UNITED NATIONS	HS
	Commission on Human Settlements	Distr. GENERAL HS/C/17/5 25 January 1999 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH

The Commission on Human Settlements, in its decision 16/31 of 7 May 1997, decided to include in the agenda of its seventeenth session the special theme, "Local implementation of the Habitat Agenda, with particular attention to local Agenda 21s". Following a review of experiences from all over the world, the present report highlights the need for improving local frameworks for planning and implementation through, inter alia: campaigns to publicize the Habitat Agenda; and legislative reform to create more space for partnerships and public participation. With respect to enhancement of partnerships, the report submits a number of suggestions, including encouraging forums of local authorities and ensuring that all partners are involved in local action. Suggestions on improving the mobilization of resources include: better utilization of existing local revenue sources; better access by local authorities to both national and international sources of credit; strengthening of financial synergies between local authorities and the private sector and strengthening of technical, managerial and leadership training. On improving methods and tools for local implementation, the paper recommends the development of incentives and disincentives to motivate participation by all groups; the use of "visioning" techniques for building consensus among partners; and the inclusion of "bad" practices in best practice programmes. With regard to improvement of the monitoring and evaluation of local implementation, the paper suggests the establishment of measurable targets responsive to local needs and the establishment of local urban observatories. Finally, on the role of international cooperation, the paper urges international organizations to accommodate the results of local level consultative processes and suggests that UNCHS (Habitat) could increase its support to partnerships among local stakeholders and forge a coalition among agencies involved in local-level sustainable development.

1. The relationship between the Habitat Agenda and Agenda 21 is outlined as follows in the report of the Secretary-General to the General Assembly on the implementation and follow-up to the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat), including the role played by UNCHS (Habitat) (A/51/384):

3. It is thus clear that both the Habitat Agenda and local Agenda 21s are useful frameworks for organizing local action for sustainable development. They can be used either separately, depending on the predominant problems that need to be addressed within a given local area, or in combination, whereby ideas from both agendas can be integrated into a comprehensive local action plan for sustainable development. The present report has been prepared, accordingly, in recognition of the importance of both the Habitat Agenda and local agenda 21s as frameworks for implementing sustainable development at the local level.

4. In implementing the Habitat Agenda, local level action is important for two main reasons. First, the development and management of human settlements is, for the most part, the responsibility of local authorities (or local governments) and local stakeholders. Second, local conditions and actions largely determine the success or failure of sustainable development. It has long been known that the benefits and costs of many urban activities will have spill-over effects. Such effects include, for example, air and water pollution, traffic congestion and contagious diseases originating from insanitary urban conditions.

5. Both Agenda 21, in its chapter 7, and the Habitat Agenda itself adopt the concept of the enabling approach. The enabling framework gives Governments a central role in setting the framework for development, but a lesser role in direct implementation. This framework encourages and supports the multiplicity of large and small initiatives, investments and expenditures by individuals, households, communities, businesses and voluntary organizations. One way in which enablement finds concrete expression is through partnerships with relevant stakeholders: private firms, non-governmental organizations, community-based organizations, citizen groups, professional groups and households themselves. Governments have committed themselves to fostering specific action areas on enablement and participation, as outlined in paragraphs 44 and 45 of the Habitat Agenda.

6. Over the past three years since the Habitat Agenda was adopted, numerous efforts have been made at the local, national and international levels to implement its recommendations. This chapter summarizes some of the experiences derived from a review of these efforts, as well as from implementation of local Agenda 21 initiatives.

7. Many of the experiences reported below and directions for the future suggested in chapter III of the present document are based on case-studies presented at, and the conclusions of, an expert group meeting, sponsored by the Government of Finland and held in Turku, Finland, in September 1998. The main purpose of the meeting was to review practical experiences and conceptual issues of significance to local level action, in the context of both the Habitat Agenda and local Agenda 21s. This expert group meeting examined experiences from China, Colombia, Kenya, Peru, the Philippines and the United Republic of Tanzania.

