Population, territory and sustainable development

More documents

Info

205 There are so many components (production, social and political) and new instruments on top of historical regional policy instruments that the focus is now on families of regional policies rather than a single regional policy (see box XI.5). An important point of this proposal and of the general discussion of territorial policies in the region is the difference between “regional” and “local”. The local sphere has been the focus of what has been called decentralization, with local (municipal) governments expanding their functions, competencies and resources (at times with imbalances between new tasks and resources). But regionalization has been a less well defined process with marked national specificities because in federal countries the rationale is far more political. Box XI.5 FOCUSING ON THE FAMILY OF TERRITORIAL POLICIES Territorial issues are now so heterogeneous and broad (unlike the strategies deployed in the twentieth century) that discussion centres on a “family of territorial policies” encompassing, “in addition to decentralization/federalism, local development and territorial competitiveness, land-use planning and the regionalization of cross-cutting and sector-based policies (promoting production and business development)” (ILPES, 2007). Although these policies are diverse, they may be grouped according to the common denominator of the challenges they involve: the need to make strides towards greater, more consolidated decentralization that amplifies the positive impacts and seeks to extend them beyond a sector-based, functional perspective in a participatory process that brings all relevant local actors together. This new concept (families of territorial policies in Latin America) has, moreover, shown that rising regional exports have not necessarily boosted regional development. Hence the need for sound political and institutional coordination between central and regional levels to reconcile and boost the benefits of economic growth on several scales. Such coordination has been enhanced recently by the new strategies for fighting poverty, with national programmes that also have decentralized functions and local programmes with national functions as well. The challenge then becomes how to coordinate different levels of government. There is, therefore, renewed emphasis on regional development policy design and implementation —undertaken by the State but aimed at goals on several scales— and their coordination with social, decentralization and land-use planning policies. Source: J.C. Ramírez, I. Silva and L.M. Cuervo, “Economía y territorio en América Latina y el Caribe: Desigualdades y políticas”, Libros de la CEPAL, No. 99 (LC/G.2385-P), Santiago, Chile, Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), 2009. As a rule, territorial development policies favour both processes, which, in principle, empower subnational spaces. But after 20 years of decentralization current expectations are more tempered, above all because the resource base, which varies widely from one location to another, is decisive for local capacities and budgets: “In Latin America, decentralization is extremely difficult, given the high level of regional productive disparity that seriously limits the functioning and financing of decentralized services (especially where their provision affects equity) […]. This is why the result of reforms will depend on the accompanying system of financial transfers and the compensatory role played by central governments […]. However, even when the required financial resources are to hand, disparities will also affect the availability of human resources and, in general, the capacities for interjurisdictional management. This implies that the transfer of monetary resources must be combined with training and capacity transfer […]. The debate on decentralization has highlighted the role of subnational governments. Nevertheless, refocusing on the need to ensure a basic level of rights in relation to decentralized sectoral policies leads to the conclusion that much needs to be done to redefine the role of central governments in decentralized countries, while also consolidating fiscal sustainability. This also emphasizes the need to avoid the
