a social welfare issue — which they
may or may not ‘afford’ to address — rather than as a basic human right, which they have committed to
realize in a progressive manner.
Page 322

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
8. Rehabilitation of the existing housing stock
Much of the public housing built between the 1950s and 1970s in developing country cities has since
turned into slums. (6.j) This has been happening in parallel to the expansion and proliferation of informal
settlements. The latter have received increasing international and national attention in recent years,
culminating in the formulation of the Cities without Slums Action Plan (6.13) and MDG 7, Target 11. The
former — the public housing turned slums — on the other hand, has been largely ignored.
There are, however, examples of successful rehabilitation of deteriorated tenement buildings and
degenerated inner-city areas. (6.k) But gentrification poses a major problem due to its adverse impact on the
poor.
Page 323

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
9. Access to land
Access to land and security of tenure are essential to the achievement of adequate shelter for all. The
urban poor and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups can gain access to these in a variety of ways.
(6.l)
Indeed, it has long been recognized that de facto security of tenure, rather than legal security in the
form of title deeds, is more important. This is particularly significant in light of the fact that many countries
have attempted large-scale regularization programmes, aimed at providing de jure security of tenure
through individual titling, and quite often resulting in failure. Many examples demonstrate that de facto
security of tenure can be based on a variety of factors. (6.m) Land for low-income housing development can
be made available in many other ways. These include land-sharing, land readjustment, land expropriation
and banking, and resettlement and transfer of titles. (6.n) Page 324

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
10. Basic infrastructure and services
In the vast majority of developing countries, infrastructure and services are failing the urban poor — in
terms of access, quantity and quality. In most cases, their provision, operation and maintenance has been,
and still remains, the responsibility of government at one level or another. However, the Habitat Agenda
identifies other actors that can effectively take over these roles. And there are indeed good examples of
innovative approaches to the provision of basic infrastructure and services, where the roles of the various
actors have changed. (6.o)
Infrastructure and services have been privatized and commercialized in many countries, especially
since the structural adjustment era of the 1980s, with controversial results. However, in general,
privatization has failed to achieve either the scale or the benefits anticipated. Far greater success has been
achieved through partnerships and community involvement.
Page 325

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
11. Slum upgrading
The MDG targets most relevant to this report are Target 10: “Halve, by 2015, the proportion of
people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and sanitation” and Target 11: “By 2020,
to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers”. (6.p)
Target 11 is also the target in the Cities without Slums Action Plan drafted by the Cities Alliance. (6.13)
Slum upgrading is a pragmatic approach towards the achievement of the above targets. (6.q) In
particular, the success of KIP, Indonesia’s famed, long-running slum upgrading initiative, offers important
lessons for policy and practice.
The Cities Alliance Slum Upgrading Action Plan calls for investment in global knowledge, learning
and capacity building in slum upgrading, and for curbing the growth of new slums. However, as the
Action Plan warns:
“[a]chieving this goal will require powerful leadership, resolute political commitments, and
ownership at the local level, coupled with broad-based partnerships at all levels— local, national
and international.” (6.14)
Indeed, political will is a critical factor if urban upgrading is to succeed at the required scale. It is
necessary, both initially and in the long term, to develop and proactively implement the policies and
institutional framework needed to effect change and mobilize the requisite subsidy funding. (6.15) Page 326

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
12. Housing finance
Housing finance remains a major constraint to housing development and improvement and to the
achievement of adequate shelter for all. (6.r) On the one hand, the overall amount of housing finance
available is limited. On the other, formal financial institutions remain reluctant to lend to the urban poor. In
fact, the great bulk of housing finance typically comes from sources other than commercial financial
institutions. Many of these sources are community-based initiatives. Some that started out as small
group-based daily savings schemes have evolved into federations of the urban poor that have been able
to mobilize considerable sums through members’ savings. These initiatives have facilitated access to
housing finance by the poor, and have enabled them to build or improve their own homes and, in some
cases, infrastructure and related services.
It has been suggested that the success of microfinance institutions in developing countries offers the
greatest promise for assisting low-income families with housing finance. However,
“[t]here is still a large unmet demand for microcredit and microfinance, and an estimated 400–
500 million poor and low-income people worldwide still do not have access to microfinance.
Reaching the poorest poor will be a major challenge.” (6.16)
Page 327