8. Important lessons have also emerged from a review (by UNCHS (Habitat) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)), of experience in the implementation of the Habitat Agenda at the local level and local Agenda 21s in 32 cities involved in implementing environmental planning and management projects. Most of this experience was gathered in developing countries, which have largely focused on the improvement of substandard housing, including the upgrading of slums and squatter settlements, the improvement of access to land by low-income groups, and the improvement of housing finance and environmental management. Countries with economies in transition have focused more on legal and institutional development, infrastructure improvements, the availability and affordability of housing and renovation of the housing stock. Many new laws have been passed and physical plans introduced at all levels. A common concern for all developed countries is the protection of the environment, linked with energy reduction in public transport, the relocation of certain industries and the reduction of regional disparities. Local Agenda 21 initiatives have played a role in all these undertakings, in some cases being extended to cover human settlements issues or converted into "local Habitat Agendas".

9. A review of the experiences of a number of international programmes also provided some useful lessons. The main programmes reviewed include the following: the Sustainable Cities Programme, implemented jointly by UNCHS (Habitat) and UNEP; the Urban Management Programme, implemented by UNCHS (Habitat) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); the Local Agenda 21 Model Communities Programme, implemented by the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICEI), the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) and UNDP; and the Localizing Agenda 21 Programme, implemented by UNCHS (Habitat). The following were also reviewed: the Healthy Cities Programme, implemented by the World Health Organization (WHO); the Community Development Programme, implemented by UNCHS (Habitat) and the Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA); the Metropolitan Environmental Improvement Programme, implemented by UNDP and the World Bank; and the Public-Private Partnership Programme, implemented by UNDP and the Business Council for Sustainable Development.

10. In considering these experiences, it should be borne in mind that only three years have passed since the Habitat Agenda was adopted in Istanbul. The Habitat Agenda is not yet as well known around the world as Agenda 21, adopted in 1992.

11. The quality and performance of the enabling framework depend upon participation, leadership, the relationships and agreements among partners, the perceptions of the participants, the nature and amounts of resources, and the social and political context. Some of these can be influenced by public policies, but others are associated with wider social and economic conditions.

12. Experience indicates that local level action in the implementation of the Habitat Agenda must be grounded in the participation of as many stakeholders as possible. The process, however, takes much more time than non-participatory methods. Experience in Peru and elsewhere has shown that a community is not a homogeneous, harmonious unit. Any community contains conflicting interests, for example between leaders - even elected leaders - and parts of the population, between the poorest and those a little better off, between women and men, between young and old. In the context of local-level action, therefore, local authorities should have a clear understanding of the sense in which they themselves relate to the community, and whom they identify specifically as stakeholders. The question of who participates "most" or "most effectively" is largely dependent on the degree and style of participation that is encouraged. Participation of community leaders in local action processes does not guarantee that the community as a whole is represented. Legislation must create the required space and modalities for public participation that facilitates and guides a broad-based local-level action planning. Local authorities need to initiate the required legislative-framework reforms to facilitate the involvement of neighbourhood development communities, residents' associations or consumer groups.

13. Building an understanding of the issues among all stakeholders is very important to those engaged in the local Agenda 21 process. In the consultation activities of the Model Communities Programme project in Mwanza, for example, it was evident that a process of community education and information-sharing was needed before people would be sufficiently informed to engage actively in a local Agenda 21 process. The communities were invited to analyse their environmental problems, to set objectives and to identify strategies, through a multi-stakeholder committee, which they did successfully, even though implementation was in the end constrained by a lack of adequate funds.

14. An important lesson learned from the experiences reviewed is that involvement at household level is very important for the success of local action. Individual inhabitants in low-income areas share responsibility for the improvement of the environmental conditions of their neighbourhood. They are likely to have knowledge rooted in the cultural, economic and physical reality of their neighbourhood, which can complement the technical knowledge of the trained professional.

