Looking Back to Look Forward: Evolution of the Habitat Agenda and Prospects for Implementation of the New Urban Agenda

Abstract

Followed by two previous conferences 20 and 40 years earlier, the Habitat III conference convened in Quito in 2016 to tackle global urban challenges. With cities experiencing ever-increasing levels of poverty, inequality, and vulnerability to climate change, Habitat's New Urban Agenda outlines its priorities for sustainable urban development considering current urban realities. This paper aims to assess the changing dynamics that have paved the road towards Habitat III and to evaluate the ongoing prospects for its effective policy implementation by analyzing: 1) the changing development paradigms that have informed the three meetings, and 2) the nature, adequacy and influence of Habitat policy frameworks. Our analysis elucidates the weak commitment of nations at framing and implementing policies that help advance past Habitat's agendas. This leads us to conclude that local governments may be better suited to promote just and sustainable development. Promising policymaking may occur if governments can intersect the principles of the New Urban Agenda with other global agendas, including the Sustainable Development Goals. Yet, it is relatively clear four years after Habitat III, that local commitment to these principles is not uniform either and that only certain world regions are actively participating in their implementation.

“Slumification” of Consolidated Informal Settlements: A Largely Unseen Challenge

“…In the 1980s Latin American countries faced a financial crisis as countries were unable to pay off foreign debt. In response to the crisis, and with the guidance of Washington-based institutions like the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, Latin American countries adopted neoliberal policies that have had long-lasting impacts on residents (Hackworth, 2007;Klaufus, 2015;Reyes, et al, 2020 first dismantled and then neoliberal practices are implemented in their place (Hackworth, 2007: p. 12). Harvey (2006) clarifies the stated political motivations behind such restructuring:…”

“…The first UN-Habitat meeting in Vancouver in 1976 proved to be a turning point in beginning to shift views of informal settlements away from their being slums inviting large scale eradication and neighborhood regeneration programs towards a more positive policy stance, which from the early 1980s largely prevailed. Indeed, it became conventional wisdom and encouraged intervention strategies such as "upgrading" and "regularization," or the provision of basic infrastructure, sometimes in tandem with conferring property titles upon squatters and other de facto, but not de jure, owners (Reyes et al, 2020). Crucial here was that multilateral organizations, such as the World Bank and UN, largely began to eschew the term "slums", preferring to use other less pejorative terms such as informal settlements, spontaneous settlements, or irregular settlements.…”

Renting and Sharing in Low-Income Informal Settlements: Lacunae in Research and Policy Challenges

“…Most developing country housing analysts will be very familiar with the widespread policy advocacy and implementation to improve conditions for informal self-building and homeownership going back to research in the late 1960s and 1970s, and the first UN-Habitat Conference held in Vancouver in 1976 (Turner, 1968;Gilbert & Ward, 1982;Reyes et al, 2020). However, researchers and policymakers appear to know far less about other informal non-owner housing tenures such as renting and sharing which, for many households, form an integral and rising part of the Latin American and Caribbean housing market.…”