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
13. Monitoring, evaluation, knowledge and information-sharing
This report underscores the emphasis the Habitat Agenda places on monitoring and evaluation of housing
conditions, including the extent of inadequate housing and homelessness. It also highlights the importance
of knowledge and information to effective implementation of enabling shelter strategies. The report has
also mentioned two UN-HABITAT programmes that are playing an important role in improving the
availability of pertinent knowledge and information to Habitat Agenda partners, namely GUO and BLP.
(6.s)
Effective sharing of knowledge and information happens through a variety of approaches and
channels. They include networking, peer-to-peer learning, and information and communication
technologies. However, although access to information is a human right, poor women and men in urban
areas are not able to access important information. This further disempowers and demotivates them.
Page 328

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
14. Scaling-up and sustainability
Many of the examples presented in this report to illustrate the application of the principles of enablement
in the development and improvement of shelter are small-scale initiatives, mostly implemented by NGOs.
However,
“very few non-governmental organizations are capable of producing shelter on a significant
scale; few can match Governments when it comes to allocating resources, setting the legal and
institutional framework for urban and shelter development, or coordinating city-wide planning.
Their success usually remains limited as their pilot projects are rarely upscaled and replicated.”
(6.17)
Section V.C. provided a taxonomy of scaling up. Greater co-operation among NGOs,
governments, the private sector and international agencies is essential if successful NGO shelter initiatives
are to be scaled up. Since all the actors involved have different resources, priority interests, and
capabilities, the best modalities would have to optimize these in an innovative synthesis.
Based on experience gained in slum upgrading, the following can be identified as fundamentals for
scaling up initiatives in the shelter sector:
Vigorous leadership and political will.
Strengthened government and voluntary institutions operating in tandem with clear policies,
assigned roles, and co-operation.
Well managed, fiscally sound and organized city and municipal governments.
Central commitment, role, ownership and responsibility and participation of all actors in the
shelter process.
Provision of an appropriate ‘package’ of affordable shelter inputs.
A systematic approach to capturing and sharing of knowledge on shelter development and
improvement. (6.18)
Essentially, “scaling up requires trust in communities, decentralised planning, long term
support, widespread capacity building and empowerment: in short, democracy.” (6.19) However,
increasing the scale of successful innovations is of little use if they only benefit some groups, or benefit
one group at the expense of another. (6.20) Page 329

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
A. Observations and conclusions
15. The importance of political will
Chapter I highlighted the appalling housing and living conditions of the growing urban poor majority in
developing countries. A major constraint to improving the lot of those living in housing poverty was
identified as “the lack of genuine political will to address the issue in a fundamentally structured,
sustainable and large scale manner.” (6.21)
The key to success lies in the mobilization of the potential and capacity of all stakeholders in the
shelter sector, particularly the people themselves, and the implementation of sustainable interventions with
local ownership and leadership. Political will is fundamental to achieving this. Indeed, this point is
underscored in a number of the experiences presented in this report.
Achieving the goal of adequate shelter for all, and meeting MDG Goal 7, Target 11, will not be
possible without national programmes that require, above all, consistent political will. In addition, success
will require determination on the part of the government and the people themselves — the greatest
resource of any country. Also necessary is an ability to deal with controversial issues. These include land
ownership and tenure, regulatory reform, and policies and institutions governing housing and infrastructure
provision. (6.18) All these have been discussed in this report, with examples of how they have been
addressed using the principles of the enabling approach.
Political will has a prominent role to play in optimizing the benefits of decentralization and
improving urban governance. “If there is enough political will, decentralization and urban
governance can serve the interests of the city.” (6.22) The benefits of decentralization and good
governance are well-demonstrated in the success of participatory budgeting in Porto Alegre, Brazil, and
its subsequent spread to other cities in the country, Latin America and worldwide. (6.t) Participatory
budgeting has overcome two of the major problems associated with projects designed to promote citizen
participation. Firstly, it has moved from local to higher levels of governance. (6.u) Secondly, it has
transcended the urban-rural dichotomy that is widespread in many developing countries. (6.23)
Political will is also reflected in the allocation of budgetary resources. The construction of
communal sanitation blocks for slum dwellers in Pune, India, illustrates this. It also demonstrates what can
be achieved if political will is mobilized effectively and backed by adequate resources. (6.v)
Political will is also required for effective public/private/community partnerships, through which
much has been achieved. For example, in many cases, government officials do not see themselves as
equal partners with poor communities, or even the private sector for that matter. Indeed, many officials
stick to negative perceptions of the urban poor in general, and slum dwellers in particular. This can lead
to problems in partnership formation and compromise negotiation. Experience has shown that this
problem can be overcome through multi-stakeholder meetings facilitated by NGOs. In many countries,
Page 330