15. Another lesson learned is that simple methods of communicating complex issues can be very influential in achieving meaningful participation. One project in Peru undertook to assess environmental issues and convey their complexity to stakeholders. For this, so-called "environmental traffic lights" were developed both for monitoring and follow-up. Extensive data were collected on social conditions, the economy and the environment. For each of these, scores were translated into colours: red for problems, yellow for warning of possible problems, and green for good quality. These traffic light colours were easy for lay audiences to appreciate, even when the range and coverage of data were very complex.

16. Many Habitat Agenda and local Agenda 21 processes begin with workshops bringing together representatives of all sectors and organizations. Typical participants at such workshops would be the district governor, members of parliament, the mayor, councillors, the heads of municipal departments and sections, representatives of non-governmental organizations and community-based organizations, staff of research centres and representatives of the business community. Given their success in many of the experiences reviewed, it is clear that workshops are an effective way of starting Habitat Agenda and local Agenda 21 initiatives.

17. Experience in Pampas de San Juan in Lima sheds interesting light on successful methods of gathering information. Diagnostic workshops were held in which local residents were asked to present their visions for their neighbourhoods through drawings. An unexpected outcome emerged from the drawing exercise: people's dreams for the future were very similar.

18. Working groups are seen as an effective way of ensuring broad-based participation and retaining and facilitating access to expertise within the community. They are particularly important in the coordinated "sectoral model" used in Bradford and Leeds, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. A coordinated sectoral approach to participation is often implemented through working groups focusing on different sectoral issues, formed to hold meetings and to consult the community in different settlements. They collect information and data and recruit neighbourhood leaders to participate in the local planning process.

19. Experience from Brazil, the Philippines and Peru has demonstrated the usefulness of forums and networks as mechanism for sharing knowledge and enhancing replication of innovative local level initiatives. For example, the "Cities for Life Forum" in Peru provides many lessons about how the leadership of local government (in partnership with civil society, and with State-level agreement and support) can improve urban environmental management and carry out local-level activities in an effective manner. The Forum brings together 18 municipalities represented by their mayors, non-governmental organizations, grass-roots organizations, university teachers, experts and academics with common goals, in a relationship at the regional level. This is helpful because experience shows that uncoordinated sectoral or isolated actions often fail to lead to sustainable changes.

20. The Forum's main task is to disseminate among its members lessons learnt from the best practices in Peru, and to support their local application. No effort is made to develop standard, prescriptive solutions, as it is recognized that each locality requires its own approach. Instead, common features of the best practices are commended as guidelines to promote "Cities for Life". The Forum seeks to strengthen existing activities in each city before developing new activities and encourages starting with small scale commitments and investments to stimulate larger investments and actions. It has sought to help the weaker institutions and municipalities with information packs and a local Agenda 21 manual.

21. Local-level action requires professionals to be close to the people, in both physical and mental senses. Thus, professionals should be trained in community awareness, listening and effective communication, so that the proposals of the community can be transformed into viable plans.

22. Developing a common vision of the future is important for initiating local-level action and a powerful management tool in the struggle for improvement. It is now so much part of the local Agenda 21 process that it has become an essential part of any local-level action initiative. It should not only include the goals of the community, but should also assign responsibilities to each actor, defining what can be dealt with by community action and where outside assistance should be sought. Experience in formulating environmental proposals has shown that the vision should include both the short and long-term to be effective. In addition, it should try to overcome electoral instability in local authorities.

23. In Nakuru (Kenya), Essaouira (Morocco) and Vinh City (Viet Nam), the Localizing Agenda 21 Programme has shown that urban pacts can be an effective tool for synthesizing the outcomes of consultation processes, securing the commitment of partners and timetabling implementation. Such pacts indicate the partners involved, the commitment and specific actions expected from each partner and the time-frame for the implementation of those actions and the pacts themselves are integrated into the existing institutional framework of the local authority.

