House of Commons - Urbanisation and Poverty - International Development Committee

Urbanisation and Poverty - International Development Committee Contents

2 INTRODUCTION: URBAN POVERTY

Urbanisation and poverty

7. The world's population is projected to grow from 6.8 billion today to over 10 billion by 2050, with almost all the growth taking place in urban areas.[4] Whilst it is predicted that Asia will retain the majority of the world's urban population (63% by 2050), Africa is the fastest-urbanising region and will host around a quarter of the global urban population by the middle of the century.[5]

8. The trend and pace of urbanisation is the result of a combination of factors and is marked by regional disparities. Natural population growth is the primary factor in Africa's urban expansion, whilst rural-to-urban migration, infrastructure development, national policies, private sector forces, and other powerful socio-economic and political processes, including globalisation, drive urbanisation across the wider developing world.[6] There is an emerging trend in Asia of metropolitan expansion, whereby urban populations relocate to suburban locations or satellite towns linked to the main city though commuter networks (as seen in cities such as New Delhi and Mumbai). In Africa, the trend is one of "urban primacy": approximately half of the 54 countries in Africa host more than 10% of their urban populations in one single "primate" city, as we saw during our visit to Lagos in Nigeria.

9. Rapidly urbanising countries are spread across the world, and represent a wide range of social, economic and geographical contexts, from Uganda, Nigeria and Egypt to Afghanistan and Pakistan.[7] Latin America is currently the most urbanised region in the developing world, with one-fifth of the region's urban residents living in cities with populations of 5 million or more. A number of Asian countries, such as the Philippines and Indonesia, also have very high rates of urbanisation; by 2020, Indonesia is expected to have five "megacities" and 23 cities with a population of more than 1 million people, and by 2025, its level of urbanisation will reach 68%.[8]

THE GROWTH OF SLUMS

10. Many countries are struggling to cope with their exponential urban growth rates. Where resources and political will are lacking to provide for new urban residents, informal settlements and slums proliferate.[9] Although slums have developed over the course of the last two centuries, their growth increased during the second half of the 20th century as the developing world became more urbanised. Africa has the highest rate of slum growth, at over 4% annually.[10] It now has almost twice the proportion of slum dwellers as Asia (62% of its urban population compared to 33% in Asia). However, more than half of the world's slum dwellers (515 million people) remain in Asia. Latin America has 120 million slum dwellers (27% of its urban population).[11]

11. It was pointed out to us that the term "slum" is contentious. Some argue that it is an over-generalised term that promotes a negative universal image of poor urban dwellers.[12] However, the term is in general use within international development debates, and is used by UN-Habitat. The agency told us that they use it "because it is a term that is not ambiguous; it catches people's attention and it accurately reflects the conditions that many poor people live in."[13] UN-Habitat also told us that slum dwellers themselves are largely "very happy" with the term: "they are happy to be known as [...] a group of people that can themselves strive towards bettering their own conditions."[14]

POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF URBANISATION

12. Over the course of the inquiry, we heard about both the positive and negative development outcomes associated with urbanisation. Population density can help ensure lower per capita costs for delivery of basic services and easy access to information (including the internet). Citizens may find it easier to mobilise around shared problems and pool resources to find solutions.[15] Urban centres provide economic advantages (including "economies of agglomeration", the benefits that firms obtain when being situated near each other) and job opportunities. Urbanised countries tend to have higher incomes, more stable economies and institutions and are better able to withstand external economic shocks and volatility.[16]

13. However, urban population growth does not always ensure urban economic growth. The urban poor are often dependent on the informal sector for jobs and therefore undertake casual or unskilled labour, or even unregistered and illegal work. This weakens their rights and benefits, and constrains their ability to escape poverty.[17] The global economic downturn is likely to increase the number of job losses amongst the urban poor, who have little defence against economic shocks such as sudden unemployment.[18] There are also pressing environmental concerns associated with urbanisation, given that urban areas consume most of the world's energy and generate the bulk of the waste.

14. DFID emphasises that:

Urban and rural linkages include interdependent economic and employment interests. For instance, a strong—mainly rurally-driven—domestic agricultural sector is likely to affect urban food prices.[20] Climate change is another issue where rural and urban concerns clearly coincide. As a recent Overseas Development Institute paper emphasised, it is important not to stereotype poor people living in either rural or urban contexts.[21] By no means all slum dwellers participate, or fully participate, in urban labour markets; many people who live in slums and on the outskirts of cities keep livestock, which, together with limited crop-growing, can provide vital food.[22] We saw this for ourselves during our visit to Nigeria, where goats were roaming freely in a very built-up district of Lagos.