NGOs also have an important role to play in promoting political will through lobbying and advocacy. (6.24) Page 331

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
From the foregoing observations and conclusions, it is possible to put forward some useful
recommendations, which — if adhered to — can facilitate enabling strategies in the shelter sector.
The enabling strategy has come about in a time of increasing urbanization, changes in the role of the
government, major political changes including an increase in democracy, changes in international power
structures, and globalization. It is important for policy-makers to embrace the benefits and opportunities
provided by urbanization and globalization and work within this context to combat urban inequality and
environmental degradation. As cities increasingly compete for global resources, they can ill-afford the
inequity which leads to dilapidated environments and increases the possibility of conflict. Thus, housing
poverty is moving centre-stage in urban governance, and should, accordingly, command more resources
than in the past. It is important that shelter policy-makers grasp this opportunity and leverage resources in
favour of improvements that are so urgently needed.
Most of the recommendations put forward in the Vancouver Action Plan, the GSS and the Habitat
Agenda are still valid today. Attention is, therefore, drawn to them once again. Governments should be
encouraged to revisit the recommendations and adhere to them accordingly, where appropriate. In this
section, some of the relevant recommendations are restated, and some new ones added.
Page 332

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
1. Intervention v. liberalization
In the prevailing context of urbanization and globalization, it is important not to leave everything to
markets. Institutional reform in favour of liberalization and enablement must be balanced by an obligation
to protect the interests of the poorest and the most vulnerable and disadvantaged. The best way to do
this is through direct intervention by governments. However, both restrictive allocation criteria and
supply-side interventions (6.w) have proved very difficult to reach their intended target groups effectively,
faced as they were with the risk of raiding by non-qualifying groups. Yet even in this context, there is a
need for positive measures such as targeted subsidies, particularly on the demand side through income
supplementation. (6.x) Page 333

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
2. Operationalizing the right to adequate housing
Given the potential benefits highlighted in the observations and conclusion above, governments should be
provided with guidance and practical materials regarding the implementation of rights-based approaches
to housing. In this regard, the “action table” prepared by UN-HABITAT and OHCHR (6.25) outlines areas
for action towards the full and progressive realization of housing rights. The ‘action table’ is a good
practical guide for governments and other actors in the shelter process.
The inclusion of a rights-based approach into all the activities related to the implementation of the
MDGs should be encouraged. Indeed, the monitoring of MDG 7, Target 11 on improving the lives of
slum dwellers has close relevance for the monitoring of the full and progressive realization of the right to
adequate housing. (6.26) Page 334