24. Experience has shown that leadership is a key factor in local-level action. Leaders can act as social and political entrepreneurs, delivering good ideas, guiding processes of reform and institutional change in skilled ways and forging creative coalitions. It is thus appropriate that mayors, local councillors and parliamentarians are being targeted by United Nations organizations as participants in their conferences and training workshops in a more intensive manner than in the past, when professionals were the main target group. Although leadership emerges from social and political processes, it can be enhanced by training.

25. The orientation of many of the national and local plans of action produced as part of the Habitat II process suggests that Governments are moving away from one single or rigid national plan of action towards sets of policies with more flexibility and diversity and towards overall monitoring. There is a clear trend towards subsidiarity, through the delegation of tasks and responsibilities to local authorities and communities. Administrative traditions and available resources, however, condition the pace and methods of the decentralization processes.

26. Experiences with local implementation of the Habitat Agenda indicate that economic and financial resources for local development can be obtained from different sources, including international aid, intergovernmental finance, local taxes and charges, private sector contributions, the voluntary sector and household self-help. All sources are subject to limitation, choice and variation in accordance with economic conditions.

27. The effectiveness of self-help is one of the most important lessons learned from the implementation of habitat initiatives at the local level (both before and after Habitat II), as well as from the implementation of local Agenda 21 initiatives. In many contexts in developing countries, self-help, with associated community development, has been extensive in low-income housing and even in middle-income areas where housing markets have been tight or where self-help is cheaper than other options. One form of self-help may be described as autonomous, in the sense that state involvement is minimal and encourages the spontaneous development of elements of community. It avoids bureaucracy and exploitative competition, but the process usually involves some commercial elements. Another form may be termed heteronomous, with more State involvement, usually in the upgrading of informal settlements. The evolution from autonomous to heteronomous expressions of human settlement development involves much more than a mere change in form since, in this process, the State can politicize, empower and bring low-income groups into mainstream development, and thus spread participation beyond limited project development.

28. The involvement of external actors, including non-governmental organizations, donors, etc., is vital in neighbourhood improvement that requires significant capital investment. Sustainable development goals can only be reached, however, when inhabitants share the responsibility for long-term investments and maintenance. Otherwise, when the project is completed, services rapidly deteriorate as no one owns them or has access to funds for maintenance. Projects like the Model Communities Programme, for example, in Mwanza, United Republic of Tanzania, have the shortcoming of not having investment resources at their disposal to support implementation of resulting local Agenda 21 action plans. A lesson from the experience of the Model Communities Programme is that, while international funding institutions have adopted policies of sustainable development, transparency and community participation, their efforts are unlikely to achieve these laudable goals unless they bring their basic work procedures into line with community-based planning.

29. From the experience of housing and infrastructure programmes over several decades, one of the policy challenges is the linking of funding and other resourcing to market costs. The use of subsidies to assist the urban poor must be very carefully targeted; all subsidies should be extremely visible and only applied on a sustainable basis.

30. Local authorities themselves need to address the unsatisfactory collection of municipal revenues, as this currently militates against the implementation of urgently needed infrastructure projects. As an example of efforts made in this direction, an action plan for rationalizing the collection of council revenues from housing, water, markets, solid waste and property rates is being implemented in Nakuru, Kenya, as part of the Localizing Agenda 21 Project.

31. From recent innovative experiences, it is now recognized that environmental education and training resources are important for the success of local action. Some country experiences have underlined the importance of a continuous programme of environmental training that can function at different levels of participation and integrate the whole local-action process. The key targets seem to be leaders, educators, and business people.

32. Thus in Manizales, Colombia, training of these three groups has been constant and has succeeded in promoting and improving the community’s environmental management capacity. The effect of environmental training for business has been very important, leading recyclers, mothers, small entrepreneurs, traders and young workers to regard the environment as a resource for economic and social development. The institutional resources were provided by the local university, the Social Foundation and the National Apprenticeship Service (SENA). The university installed a permanent environmental information service for business.