THE RESPONSES OF DEVELOPING COUNTRY GOVERNMENTS TO URBAN POVERTY

15. Witnesses provided us with examples of countries which are dealing effectively with urban poverty, including Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Thailand and India.[23] However, it struck us that there were very few examples of success in sub-Saharan Africa which is a cause for concern given that, by 2030, 700 million of Africa's population will be in cities and towns, some 72% of these in slum conditions.[24] We witnessed high levels of overcrowding and the strain this places on services such as housing and transport during our visit to Nigeria; we heard that the city of Lagos may soon have a population of 25 million, rising from a current estimate of 19 million.

16. It seems likely that an "anti-urban bias" persists in a number of countries, particularly in Africa. Cities are still regarded as places for the elite in some countries, and governments worry that increasing access to land, housing and services in urban areas will only serve to encourage rural-urban migration that could jeopardise rural and agricultural development.[25] A 2005 survey by the UN Population Fund indicated that more than half the countries surveyed wanted to reduce internal migration to limit urban population growth.[26] Egypt has sought to divert people from its overcrowded capital, Cairo, by building new cities.[27] Ethiopia discourages movement into urban centres by limiting social security for migrants, due to concerns about rural food security and for political reasons.[28] The poverty reduction strategy papers (PRSPs) produced by developing country governments tend not to include long-term strategic planning for urban development and dealing with pressures on access to land.[29]

17. We were concerned to hear that few governments in sub-Saharan Africa have effective urban poverty reduction programmes, despite Africa's status as the world's fastest-urbanising region and the fact that it has the highest proportion of slum dwellers. We encourage DFID and other donors to advocate for increased attention to urban poverty by all partner governments, especially those in Africa. This will necessitate greater prioritisation of urban development within national poverty reduction strategies. We will return to this issue in Chapter 4.

MEASURING URBAN POVERTY

18. Evidence suggests that the scale and depth of urban poverty is under-estimated within many low-income and middle-income countries. It struck us that rural dwellers could potentially find it easier to eke out a living from the land, and obtain even very basic locally-grown food, than urban dwellers who may be geographically distant from agricultural opportunities.

19. Poverty is calculated across countries but is not disaggregated for cities, making it difficult to isolate urban poverty from national averages.[30] The International Institute for the Environment and Development (IIED) told us that this is because poverty is usually measured by setting an income-based poverty line, often based on the cost of a minimum daily food selection. This fails to take account of the high costs paid by the urban poor for housing (which can take 10-20% of income) and water (5-10%) and other services such as sanitation, health care, education and transport.[31] It also takes no account of the economic and other shocks to which the poor are particularly vulnerable, such as recent food price increases.[32]

20. The "dollar a day" poverty line—recently upgraded to a $1.50 per day threshold by the institution that measures international poverty, the World Bank—is also problematic, as living costs vary widely. As David Satterthwaite of the IIED told us, "A dollar a day in rural Malawi will get you quite a lot; a dollar a day in Mumbai or Buenos Aires will not get you anything at all".[33] He suggested that the World Bank should look again at how urban poverty is measured.[34] Ensuring that policies and programmes are based on accurate measurements of urban poverty is vital. We recommend that DFID encourage the World Bank and other key international institutions to explore new forms of measuring urban poverty that move beyond the use of crude poverty lines to take proper account of the high costs for housing and basic services paid by many of the urban poor.

MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOAL 7, TARGET 11

21. Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 7, Target 11 aims "By 2020, to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers". Sub-Saharan Africa and several parts of Asia and the Pacific Islands are all currently showing insufficient progress to meet this target by 2020.[35]

22. We heard throughout our inquiry that the conceptualisation of this target has inherent flaws. It is likely that 100 million slum dwellers have already been assisted, possibly through the efforts of India and China alone, so the Target has effectively been achieved.[36] However, since the target was set in 2000 the number of slum dwellers has grown to one billion people worldwide; a mere 10% of this population is included in the Target's initial specifications. As UN-Habitat told us, "The numbers are overtaking whatever governments are doing."[37] The inadequacy of the 100 million figure is clear: it is predicted that, if no effective action is taken, the population of slum dwellers will double from one to two billion by 2050. That means that almost one-fifth of the world's population could be living in slums by that date.[38] Thus, the international community finds itself in a situation where MDG 7 Target 11 has probably already been achieved in aggregate terms but this only demonstrates that the target was deficient in the first place.