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
3. Role and capacity of the state
Governments should be made to understand that the enabling approach does not mean their complete
withdrawal from housing development and improvement, or an abrogation of responsibility. They have a
paramount role to play in creating an appropriate legal, institutional and regulatory environment, and
ensuring availability of housing finance. This will enable the other actors in the shelter process to fulfil their
own potential and optimize their own contributions to shelter development and improvement.
Adequate human capacity, namely, appropriately trained personnel, is essential for effective
implementation of enabling shelter strategies. Therefore, as recommended in the Habitat Agenda,
Governments should:
“[p]romote comprehensive training, education and human resources development policies and
programmes that are gender-sensitive and involve local authorities and their
associations/networks.” (6.27)
To this end, training programmes (6.y) should be supported and conducted more widely. This will help
governments to generate the qualified human resources required for effective implementation of enabling
shelter strategies.
Page 335

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
4. Participation and partnerships
Public/private partnerships should be used to maximize the efforts of non-public actors in enabling shelter
strategies. However, it is important not to confuse ‘private’ with ‘commercial’. Households are often very
active in shelter provision and institutions should develop ways of supporting and partnering with them in
their efforts to develop and improve dwellings and neighbourhoods. All partners must receive benefits
from their participation. In particular, poor women and men should not be expected to work without
payment in neighbourhood improvement. Rather, they should be involved as paid workers or contractors
wherever possible. (6.28)
In the spirit of involving all actors in the shelter process, the energies and resources of people are a
major potential input. It is important for the enabling process to tap these energies and resources across
their spectrum — from community involvement in decision-making to greater opportunities for
construction artisans to be involved in shelter delivery in both formal and informal sectors. Public
authorities have a vital role in co-ordinating and encouraging every actor in the process — despite the
fact that this may lead policy-makers and officials into relinquishing roles, activities and influences to other
actors in the process. The process of institutional change currently underway in many cities (6.z) offers
lessons and models for others to follow.
One of the most important, though difficult, aspects of the enabling approach is to strengthen the
capacities of all the actors in the shelter process. Efforts are required to enhance local control over
resource mobilization and management, with transparent monitoring and accountable structures. Both of
these require capacity-building, including training and improving the resources available to each actor —
from central and local government to community and household levels, from local authority to artisans
and households. NGOs have an important role in building capacity at household and neighbourhood
level; NGO contributions should be budgeted for to ensure their longevity in the medium term.
Therefore, the need is for an enabling framework for active and effective participation through
stronger structures of urban governance and relevant institutions — economic, political and civic. The
universal principles of transparency, accountability and representative governance, as adjusted to the
local situation, should be adopted. And women should always be involved.
Previous research has identified the following guiding principles for the formation and operation of
effective partnerships:
“Understand power relations, and comparative advantage as a basis for
deciding partners.
Safeguard the poor and the vulnerable in partnership formation.
Page 336

Decide the type of partnership in relation to purpose.
Decide the kind of organization to which the partnership will lead.
Ensure partnerships create organizational identity whilst safeguarding the
distinctive identity of individual partners.
Sort out levels of partners relations in pursuit of both practical and strategic
agendas.
Understand the capacities, interests and priorities as a basis for partner
selection.
Assess the advantages of participation and partnership and evaluate risk.
Utilize participatory action planning methods in order to converge interests of
stakeholders and pool resources.” (6.29) Page 337

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
5. Gender
The challenge of discrimination based on gender can be met through education, dialogue and
strengthening of legal and institutional frameworks for the protection of their rights. Women themselves
should be encouraged and supported to play a leading role in overcoming the discrimination that hinders
their full participation in decision-making and other aspects of everyday life. Lobbying and advocacy
initiatives should be supported as they have demonstrably helped reduce discrimination against women in
some countries. (6.aa) Page 338