33. In the local Agenda 21 process in the United Kingdom, not only has the first step been educating local authority officers and members, business leaders, and the public about local Agenda 21, but informing and educating have also become ongoing features of the whole local Agenda 21 policy-making process.

34. Another good example of the utilization of existing training resources is that of Essaouira, Morocco, where the cultural heritage of the old town has for long been threatened by the lack of a consistent conservation and revitalization policy. Collaboration between the council and architectural schools in Essaouira has led to the creation of a social and economic and physical database on the old town, which should be helpful to both the private and public sectors in the formulation and implementation of revitalization projects.

35. Many useful lessons in land-use planning and management, as well as in urban infrastructure, services and shelter development have emerged from local level initiatives that predate both Agenda 21 and the Habitat Agenda. Some of these initiatives formed part of the preparatory processes for both the Earth Summit in 1992 and Habitat II in 1996.

36. It is unlikely that macro-spatial planning of cities can be expected to result from community participation. In circumstances where the participation has been pursued over a long period, however, as in Chattanooga, United States of America, it has been possible to address the form and nature of total urban development. In Chattanooga, participatory partnerships included action on city centre regeneration and the containment of urban sprawl. Also, in Cleveland, Ohio, participatory partnerships led to analytical appraisals of comparative costs and benefits of using inner city area "brownfield" or outer city area "greenfield" sites for urban development.

37. Since the 1960s, Singapore has developed spatially on the basis of policies which amount to long-term sustainable urban development in terms of balancing economic growth, social development and the enhancement of urban environmental capital. Similarly, in Curitiba, Brazil, economic development and spatial planning since the 1970s have developed a city on linear axes, along express bus routes, and there have been major improvements in the implementation and management of slum upgrading, waste collection, industrial expansion and social services.

38. Spatial development can also be influenced on a broad scale through the continuous and long-term upgrading of squatter settlements. This has occurred in one of the World Bank’s leading slum upgrading schemes, the Kampung Improvement Programme in Indonesia. Between 1973 and 1993, the Programme upgraded living conditions, footpaths, utility and social services and housing conditions in four projects with loans totalling $439 million from the World Bank and further resourcing from central and local governments in Indonesia. Institutional reforms ensured broad participation by local residents and helped organize communities. The benefits of the neighbourhood improvement measures included social planning of educational and health facilities, greater household investment in housing improvement, increased asset values (with only minor gentrification), and some social and political organizational maturity among economically deprived groups.

39. Infrastructure, social services and housing improvement can be provided as a package or added incrementally through partnerships between organized communities, the private sector and government agencies. Sometimes some elements can occur autonomously. Enabling conditions for the provision of such benefits include security of land tenure, linking capital installation with maintenance, and the adoption of a step-by-step approach by which, for example, small-scale neighbourhood infrastructure can progressively be linked to city-wide networks. Sometimes sanitation systems can be owned by the community and maintenance contracted to local groups. In the Orangi district of Karachi, Pakistan, a locally led community organized the installation of a sanitary system and its maintenance to serve some 800,000 people at a cost of only $66 per dwelling, which compares favourably with the unit cost of a conventional sanitation system.

40. The development of low-income housing has had mixed success and failure. In one approach, formal public housing has been developed for low income groups, and often it has proved unaffordable, inappropriate, and an inducement for raiding by higher income groups. The approach has succeeded, however, in the special conditions of Singapore and Hong Kong. In an alternative approach it has sometimes been possible to achieve success in assisted self-help schemes in the form of sites and services, along with complementary slum upgrading. Even where projects have been successful, however, the developmental impact has been limited to designated projects. This points to the need to ensure that the housing sector as a whole is developed as an integral part of the urban economy, especially in regard to housing-finance development and suitable land policies.