THE DECLINE OF DONOR URBAN PROGRAMMING

23. Despite modest gains, the international community has struggled to secure substantial progress on preventing slum formation or significantly improving the lives of slum dwellers since 2000. DFID told us:

Overall donor financing for achieving the MDG 7 slum upgrading target is very low: in 2007 it was estimated that current development assistance met only 5-10% of the financing required.[40]

24. This lack of financial resources reflects a lack of staff capacity to work on urban development within bilateral donor agencies.[41] We heard from witnesses that the Swedish international development agency's (SIDA's) position as one of the key agencies working on urban development over the last two decades had recently "gone backwards" and that it no longer has a dedicated section focusing on urban development.[42] German government support to urban development has reduced in recent years, although DFID says it is reviving.[43] The Swiss development agency's urban focus has diminished in recent years.[44] Japan and Australia's aid agencies tend to focus their urban development work primarily on infrastructure.[45] However, France has signalled its intention gradually to increase its support to urban development and DFID notes a new focus on the sector from Spain.[46]

25. Witnesses highlighted that DFID too has reduced its support for urban development and had withdrawn from its role as "the leading agency" in this field.[47] This is despite a 2001 commitment, made in what witnesses termed an "excellent" and "progressive" Strategy Paper,[48] Meeting the Challenge of Poverty in Urban Areas, to make "a full and substantial contribution to meeting the urban challenge".[49] The document stated that "Country and Institutional Strategy Papers will increasingly focus on the urban challenge and its relevance for their work".[50] It committed DFID to five Actions:

enabling the poor to participate in and benefit from urban development;
developing local capacity to manage pro-poor urban development;
supporting governments to strengthen the legislative and regulatory framework for city development;
strengthening international efforts to support urban development; and
improving DFID's and others' provision of information and research on urban development.[51]

26. Despite these pledges, Caren Levy, Director of University College London's Development Planning Unit, said that since 2001, "much of DFID's expertise has been dismantled and fragmented".[52] No further policy or strategy on urban poverty has been produced since 2001 and DFID closed its Infrastructure and Urban Development Department following its 2003-04 organisational restructuring.[53] Thus no unit or team dedicated to urban development now exists within DFID.

27. We were concerned to hear that overall donor financing for achieving the Millennium Development Goal 7 slum upgrading target is very low. We are also concerned about the level of staffing capacity within donor agencies to meet the target. DFID is one of a number of bilateral donors that have withdrawn their dedicated urban poverty teams or units. It seems counter-intuitive to us that, as the process of urbanisation and levels of urban poverty have increased, staff capacity to work on these issues has been reduced. We will return to this issue, and recommend how DFID should address it, in Chapter 5.

Links between urban poverty and wider development issues

28. It is clear that "urban" refers to a context, not a specific sector; urban issues are multi-sectoral and require integrated approaches that address a wide range of human needs for people living in urban settlements.[54] This section will look at the close inter-relationship between urban poverty and four particular aspects of development: unemployment and crime; social exclusion; population growth; and climate change and the environment.

UNEMPLOYMENT AND CRIME

Employment in poor urban centres

29. Cities make a disproportionate contribution to national economies. We heard during our visit to Nigeria that Lagos state provided 20% of the country's gross domestic product whilst hosting only 13% of the country's population and covering just 0.4% of the landmass. Yet the huge numbers of people drawn to urban centres to find work are often disappointed. Unemployment in the large cities of developing countries is often rife, especially amongst young people. Around 80% of workers in developing countries, including a high proportion within urban areas, operate within the informal sector (for example, rickshaw-pulling or factory work), which often entails casual or unregulated labour that can be illegal or even dangerous. Employees' rights and benefits are weak in these situations.[55]