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
6. Reaching the poorest and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
Proactive measures are in order against the inequities that the poorest of the poor and members of
vulnerable and disadvantaged groups face regarding access to adequate shelter, as well as in other
aspects of life. (6.bb) These groups must imperatively be provided with suitable platforms from which their
voices can be heard and acknowledged.
The Habitat Agenda recognizes the need for direct intervention to support the poorest and other
disadvantaged groups. It calls on Governments to take appropriate action to:
“[i]ncrease affordability through the provision of subsidies and rental and other forms of housing
assistance to people living in poverty.” (6.30)
The United Nations also urges governments, through legislation and policies, to support
“access to housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living for vulnerable
and disadvantaged people, and to take the necessary actions for the practical implementation of
those rights.” (6.31)
Central and local government subsidies in developing countries often take the form of provision of
land and services at below-market prices. They may also be provided in the form of housing credits from
public funds with interest rate subsidies. However, since the need for subsidy is much greater than
available resources, targeting problems are widespread. Due care should, therefore, be taken to ensure
that the less-deserving do not benefit from subsidies.
Page 339

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
7. Rehabilitation of the existing housing stock
One of the consequences of governments’ playing a lesser role in the direct provision of housing, as
recommended in the enabling approach, has been a deterioration of the existing public housing stock in
many developing country cities. In many cases, what was once good quality housing has turned into
slums.
Research has shown that, where tenants have gained ownership of government-built housing, or
where they feel very secure, they are willing and able to make significant improvements (in physical
conditions and providing better bathrooms and toilets). They may also extend their houses, thereby
increasing the number of rooms available. This ‘transformation’ represents additional housing at no cost
to government budgets. Moreover, more efficient use of the existing urban fabric, space and
infrastructure contributes to sustainable development. (6.32) In addition, in the spirit of involving all actors in
the housing process, improvements involve users who would not be expected to be producers — e.g.,
occupants of government-built, subsidized social housing — in the production of housing goods and the
rehabilitation of deteriorated neighbourhoods.
Page 340

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
8. Access to land
Governments must urgently address the issues of land reform and rights of access to land, in consultation
with all stakeholders including traditional authorities where appropriate. As recommended in the Habitat
Agenda, governments should:
“[r]eview legal and regulatory frameworks, adjusting them to the principles and commitments of
the Global Plan of Action and ensuring that the equal rights of women and men are clearly
specified and enforced.” (6.33)
More governments should be encouraged to view different types of land rights as part of a
continuum. (6.cc) Innovative tenure policies should be combined with responsive urban planning and
infrastructure provision programmes. This is not only an effective means of improving the urban and
national economy; it will also contribute to the achievement of the MDG on reducing poverty.
Anti-eviction legislation should be implemented as a matter of priority, as security of tenure is a
fundamental prerequisite for tenure regularization and upgrading. Moreover, where legislation protecting
households from arbitrary forced eviction has been passed, it should be enforced.
Page 341

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
9. Basic infrastructure and services
In line with the recommendations of the Habitat Agenda, governments, at the appropriate levels, should
promote a partnership approach to the development, operation and maintenance of basic infrastructure
and services. (6.34) In addition, pricing policies that ensure economic viability and sustainability and equal
access are in order. Greater consideration must be given to equity pricing, based on the principle that the
poor should pay less for, and have access to, essential basic services. This will help to ensure that, from
the point of view of the community and individual households, the price they pay for basic infrastructure
and services is fair, equitable and affordable.
Initiatives such as the CLIFF-supported activities must be monitored and evaluated regularly.
Lessons learned should be continuously collected and shared as widely as possible through appropriate
channels such as SDI and other networks.
Page 342

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
10. Slum upgrading
Slum upgrading should involve all the relevant actors in the shelter process. In particular, local
communities must be actively involved in the planning and implementation phases. If it is to be sustainable
and replicable, slum upgrading must be part of city-wide strategies, with local government leading the
way.
Governments must be encouraged to use the “Guide to Monitoring Target 11: Improving the
Lives of 100 Million Slum Dwellers.” (6.35) This will help them understand the issues, set their own goals
and targets in relation to prevailing slum conditions in their respective countries, and monitor progress
towards achievement of the ‘ Cities without Slums’ targets. In addition, governments must be well aware
of the need for a twin-track approach towards existing as well as potential future slums. (6.36) Page 343