41. Housing development in China, through such new strategies as the Anju engineering project, is encouraging higher population densities, attracting foreign investment, increasing the proportion of investment in residential apartment buildings and promoting the housing industry by setting up different and well-targeted subsidy structures for people with different incomes, so as to create a sustainable cycle of housing construction, use, circulation and value appreciation. Long-standing policies of free allocation of housing are giving way to house purchase through the establishment of housing funds that combine well-targeted government subsidies with household contributions in accordance with the occupants' salaries. Such reforms represent part of a gradual process from top-down responsibility to a partnership between Government and house-owners, and a market-based system of housing supply.

42. The following observations represent the main findings and feedback from the review of the local implementation of the Habitat Agenda to date, and there was consensus on these at the Turku expert group meeting referred to in paragraph 0 above.

43. The Habitat Agenda remains largely unfamiliar to those who are expected to implement it - relevant decision makers as well as the general population around the world - and requires enhanced publicity and awareness-raising campaigns to overcome that limitation.

44. The Agenda is too heavy - containing 241 paragraphs in 138 pages and dealing with or addressing too many things at the same time. It is viewed as not implementable as it stands. It requires systematic prioritization and refocusing at the national and local levels.

45. There is still some ambivalence about the relationship between the Habitat Agenda and Agenda 21.

46. There is also still some ambiguity in the scope and scale of what the term "local" denotes in the local implementation of the Habitat Agenda and in local Agenda 21s. Some perceive "local" as city-wide or local authority-wide in scope, while others perceive "local" as covering any actions by any local groups, irrespective of the size of the group or subunits of settlement.

47. The crucial role of resources for implementation of the Habitat Agenda is strongly emphasized by most partners, covering resources from both domestic and external sources, as well as the need to improve municipal finance systems.

48. Three years after Istanbul, the Habitat Agenda is still little known by decision makers and ordinary people in many countries. The shorter and more popular version of the Habitat Agenda that UNCHS (Habitat) is currently finalizing is needed urgently. This should be disseminated extensively, in both hard-copy form and through the Internet. There is also a need for this to be translated into major national languages as, indeed, the Habitat Agenda has been in some countries.

49. The contents of the Habitat Agenda should be popularized through a major communication strategy with media involvement. There should be a major international campaign linked to national campaigns, with material for schools as an important component. Publicity should be linked to already existing national local Agenda 21 campaigns, and also to the two global campaigns on secure tenure and urban governance proposed in the draft work programme of UNCHS (Habitat) for the biennium 2000-2001 (HS/C/17/8). This should strengthen the dissemination of both Agenda 21 and the Habitat Agenda and make the best use of limited resources. Governments should help in preparing and disseminating publicity materials, such as posters and leaflets, regionally and nationally.

50. Governments should reform existing legislation to create more space for partnerships, public participation and local action planning. Local authorities should make recommendations on the legislative frameworks that are necessary at the national level and should be encouraged to collaborate with one another so as to make legislative reform more effective.

51. There is a need to consider the level at which local-level initiatives require administrative and executive action. In contrast to the general principle of subsidiarity, it is advisable to position local-level initiatives at as high an administrative and executive level as possible, e.g., close to the mayor or the town clerk, so that people with real power are committed to the approach. In this way, local-level initiatives can be integrated effectively into the existing statutory planning and investment processes.

52. Adequate space for public participation can be created through integrating the participatory approaches emerging in local-level initiatives into existing or new neighbourhood development committees, resident associations, or consumer organizations, thus creating a local institutional setting which is inclusive. Technical cooperation projects can be used as opportunities to initiate legislative reforms. At the same time, local initiatives should not wait for the establishment of legal and administrative frameworks.

53. To ensure sustainability, solutions should, as far as possible, be based on local institutions, structures and dynamics. It makes good sense to strengthen these instead of creating new initiatives which might not so readily reflect local priorities and enthusiasm.