206 overlap of functions and allocations among the various levels. This appears to be the ideal opportunity to analyse the combined impact on social cohesion and fiscal sustainability, taking account of the tensions between the above-mentioned policy objectives” (ECLAC, 2010a, p.145). This does not mean a return to centralized, vertical models but rather a broadening of the decentralization strategy so that it effectively empowers local governments and communities and compensates for baseline inequalities among municipalities. Population (and socioeconomic) urbanization continues, as chapter VIII of the report shows with population projections and the first findings of censuses conducted in the 2010s. Advancing urbanization is due exclusively to net transfer from the countryside; absent this, the region would ruralize because natural population growth in urban areas is slower. Because this process held even in times that were especially bad for cities (the 1980s and the early stages of the model based on openness, privatization and deregulation) the most likely medium-run scenario is that urbanization will go on despite the current high ratios that make Latin America the most urbanized developing region in the world. Policies aimed at curbing urbanization are debatable not only on technical and rights-based grounds but on practical ones as well because they would almost certainly fail. The key policy implication of this trend is that social demands and needs will not only concentrate in cities but will also raise their urban profile. Slowing urban population growth in the 2000s was coupled with a favourable combination of increased fiscal resources, a new appreciation of the urban setting and of cities in general and stronger political will to take action on cities. This was seen in public policies targeting the “urban deficits” that had been accumulating for decades (owing, among other reasons, to the urban population explosion between the 1940s and 1970s) in spheres such as housing, basic services, mass transit and community facilities. These initiatives have produced results; some of the deficits are receding, albeit at a modest pace and with variations among countries and at the subnational level. These policies are starting to incorporate new approaches to recognizing the rights of the population, the social function of urban property, integrated building and operating of a city, environmental sustainability and stewardship, citizen involvement in decision-making (including budgeting) and valuing diversity. A clear expression of this emerging urban policy spirit was The City Statute and the subsequent creation of the Ministry of Cities in Brazil. Article 2, paragraph I of the Statute provides that the purpose of urban policy shall be as set out in the following paragraph: The right to sustainable cities is understood as the right to urban land, housing, environmental sanitation, urban infrastructure, transportation and public services, to work and leisure for current and future generations. 3 All in all, this experience shows that moving from intent to effective change in how things are done is complicated, especially when there are many interests at stake (see box XI.6). 3 See [online] www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/LEIS_2001/L10257.htm.
Page 3 and 4:
Alicia Bárcena Executive Secretary
Page 5 and 6:
4 Chapter VII Regional inequalities
Page 7 and 8:
6 Table V.3 Latin America (9 countr
Page 9 and 10:
8 Figure IV.10 Latin America (selec
Page 11 and 12:
10 Map VII.5 Plurinational State of
Page 13 and 14:
12 This document is therefore divid
Page 16 and 17:
15 Chapter II CONCEPTS, DEFINITIONS
Page 18 and 19:
17 which guarantee comparability. C
Page 20 and 21:
19 social inclusion, with improveme
Page 22:
21 The above description is clearly
Page 25 and 26:
24 Table III.1 LATIN AMERICA AND TH
Page 27 and 28:
26 Table III.3 LATIN AMERICA (19 CO
Page 29 and 30:
28 While the rural population of La
Page 31 and 32:
30 Box IV.1 (concluded) In addition
Page 33 and 34:
32 As a result of the absolute and
Page 35 and 36:
34 The sustained decline in the rur
Page 37 and 38:
36 Country Table IV.2 LATIN AMERICA
Page 39 and 40:
38 Country Table IV.5 LATIN AMERICA
Page 41 and 42:
40 Box IV.3 THE AGEING OF THE RURAL
Page 43 and 44:
42 Rodríguez and Meneses (2011) co
Page 45 and 46:
44 The classification outlined in t
Page 47 and 48:
46 An analysis of the results obtai
Page 49 and 50:
48 Although the inhabitants of some
Page 51 and 52:
50 Non-agricultural employment has
Page 53 and 54:
52 C. PRODUCTION PATTERNS AND THE R
Page 55 and 56:
54 Box IV.5 IMPACTS OF SOYBEAN PROD