30. The global economic downturn is increasing the number of job losses worldwide—some 30 to 50 million more people worldwide could lose their jobs in 2009—and the urban poor are likely to be badly affected.[56] Women and young people are particularly vulnerable.[57] Women have to balance work and domestic duties and are less likely to have the education, skills and empowerment to find decent work.[58] Many women end up undertaking exploitative work such as prostitution. Girls are even more at risk from exploitation, whether through sex work or child labour in unsafe conditions. Children from female-headed households are those most likely to have to work, as well as those from households where adults are ill. Hazardous jobs performed by children in poor urban areas include garbage-picking and begging.[59]

31. Youth unemployment is a major problem in many cities, with rates at their highest in the Middle East and North Africa (26%) and sub-Saharan Africa (21%).[60] UN-Habitat notes that frustrations accompanying long-term unemployment among groups of urban young men "may feed political and ideological unrest and provoke violence." The report highlights that many countries have experienced "youth bulges" (when young people comprise at least 40% of the population) that, when accompanied by unemployment and poverty, may challenge the authority of governments and lead to social unrest.[61]

32. The international community has pledged to assist those seeking employment by committing to achieve MDG Target 1b, which seeks to "Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all, including women and young people." In its new White Paper, published in July 2009, DFID has pledged directly to address "the underlying causes of conflict and fragility", including high numbers of unemployed young men.[62] It states that "short-term employment generation schemes can provide immediate relief, offering alternatives to violence for former combatants or young men." It highlights the importance of developing women's skills, stating that "the best support is for productive activities and decent work".[63] Yet DFID does not relate either of these points to the specific challenges of the urban context. We welcome the pledge made in DFID's White Paper to address a key driver of conflict and crime—unemployment amongst young men. We also welcome DFID's recognition of the importance of developing women's skills. However, we were disappointed that neither point was linked to urban contexts specifically. In slum settlements, where large numbers of young, poor and unemployed people may be concentrated, the risks of internal conflict, crime and extremism are heightened. Women and children are at particular risk to exploitative and dangerous work. We recommend that DFID ensure that urban settings are given a specific focus for its crime reduction, employment generation and skills development schemes.

Crime and violence

33. Governance, security and justice are crucial sectors for governments and donors seeking to address urban poverty. DFID's new White Paper states that, "As the world becomes more urbanised, we have to pay even more attention to crime and violence in cities and the growing problem of international organised crime."[64] DFID said that it attempts to address the links between urban poverty, unemployment and crime within "a country context."[65] The Minister of State for International Development, Gareth Thomas MP, gave the example of a community security initiative in Jamaica, supported by £1 million from DFID, that aims to improve social services in six violent communities where organised criminals and gang leaders have been removed. DFID has helped to restore services such as security, refuse collection and sanitation, power, water and health clinics within these communities.[66]

34. Ruth McLeod of University College London's Development Planning Unit emphasised the importance of community-based approaches to addressing crime in urban settings.[67] DFID is supporting implementation of community policing in 18 of Nigeria's 36 states, an initiative that has now been adopted as policy both by the Nigerian Police Force and by the Ministry of Police Affairs. We heard about the benefits of the scheme during our visit to the country; in Kano over a 12-month period fear of crime went down by 20%, 56% of respondents reported less corruption and 93% reported improved police behaviour.[68] Local and community responses to urban crime have been proven to be highly effective. We credit DFID's support to community security and policing initiatives in Jamaica and Nigeria and urge the Department to look at other contexts where these approaches can be applied.

SOCIAL EXCLUSION

35. Poor urban residents face social exclusion on many levels. The marginalisation stemming from status as a slum or shack dweller may be compounded by discrimination based on gender, ethnicity, race, caste, religion, sexual orientation, age, disability, HIV status or migrant status.

Street children

36. The world's estimated 100 million street children represent a particularly marginalised group. Children who are homeless or work on the streets tend to have different needs from other children living in urban contexts. Whether or not they have contact with their families, they are vulnerable to violence (including sexual abuse), exploitation and poor living conditions, including a lack of food. They tend to live transitory lifestyles, unsupervised by adults, with little access to health, education and other services.[69] The Consortium for Street Children (CSC) expressed concern about the lack of attention given to street children by DFID and other large donors, especially UNICEF (the UN Children's Fund), to which DFID allocated £26 million in 2007-08:

There is an assumption amongst many donors, including DFID, that funding to UNICEF benefits street children. However [...] DFID does not record expenditure to particular groups and are therefore unable to evidence their assumption that the funding given to UNICEF benefits street children.[70]