54. The role of national Governments is critical in creating a framework to enable and support local governments and other actors for the implementation of local-level action. The power and revenue base of local authorities is often too weak to champion a local Habitat Agenda or local Agenda 21 process on its own. National Governments should create a climate in which local-level initiatives can flourish. This includes enabling forums and associations of municipalities conduct nation-wide programmes for environmental awareness to complement the initiatives of individual cities, and address concerns which transcend municipal boundaries. National Governments may also want to consider organizing national training programmes for elected municipal officials. Above all, Governments should remove legal and administrative barriers that hinder the effective implementation of local-level action initiatives. Strong local authorities - strong in financial, political and professional terms - are a precondition for local-level action. While they are expected to work with and through partnerships, local authorities must not abdicate their responsibilities, as partners' efforts should be considered complementary.

55. Sustainable development at the local level needs adequate resources. It must be recognized that, in many countries, local-level action requires both additional resources and the effective use of existing financial resources. At the local level, therefore, there is a need to improve municipal finance, mainly through exploitation of the full potential of property tax and other local taxes, as well as charges for services provided. Resources should be more congruent with responsibilities than has been customary in the recent past.

56. The funds currently available to local governments are not sufficient. There is a crucial need for a better and easier system for the local authorities to obtain loans for long-term investments. Governments, in partnership with the private sector and non-governmental organizations, could consider working out such a system. The sustainability of a project must be based on local or national funding resources and should not rely exclusively on international loans.

57. Local authorities should explore different ways of establishing links with the private financial sector, as is already happening in many countries. There is also a need for a systematic appraisal of the mechanisms through which the private sector could participate in local-level development. There are now numerous successful, and less successful, experiences of partnerships and the privatization of municipal services from which useful lessons have been learned. Many of these experiences point to the complexity of such strategies, especially with regard to achieving quality and equal distribution of services, so that caution is required in the adoption and implementation of private-sector-based solutions.

58. There is a need for capacity-building and technical training among the key actors. This undertaking should include technical, managerial and leadership training for central and local government organizations, non-governmental organizations and community-based organizations and a greater effort to bring about an exchange of knowledge among the developing and developed countries. The involvement of university students in the action planning processes of poor neighbourhoods is an appropriate way to educate future professionals and inculcate long-term sensitivity to the needs and conditions of such areas. The research capacity of local universities should also be utilized in local-level action processes.

59. While it is acknowledged that there are no general recipes for action at the local level, some methods and tools can enhance effectiveness if they are adapted to local circumstances. One important tool is the development of incentives and disincentives to encourage all groups to participate in sustainable local-level planning and management. For example, industries that clean up their waste disposal may receive tax relief but a "dirty tax" may be introduced to catch polluters who ignore their obligations.

60. Consultation and other forms of partnership should aim to generate a shared vision for the local area, which in turn can lead to specific points of agreement or urban pacts among stakeholders. It is critical that the leaders of the process be wholly committed to the vision.

61. The exchange of experiences between cities and projects through forums, the dissemination of best practices, and other means, should be sensitive to the needs of users. Exchanges and the documentation of experiences should include the bad as well as the good, but such openness requires trust and tolerance from those who present the experiences and from those who receive the information.

62. For significant improvement of living and working conditions to occur nationally, there is a need to ensure that successful and innovative local level initiatives are widely replicated. Some of the experiences reviewed above show clearly that the establishment of national networks and forums, as well as the sharing of best practices nationally and internationally, are among the most effective mechanisms for achieving this objective.

63. A comprehensive approach to local-level action provides the community with an opportunity to examine the interrelationships between issues and to consider the longer-term implications. It is recognized, however, that such an approach is time-consuming. In contrast to a comprehensive approach, local-level action to address existing problems is most effective when only a few issues are tackled at a time. Local actors need to be aware of the implications of sustainability in local contexts and in its sectoral components - e.g., in maintaining or achieving a clean river, in disposing of garbage, etc. - and to understand how these contribute to a gradual improvement in the whole environment. Success in small initiatives gives confidence and the enthusiasm to continue, whereas failure in complex tasks is bad for morale and generates reluctance to try again.

