Taking cities seriously

Habitat III was the third in a series of conferences that take place every 20 years. While evaluations have indicated that progress on the goals of the previous conference – Habitat II – has been limited, a paradigm change has taken place in the way cities and urbanization are perceived. While urbanization was initially seen as a problem – associated with poverty, uncontrolled growth of slums, and pollution – a shift has occurred towards recognizing that well planned, built and managed cities can be drivers of sustainable development, climate action, economic growth and inclusiveness.

A further important contribution of the Habitat III process is that inputs for the New Urban Agenda were discussed during inclusive consultations with a wide range of stakeholders. Local authorities organized in interest groups such as the Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments, and increasingly spoke with one voice to call for a “seat at the table”. They argued that since the New Urban Agenda is about cities and local authorities, they should have a more substantial role in its elaboration than merely being given observer status. While this demand was ultimately denied, the Habitat III process nonetheless stands out as the first time that direct consultations between local authorities and member states took place in a UN context.

Resilience in the New Urban Agenda

Resilience is one of the guiding principles of the agenda, which emphasizes that changes in the way cities are planned, financed, designed, built, governed and managed can foster resilience. However, at the same time, when discussing resilience more specifically the New Urban Agenda primarily links it  to climate change and disaster resilience, and emphasis is placed on transforming urban infrastructure, housing, planning and design as tools to achieve resilience.

This is a rather narrow conception that avoids a broader range of environmental, social, economic and political pressures and stressors that may contribute to fragility and undermine resilience. For example, the concept of “fragile cities” has in recent years been used to refer to the destabilizing effect that can emerge in cities where various global pressures – such as climate risks, rapid and unplanned urbanization, social inequalities, criminality and unemployment – converge, but does not play a role in the New Urban Agenda.

The relative novelty of the concept of “resilience” also means that definitions are still contested – consequently, very different (and potentially inconsistent) activities may be implemented in the same city with the aim of enhancing resilience. Evidently, more efforts may still be needed to arrive at a widely shared definition of urban resilience. At the local level, these discussions also need to take place to ensure that new initiatives share the same understanding of resilience.

Implementing Habitat III

While the New Urban Agenda outlines a broad vision for sustainable cities, enthusiasm for implementation thus far remains limited. Stakeholders are invited to register voluntary commitments online. However, thus far, only 69 initiatives have been entered, and only 23 of them have financial resources of more than USD 1 million available. In comparison, more than 2100 partnerships have been registered to support the implementation of the SDGs – including more than 70 partnerships that intend to contribute to the implementation of SDG 11. Moreover, more than 11,600 commitments have been registered in the Non-State Actor Zone for Climate Action (NAZCA). Of course, the latter two platforms have been around for much longer, and more voluntary commitments for the New Urban Agenda will likely be registered in the coming years.

More specifically, the number of voluntary commitments to support the implementation of the New Urban Agenda that mention resilience in the description of their goals and activities is currently limited. There are, however, several noteworthy initiatives that were launched or scaled up in the context of the Habitat III conference that could make substantial contributions to urban resilience.

For example, the C40 Cities Finance Facility (CFF) that was launched last year at the Paris climate conference received additional funding commitments at Habitat III. This initiative aims to improve access to climate finance for cities with the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and improving urban climate resilience. While the New Urban Agenda contains a commitment to improve cities´ access to international climate funds, member states will still need to translate this commitment into practice. In the meantime, the CFF can potentially play an important role in improving financing options for cities, which are currently not able to directly access funding from climate finance initiatives such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF). 

The Transformative Urban Mobility Initiative (TUMI) that was announced at Habitat III by Germany´s Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development is also of interest. Resilience is one of several targets – the initiative emphasizes the relevance of “climate-sensitive and resilient transport services and infrastructures” – and with EUR 1 billion available, TUMI has the potential to have a significant impact.

While these two initiatives are thus noteworthy, it remains to be seen whether the New Urban Agenda can catalyze more activities to foster urban resilience, and what understanding of resilience they embody.