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
11. Housing finance
Shelter and human settlements should not be divorced from wider economic, political and social policies
or human rights. Accordingly, issues regarding land, finance, regulations, etc., cannot be dealt with solely
in a shelter context. Only if national financial institutions and guarantee systems for local authorities,
companies and individuals are in place is there likely to be a viable shelter finance system. The same can
be said for land delivery, regulations, infrastructure, and other components of a successful shelter delivery
system: shelter cannot operate successfully in isolation. (6.dd)
Governments should encourage and support the development of alternative housing finance
systems. In particular, greater recognition and support must be given to community-based initiatives such
as daily-savings schemes and the federations of the urban poor that have evolved from these. However,
public authorities should be judicious when seeking intervention opportunities, and ensure that their
actions have no adverse consequences.
Page 344

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
12. Monitoring, evaluation, knowledge and information-sharing
The World Bank now requires highly indebted poor countries to produce a PRSP as a basis for
concessional lending and a prerequisite for aid “packages”. These are the very countries facing severe
housing poverty, and where a majority of the urban population are inadequately housed. PRSPs are
providing important benchmark data and information within which planning can take place and change
can be monitored. Greater use should be made of PRSPs to monitor the housing conditions of the
growing urban poor majority.
Good governance, through appropriate mixes of public, NGO and private institutions, can make a
difference in implementing enabling shelter strategies, especially when resources are scarce. Sharing of
information and experience is one of those areas where co-operation is most useful. Knowing what has
or has not worked before, and the process leading to success, can save time and other valuable
resources. This can also maximize the chances of success. Loci of co-operation and collaboration should
be established.
National and local governments should be encouraged to undertake their own monitoring and
self-evaluation activities and submit this information and briefs to GUO and BLP (see Box 9), as well as
to other relevant data collection initiatives. They should also be provided with any support they require
towards this end. In particular, UN-HABITAT should continue providing guidance for national and local
monitoring and evaluation of implementation, as recommended in the Habitat Agenda.
Page 345

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
13. Scaling-up and sustainability
It is vital for policies and strategies to be formulated according to the local situation, not imported models
or ideologies. Some major contradictions frequently arise between the assumptions behind housing policy
and local attitudes. There is need to concentrate on scaling-up successful ideas, attitudes and
approaches, not just projects and programmes. Available public and NGO funds should be used to
leverage additional resources. Links between formal and informal structures should also be strengthened.
Effective scaling up of successful small-scale housing and infrastructure development and
improvement initiatives will require the participation of all actors in the shelter process. The general roles
in scaling up that the different actors can play are summarized as follows:
Community: “in control, managing a process but not the sole actors — it needs support.”
Central government: “policy, financial and legal environment, setting up institutional
support mechanisms.”
International NGOs: “advocacy, honest broker, support.”
Local government: “project and programme planning, support to communities.”
NGOs: “facilitation, support and training.”
Private sector: “development of the sector to provide the supply chain.”
The donor and international community: “more hands off and less controlling,
commitment over long periods.” (6.37) Page 346

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
B. Recommendations
14. Political will
Political will can be generated in a number of different ways. One strategy should be to use small-scale
pilot projects and research findings to demonstrate the effectiveness of particular types of interventions.
(6.ee)
Projects and research can also be used to strengthen arguments based on equality and human rights
considerations. The media, both print and electronic, can help draw the attention of policy- and
decision-makers. Strategic networks must be deployed to lobby and advocate for change. NGOs also
have an important role in this respect.
Page 347