37. CSC believed that DFID's new Institutional Strategy with UNICEF (2009/10-20011/12), due to be published imminently, should adopt indicators specific to street children.[71] When we put this suggestion to the DFID Minister, he accepted that there were "some discrete challenges around street children" but appeared to be content for indicators within the Institutional Strategy to focus on "vulnerable children" rather than street children specifically.[72] Street children have different needs from other children living in urban contexts. We urge DFID to ensure that both the Department and its key partners include tailored policies and programmes for street children within their approach to urban development. We are concerned that indicators based on reaching vulnerable children more generally may not ensure that street children receive the discrete and targeted assistance they require. We recommend that DFID adopt indicators specific to street children within its new Institutional Strategy with UNICEF.

Property rights

38. In many developing countries, only a small proportion (often around 30%) of land and property is formally registered.[73] Without a legal address, residents may find it difficult to access essential services. Because many slum households do not have secure property rights, local authorities are reluctant to provide essential infrastructure services, such as water and electricity, due partly to concerns that the provision of services may turn informal settlements into permanent arrangements.[74]

39. Insecure property rights also lead to the risk of forced eviction. The Development Planning Unit (DPU) told us that over the last three years, forced evictions have increased dramatically in frequency, number, level of violence and often in scale, involving hundreds of thousands and even millions of people in at least 60 countries.[75] The DPU stated:

We heard about the effects of forced eviction on urban dwellers in Indonesia, where evictees often return to the same location but must start again, with no shelter or services available to them.[77]

40. When we visited the Lagos State Land Registry in Nigeria, we saw how DFID-supported improvements—notably digitisation of registry documents—had catalysed the process of establishing land tenure in Lagos. The registry was also mapping the entire city. We heard how establishing tenure allowed residents to raise capital by applying for a loan using their property as collateral. The project was being used as a model for other states. DFID recently announced £20 million of support for a nationwide land registration scheme in Rwanda, where disputes over land rights contributed to the conflict that sparked the genocide of 1994.[78]

41. A case for expanding this approach of freeing "dead" capital has been made by the economist Hernando de Soto, who contends that large-scale land titling programmes could be an important tool for poverty reduction.[79] However, critics have argued that the approach favoured by de Soto is simplistic, that it does not always lead to the provision of credit, that it attempts to export the Western legal system and that titled ownership is not in itself the answer to solving urban poverty.[80] The Development Planning Unit has highlighted that outright titled ownership is not the only secure form of tenure, and that right of use, leasehold and collective forms of tenure can also protect the rights of the poor to housing and land.[81] Geoffrey Payne, an urban development consultant, told us that security of tenure should be one among a number of policy options for governments and donors looking to support urban development.[82] DFID says that its support to the Community-Led Infrastructure Finance Facility (CLIFF) has helped improve security of tenure for over 5,000 households in India, Kenya and the Philippines.[83] It also says that it is "considering support" to a pilot programme in Punjab, India to strengthen land tenancy rights for the poor. The Punjab Economic Opportunities Programme is seeking £4.4 million from donors.[84]

42. A lack of secure property rights is a major barrier to poor urban dwellers' inclusion in city-wide service provision. It also exposes poor residents to the risk of forced eviction. During our visit to Nigeria we witnessed the benefits emerging from a DFID-supported project to establish secure land tenure and property rights in Lagos. Establishing tenure can help residents improve their living conditions, access basic services and raise capital. We recommend that DFID disseminate lessons from and build on their support to the Lagos State Land Registry, and actively support other programmes supporting secure tenure. However, we would caution that land and property titling may not always be the most appropriate form of providing secure tenure for poor urban dwellers and we would encourage DFID to use the approach judiciously.

Exclusion based on gender and migrant status

43. Women, and poor women especially, face particular challenges in securing land tenure. In many parts of Africa and Asia especially, customary rules and the legal system deny women their human rights to access, own, control or inherit land and property.[85] At the same time, millions of women rely on land for their livelihoods and to feed their families.[86] Women face many other forms of gender inequality within urban contexts, ranging from employment and political participation to access to education and healthcare. Women's self-help, microcredit and other community groups have proliferated in many developing country cities.[87] We will explore community-led initiatives further in Chapter 4.

