I stumbled upon this old article that I wrote for my grad school's academic journal. Thought I'd share it since I've been too busy to post in a while. Warning: It is boring.
From Local Vision to Global Action: UN-Habitat and Agenda 21
All international organizations attempt to solve some of the world’s greatest problems, and some international organizations attempt to solve all of the world’s greatest problems. The United Nations is the latter type of organization, sensibly confronting global problems with global policies but struggling with the sheer magnitude of its ideas and its structure when it comes to implementation.
Much of the UN’s efforts are devoted to the creation of global standards intended to improve the lives of individuals throughout the world. The institution provides a medium for the fusion of local opinions into global consensus, producing lofty policies that are disconnected from the intended beneficiaries. In order to reconnect, however, the institution must also provide a medium for the fission of global visions into local actions.
With the generous assistance of a FLAS fellowship from the European Studies Center, I have been studying the process of localization, by which international organizations attempt to reconcile the rhetoric of the crème de la crème with the realities of the poorest of the poor. By examining the experiences of the UN Human Settlements Programme (UN- HABITAT) in localizing the goals outlined in Agenda 21, I am assessing the ability of global organizations to effect meaningful change for local people.
Agenda 21 is the authoritative publication on sustainable development, which was developed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. UN-HABITAT had begun to incorporate the goal of sustainable development into its global vision just before the publication of Agenda 21, when it established its Sustainable Cities Programme (SCP) in 1991. In 1995, the institution established a sister program, Localizing Agenda 21 (LA21), to further implement the agenda. Together, the two programs act as the medium through which UN-HABITAT localizes its mission of providing “socially and environmentally sustainable human settlements development and the achievement of adequate shelter for all.”
The SCP process focuses on the institutionalization of participatory decision-making processes in partner cities. Through an expert environmental assessment of each city and increased stakeholder representation, it is hoped that a permanent process of sustainable planning will be established. While the program is flexible, adaptable, and replicable, its effectiveness relies largely on the quality of individual involvement. Despite an intention to include community representatives, results have varied. A “successful” process, to the experts, is characterized by full participation and hard-won consensus among stakeholders. Decisions reached in this manner may be socially-sustainable, but there seems to be little evidence that they need be environmentally-sustainable.
The LA21 process focuses more directly on the implementation of sustainable development in partner cities. Proceeding in the manner of typical community design charettes, the LA21 program brings experts in sustainable urban planning, architecture, and transit, to name a few, together with stakeholders to create plans and designs for the city’s development. Like the SCP process, the results rely largely on the quality of individual involvement. Increased expert involvement results in more fully-developed and environmentally-sustainable plans at the expense, perhaps, of a degree of stakeholder control and social sustainability.
The two programs take different approaches to localizing Agenda 21. Each combines the expert support of an international organization with the first-hand experience of community representatives in different ways. SCP and LA21 complement each other by providing cities with the tools and skills to engage in early-stage sustainable planning and the knowledge and experience to engage in late-stage sustainable development.
Together, the programs provide a reasonable and comprehensive strategy. Yet, both programs have faced some challenges in cultivating local participation and balancing expert involvement. The success of UN-HABITAT in reconciling rhetoric with realities to effect meaningful change for local people has depended, and will continue to depend, on the ability of the experts to educate and motivate the local population—and then to step back.
From Local Vision to Global Action: UN-Habitat and Agenda 21
All international organizations attempt to solve some of the world’s greatest problems, and some international organizations attempt to solve all of the world’s greatest problems. The United Nations is the latter type of organization, sensibly confronting global problems with global policies but struggling with the sheer magnitude of its ideas and its structure when it comes to implementation.
Much of the UN’s efforts are devoted to the creation of global standards intended to improve the lives of individuals throughout the world. The institution provides a medium for the fusion of local opinions into global consensus, producing lofty policies that are disconnected from the intended beneficiaries. In order to reconnect, however, the institution must also provide a medium for the fission of global visions into local actions.
With the generous assistance of a FLAS fellowship from the European Studies Center, I have been studying the process of localization, by which international organizations attempt to reconcile the rhetoric of the crème de la crème with the realities of the poorest of the poor. By examining the experiences of the UN Human Settlements Programme (UN- HABITAT) in localizing the goals outlined in Agenda 21, I am assessing the ability of global organizations to effect meaningful change for local people.
Agenda 21 is the authoritative publication on sustainable development, which was developed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. UN-HABITAT had begun to incorporate the goal of sustainable development into its global vision just before the publication of Agenda 21, when it established its Sustainable Cities Programme (SCP) in 1991. In 1995, the institution established a sister program, Localizing Agenda 21 (LA21), to further implement the agenda. Together, the two programs act as the medium through which UN-HABITAT localizes its mission of providing “socially and environmentally sustainable human settlements development and the achievement of adequate shelter for all.”
The SCP process focuses on the institutionalization of participatory decision-making processes in partner cities. Through an expert environmental assessment of each city and increased stakeholder representation, it is hoped that a permanent process of sustainable planning will be established. While the program is flexible, adaptable, and replicable, its effectiveness relies largely on the quality of individual involvement. Despite an intention to include community representatives, results have varied. A “successful” process, to the experts, is characterized by full participation and hard-won consensus among stakeholders. Decisions reached in this manner may be socially-sustainable, but there seems to be little evidence that they need be environmentally-sustainable.
The LA21 process focuses more directly on the implementation of sustainable development in partner cities. Proceeding in the manner of typical community design charettes, the LA21 program brings experts in sustainable urban planning, architecture, and transit, to name a few, together with stakeholders to create plans and designs for the city’s development. Like the SCP process, the results rely largely on the quality of individual involvement. Increased expert involvement results in more fully-developed and environmentally-sustainable plans at the expense, perhaps, of a degree of stakeholder control and social sustainability.
The two programs take different approaches to localizing Agenda 21. Each combines the expert support of an international organization with the first-hand experience of community representatives in different ways. SCP and LA21 complement each other by providing cities with the tools and skills to engage in early-stage sustainable planning and the knowledge and experience to engage in late-stage sustainable development.
Together, the programs provide a reasonable and comprehensive strategy. Yet, both programs have faced some challenges in cultivating local participation and balancing expert involvement. The success of UN-HABITAT in reconciling rhetoric with realities to effect meaningful change for local people has depended, and will continue to depend, on the ability of the experts to educate and motivate the local population—and then to step back.
Posts