Enabling shelter strategies
Review of experience from two decades of implementation
VI. Observations, conclusions and recommendations on improving workable elements of
enabling shelter strategies
C. Directions for future research
This report has highlighted the consequences of urbanization and the many facets of housing
development, and particularly the housing conditions of the poor. In recent years, a growing body of
literature has focused on the definition, measurement and analysis of urban poverty. However, individual
cities looking to address the problems of urban poverty and housing need reliable data and information if
they are to be in a position to answer specific questions, such as:
Where are the poor located in the city?
Are there differences between poor areas?
What are the defining features of the poor? (6.ff)
Are specific programmes reaching the poorest and vulnerable and disadvantaged groups
(including tenants)?
How can poverty reduction policies and programmes be made more effective?
These questions must imperatively be answered, particularly in the case of large, expansive cities
where urban poverty is a growing trend and populations are very diverse.
As noted in the Habitat Agenda, if governments are to respond effectively to the need for
appropriate planning, design, construction, maintenance and rehabilitation of shelter, infrastructure and
other facilities, they must promote research, exchange of knowledge and information, and capacity
building.
As underlined earlier in this report, efforts to improve access to adequate and appropriate shelter
and basic services for people with disabilities have made little progress so far. However, some research
has begun to address this deficiency. UN-HABITAT earlier conducted a study on policies and
programmes to improve the living conditions of the elderly and people with disabilities. This was followed
by a global survey in connection with the “International Year of Older Persons, 1999”. (6.38) In the recent
past, universities have also carried out research on the living conditions and access to services of people
with disabilities. (6.gg) The World Bank is similarly committed to raising awareness of disability and
development issues. (6.39) While promotion of the rights of people with disabilities has made significant
progress, greater emphasis must be placed on their rights to adequate housing, which include access to
basic infrastructure and services. An ideal platform in this regard would be the ‘Biwako Millennium
Framework’ which outlines issues, action plans and strategies towards an inclusive, barrier-free and
rights-based society for disabled people. (6.hh)
The International Decade of the World’s Indigenous People (1995–2004) has drawn the attention
Page 348

of the international community to the plight of indigenous peoples. A recent UN-HABITAT report
underscores this concern. (6.40) The report is a preliminary though significant first step towards
understanding the circumstances of indigenous peoples:
“their generally poor housing situation, their vulnerability as groups affected by displacement, the
insecurity of tenure they often have over their traditional homelands, and the culturally
inappropriate housing alternatives offered by the authorities.” (6.41)
In a context of increasing urbanization and globalization, growing numbers of indigenous people are likely
to migrate from rural to urban areas. More research will be required to ensure the progressive realization
of their right to adequate housing, and to improve their living conditions worldwide.
A number of studies have focused on alternative tenure systems, (6.42) but research on the best ways
to improve access to land and security of tenure remains a priority. As mentioned in the earlier discussion
on land readjustment, (6.ii) traditional authorities in developing countries often need to retain control of some
of their land in order to continue customary practices such as honouring ancestors. However, urban
growth is encroaching on rural areas and usurping traditional land rights. Research must be encouraged
into innovative land management systems that enable land to be used more intensively, while leaving some
under traditional ownership.
A major area requiring further research is that of housing finance for the poor. This report has
shown how federations of the urban poor formed by community-based savings schemes have given
members access to land and housing. (6.jj) Studies should be conducted to find out more about how these
movements are able to mobilize human and financial resources for housing development and
improvement. The lessons learned should be shared through existing networks such as SDI and others,
(6.kk)
and extensions to these networks or appropriate new ones should be developed.
Another area requiring further research is that of rental housing and the question of tenants’ rights.
This is especially important in light of the rapidly increasing numbers of tenants in slums and informal
settlements in developing country cities. The problems they face with regard to security of tenure and
access to basic urban services must be effectively addressed if the MDG Target of improving the lives of
slum dwellers is to be met by 2020.
A primary aim of the CLIFF initiative, which was based on research findings, is to scale up
community-driven infrastructure, housing and urban services initiatives. Feasibility studies for the
replication of CLIFF operations in Sub-Saharan African countries have already been carried out.
However, further research in this area is still required. The taxonomy of scaling up presented in section
V.C can guide research in this direction.
Dissemination of research findings, in an appropriate format and through the right channels, is of
fundamental importance. Indeed, dissemination is not only an effective means of raising awareness; as
noted earlier, it can also be an effective way of generating and strengthening political will.
Page 349