44. Rural-urban migrants are another particularly vulnerable group within slum populations, because they move around frequently, are away from their families and may not have access to state social welfare programmes or services. DFID-funded research by Sussex and Oxford Universities showed that families who had migrated from the countryside to a slum settlement in Rajasthan, India were more likely to get ill and more likely to suffer the death of a child than longer-term residents.[88]

Policies for inclusive urban development

45. One World Action, a UK-based NGO, told us that one route to ensuring inclusive urban development that targets women, migrants and other marginalised groups was to carry out a physical mapping process of where the most vulnerable urban populations are located, and what access they have to services.[89] DFID-supported geographic information system (GIS) mapping in Faisalabad, Pakistan has improved the targeting of poor communities by providing accurate information as a basis for decisions on city planning, budgeting and for land and property registration.[90] The provincial government has committed to replicating this approach across nine districts in Punjab.[91]

46. One World Action said that participatory urban planning processes such as mapping should form part of wider approaches to support marginalised groups to be active citizens—particularly within urban governance and justice systems.[92]It said that the urban context has "remained relatively ignored" within DFID's work on governance and exclusion.[93]Slum dwellers face multiple levels of social exclusion, and their marginalisation may be exacerbated by other forms of discrimination based on, for example, gender, ethnicity, age and migrant status. We believe that DFID should allocate resources towards urban programmes that strengthen inclusive governance, transparency and accountability. This should include support to community groups working for urban development, including women's organisations. We will return to this issue in Chapter 4.

Social protection

47. DFID's recent White Paper highlights the role of social protection schemes in assisting vulnerable groups and protecting poor households from economic shocks such as the recent global economic crisis and the food price rises in 2008-09. The UK is now the largest bilateral funder of social protection schemes, which provide a safety net for poor households through cash transfers, stipends (given, for example, in exchange for school attendance) and targeted funds for vulnerable groups such as disabled and elderly people. Other forms of social protection include "in kind" transfers such as free school meals or the provision of social services.[94] DFID is aiming is reach 50 million people through social protection schemes over the next three years.[95]

48. DFID told us that there is evidence that the urban poor are less well covered by social protection programmes than their rural counterparts in countries such as Indonesia and China.[96] Yet the White Paper chiefly links social protection to rural contexts, as part of a response to agriculture and food security.[97] The Consortium for Street Children believed that if DFID is to expand social protection as a way of dealing with urban poverty, it must adopt a broad approach as cash transfers to households do not necessarily reach the vulnerable groups at which they are targeted (especially street children who may not have family contact).[98] Social protection schemes provide an important safety net for households at risk from poverty and economic shocks. We urge DFID to ensure that its expansion of social protection schemes over the next three years is focused as much on urban as rural contexts. We encourage DFID to look beyond cash transfers alone to broader measures of protection that will ensure all vulnerable groups are reached.

POPULATION GROWTH

49. The world's population is likely to grow from 6.8 billion today to over 10 billion by 2050, with 95% of the growth taking place in urban areas.[99] The UN estimates that natural population increase accounts for some 60% of urban growth. As the urban base grows, natural population increase becomes responsible for a higher proportion of urban growth.[100] In regions such as Africa, natural population expansion is playing a powerful role in urbanisation, although other factors such as economic growth and the forced movements of people as a result of natural disasters and conflict have also been influential factors.[101] Africa's population is increasing three times faster than the world average, with the number of poorest people—310 million—still increasing (albeit mostly in rural areas).[102]

50. We were struck by the lack of evidence we received in the inquiry relating to the links between urbanisation and population growth and how population control might play a part in tackling urban poverty. One reason for this may be that population control is a sensitive area. We heard during our visit to Nigeria that—partly due to political sensitivities—there was no population strategy in place, despite the high rates of population growth.

51. Geoffrey Payne, an urban development consultant, told us simply that "the best contraceptive is development." He said that expanding access to clean water and education, and improving women's rights, would help reduce fertility rates.[103] In our report on DFID's 2008 Departmental Annual Report, we highlighted that one in five girls of primary school age are not in school, and noted the positive development impacts that result from educating girls.[104] These include reduced fertility: a World Bank study found that for each four years of extra education, fertility per woman drops by roughly one birth.[105]

52. UN-Habitat did not provide a clear answer when we asked them if they had a population strategy in place.[106]DFID did not comment on linking the two issues of urbanisation and population growth. Neither organisation commented on co-operation with the lead UN agency on population growth, the UN Population Fund (UNFPA). We were struck by the paucity of evidence received in this inquiry addressing the links between urbanisation and population growth. Natural population increase accounts for some 60% of urban growth. We understand that population control is a sensitive issue but it seems surprising to us that neither UN-Habitat nor DFID provided us with information on linking their support to urban development with a population strategy or with co-operation with the UN Population Fund. We suggest that both agencies look more closely at how such linkages could be achieved.

CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE ENVIRONMENT

53. Improving the lives of slum dwellers depends on governments' and communities' ability to improve the physical environment of poor urban settlements. This will entail efforts to control pollution and address the impact of climate change, as well as the implementation of planning policies, urban design, provision of green space and effective disaster planning.[107]

54. Climate change is already affecting coastal cities in particular, both in terms of higher incidence of natural disasters and rising sea levels. During the 20th century, sea levels rose by an estimated 17 centimetres globally. Global projections for sea level rise between 1990 and 2080 range from 22 to 34 centimetres. The low elevation coastal zone (the area along coastlines that is less than 10 metres above sea level) represents 2% of the world's land area but contains 10% of its total population and 13% of its urban population.[108] During our visit to Nigeria, we heard that Lagos is just three feet above sea level and yet is home to a population that is expanding by around one million every year.

55. Poor people living in cities in developing countries often live in flood-prone or water-logged areas, especially within coastal cities, and are vulnerable to losing their homes due to rising sea levels or natural disasters. For example, an estimated 17% of Mombasa in Kenya (4600 hectares) could be submerged by a sea level rise of 0.3 metres. Even a slight rise in sea level is likely to engulf large areas of Dhaka in Bangladesh.[109]Poverty limits urban dwellers' ability to insure and protect themselves against rising sea levels, climate impacts and disasters such as floods and storms.[110]

56. Climate change is thought to offer both opportunities and challenges for urban areas. Given that urban areas consume most of the world's energy and generate the bulk of the waste, climate change offers the chance for greater focus on the urban context. This could lead to more money being allocated to the urban sector—including from organisations not previously involved in development (for example, the European Investment Bank, which now has an EU mandate to invest in climate change strategies in developing countries). The Development Planning Unit told us that "embryonic" work on the integration of three separate sectors—urban planning, disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation—at urban level needs to be strengthened.[111]

57. There is, however, a risk that such investments are likely to be targeted at "climate proofing" cities (for instance, through providing 'greener' public transport), which may divert attention and funds from targeted programmes for urban poverty reduction and slum upgrading.[112]This risk is heightened by the fact that adequate responses to climate change impacts are likely to depend on strong and committed local governments and communities.[113] Education, awareness-raising and community participation at the local level are thus of primary importance. UN-Habitat told us it was important to ensure that:

114

58. The DFID Minister told us that:

Part of our response [...] to climate change as well as part of our response to urbanisation has got to be to bring those two agendas together, to think through how you better manage or how you get better training systems, better flood alleviation systems in place, better disaster management programmes in place.

He gave the example of low-lying areas of Bangladesh, where DFID is supporting interventions that simultaneously address hygiene and waste concerns (blocked drains) and extreme weather events (flooding).[115] We were pleased to hear that DFID is seeking to bring the climate change and urbanisation agendas closer together. However, we urge DFID and other international agencies to ensure that attempts to address the impacts of climate change in cities do not divert resources from targeted programmes for urban poverty reduction, including basic service provision and slum upgrading. We recommend that, as well as ensuring its own programmes avoid this outcome, DFID advocate for UN-Habitat, in conjunction with the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, to lead efforts to boost the capacity of cities to address climate change impacts without neglecting vital urban poverty reduction strategies. Building capacity at local government and community level is central to managing this tension.

4 These figures assume that global fertility levels remain at or near present levels and that longevity will increase. Back

5 Ev 72 and UN-Habitat, State of the World's Cities 2008-09, p.xi Back

6 UN-Habitat, State of the World's Cities 2008-09, p. xi Back

7 Ev 72 Back

8 Ev 122. A megacity is usually defined as a metropolitan area with a total population in excess of 10 million people. Some definitions also set a minimum level for population density (at least 2,000 persons/square km). Back

9 UN-Habitat defines a slum as a co-habiting group lacking one or more of the following conditions, together classified as basic shelter deprivations:

Durable housing comprising a permanent structure giving adequate protection from the weather

Access to improved water

Access to improved sanitation facilities