64. Measurable targets should be established and economic and social benefits, such as income generation, reduced health hazards, etc., and costs should be monitored regularly. Results should be highlighted to show politicians, business people and others that the progress being achieved makes good economic sense and that local-level action should be sustained through long-term commitment. This and other forms of evaluation and monitoring should address both physical changes, such as improvements in services, pollution levels, housing, etc., and process indicators, such as the involvement of more groups.

65. Local authorities are encouraged to establish local urban observatories, as part of the Global Urban Observatory network currently being set up by UNCHS (Habitat). The Global Urban Observatory is intended to be a knowledge and capacity-building coalition that helps Governments, local authorities and their partners to improve the collection, management, analysis and use of information and indicators in formulating more effective urban policies, as well as to understand how cities work as social and economic systems and how that knowledge can be used for more effective action planning.

66. International organizations, working in cooperation with national Governments, are expected to facilitate the provision of technical and financial assistance to local authorities and their partners in the local-level action process. They should respect the priorities of local actors instead of following their own agendas. They should therefore be flexible enough to accommodate the results of consultative processes at the local level and allow sufficient time for local level action to be consolidated. In view of its mandate, UNCHS (Habitat) is particularly well placed to support partnerships among the range of stakeholders involved in sustainable urban development. Particularly useful in this process will be the partners' guidelines that UNCHS (Habitat) is currently preparing, jointly with Habitat partners, on implementation of the Habitat Agenda at the local level.

67. External initiatives can be catalysts for local-level action, but patience is needed to see results come through. Considerable time flexibility is needed to ensure that local actors are able to give their full support to politically or socially sensitive components of action plans. A process of five or six years, with decreasing intensity of external inputs, seems to be more appropriate for this purpose than a three-year period of assistance.

68. The private sector has thus far contributed little towards the formation of partnerships for local action, but this may be a result of constraints inherent in the existing legal and administrative frameworks. International associations may be able to encourage local institutions to become more involved. The participation of chambers of commerce or clubs, such as the Rotary Club, and of religious organizations may be more likely if their international associations become involved in the United Nations system.

69. The following points are recommended for discussion:

    (a) Governments at national and local levels, jointly with civil society partners, should initiate national publicity campaigns to increase awareness of both the Habitat Agenda and Agenda 21 and to support their implementation at the local level. The campaigns should be targeted at, among others: newspaper, radio and television editors; religious and community leaders; parliamentarians; consumer associations; chambers of commerce and industry; and schools and universities. These campaigns could be linked with the two global campaigns on secure tenure and urban governance proposed in the draft work programme of UNCHS (Habitat) for the biennium 2000-2001;

    (b) Governments at national and local levels, jointly with civil society partners and with assistance from UNCHS (Habitat) and other organizations, should initiate the revision of legal and institutional frameworks at both the national and local levels to foster or facilitate partnerships and participation;

    (c) Governments at national and local levels, jointly with civil society partners and with assistance from UNCHS (Habitat) and other organizations, should develop or intensify programmes for training local-level elected representatives, community leaders, professionals, non-governmental and private-sector partner organizations and households on how to establish and manage partnerships for sustainable urban development within the framework of the Habitat Agenda and local Agenda 21;

    (d) Governments at national and local levels, jointly with civil society partners and with assistance from UNCHS (Habitat) and other interested organizations, should put in place or intensify existing programmes and projects designed to improve the pricing of local services, the setting of local tax rates, and the collection and management of revenue from local sources, as well as to enhance the motivation and efficiency of local government employees, so as to establish sustainable institutional frameworks for local development. Such programmes and projects could be linked to the Centre's proposed global campaign on urban governance;

    (e) National Governments, jointly with civil society partners, should encourage their local authorities to establish local urban observatories, as part of the UNCHS (Habitat)-initiated Global Urban Observatory, in order to improve the collection and use of information in local-level sustainable development, as well as the monitoring and evaluation of local development initiatives.