Page 57 and 58:
56 A recent study entitled Inserci
Page 59 and 60:
58 Table IV.11 LATIN AMERICA: POOR
Page 61 and 62:
60 Figure IV.7 POVERTY IN RURAL HOU
Page 63 and 64:
62 Box IV.6 (concluded) These and o
Page 65 and 66:
64 combine a number of factors of w
Page 67 and 68:
66 Figure IV.10 LATIN AMERICA (SELE
Page 69 and 70:
68 The data in figure IV.11 also sh
Page 71 and 72:
70 Figure IV.12 LATIN AMERICA: AVER
Page 73 and 74:
72 Box IV.8 ADOLESCENT FERTILITY IN
Page 75 and 76:
74 Map V.1 SOUTH AMERICA: POPULATIO
Page 77 and 78:
76 Prime examples of this include t
Page 79 and 80:
78 Table V.2 LATIN AMERICA (9 COUNT
Page 81 and 82:
80 creation of tax-free zones, the
Page 83 and 84:
82 Box V.2 (concluded) State polici
Page 85 and 86:
84 In any case, only once the infor
Page 87 and 88:
86 It is not possible to draw direc
Page 89 and 90:
88 studies was conducted recently b
Page 91 and 92:
90 C. THE POLITICAL CONTEXT AND MOB
Page 94 and 95:
93 Chapter VII REGIONAL INEQUALITIE
Page 96 and 97:
95 Map VII.2 LATIN AMERICA AND THE
Page 98 and 99:
97 Some of these programmes were su
Page 100 and 101:
99 D. TERRITORIAL EQUITY, REGIONAL
Page 102 and 103:
101 Map VII.3 CHILE: CLASSIFICATION
Page 104 and 105:
103 In Mexico, most of the chronica
Page 106 and 107:
105 Figure VII.3 ECUADOR: POVERTY R
Page 108 and 109:
107 However, internal migration can
Page 110 and 111:
109 Table VII.5 LATIN AMERICA (SELE
Page 112 and 113:
111 Table VII.7 PERU (SIERRA DEPART
Page 114 and 115:
113 Lastly, in the case of Ecuador,
Page 116 and 117:
115 Chapter VIII SUSTAINED URBANIZA
Page 118 and 119:
117 This chapter presents the most
Page 120 and 121:
119 Busso, 2009; and ECLAC-UN-HABIT
Page 122 and 123:
121 estimate of the urban populatio
Page 124 and 125:
123 Figure VIII.2 LATIN AMERICA AND
Page 126 and 127:
125 First, the region’s economy i
Page 128 and 129:
127 urbanized; the rural population
Page 130 and 131:
129 rural areas. According to the s
Page 132 and 133:
131 the absence of a strategic visi
Page 134 and 135:
133 The need to design ad hoc inter
Page 136 and 137:
135 settlements with low-income pop
Page 138 and 139:
137 Figure VIII.4 LATIN AMERICA AND
Page 140:
139 At the same time, decentralizat
Page 143 and 144:
142 The rest of the system of citie
Page 145 and 146:
144 Table IX.1 LATIN AMERICA: NUMBE
Page 147 and 148:
146 First is the demographic scope
Page 149 and 150:
148 Basing the same series on towns
Page 151 and 152:
150 Table IX.2 LATIN AMERICA: PROSP
Page 153 and 154:
152 The data emerging from 2010 cen
Page 155 and 156: 154 City size Table IX.6 LATIN AMER
Page 157 and 158: 156 Figure IX.5 LATIN AMERICA (1,73
Page 159 and 160: 158 For unemployment, the picture i
Page 161 and 162: 160 rate differential among the dif
Page 163 and 164: 162 individuals valued cultural fac
Page 165 and 166: 164 that draw migrants, due precise
Page 167 and 168: 166 Table IX.10 LATIN AMERICA AND T
Page 170 and 171: 169 Chapter X TRENDS, MUTATIONS AND
Page 172 and 173: 171 Table X.2 LATIN AMERICA: EVOLUT
Page 174 and 175: 173 1. Demographic evolution of lar
Page 176 and 177: 175 As table X.4 shows, during the
Page 178 and 179: 177 comparison. But the most convin
Page 180 and 181: 179 in recent years, which are desc
Page 182 and 183: 181 Map X.2 MEXICO: INTERCENSAL GRO
Page 184 and 185: 183 irregular settlements known as
Page 186 and 187: 185 The third argument is based on
Page 188 and 189: 187 Map X.4 MEXICO CITY: EXTENDED M
Page 190 and 191: 189 more general social inequalitie
Page 192: 191 5. Concluding remarks: the grea
Page 195 and 196: 194 In view of lower internal migra
Page 197 and 198: 196 familiarity with surroundings a
Page 199 and 200: 198 connections; (ii) identify the
Page 201 and 202: 200 The report casts light on an is
Page 203 and 204: 202 Box XI.3 PROTECTING THE ECOSYST
Page 205: 204 In view of the above, the prima
Page 209 and 210: 208 Many of the programmes develope
Page 211 and 212: 210 A breakdown of net migration by
Page 213 and 214: 212 Box XI.8 (concluded) Case studi
Page 216 and 217: 215 Bibliography Abba, Artemio Pedr
Page 218 and 219: 217 Cecchini, S. and A. Madariaga (
Page 220 and 221: 219 (2010a), Time for equality: clo
Page 222 and 223: 221 Hiebert, Daniel and David Ley (
Page 224 and 225: 223 Pendall, R., R. Puentes and J.
Page 226 and 227: 225 Rodríguez, J. and M. Villa (19
show all

Population, territory and sustainable development

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?