City Development Strategies (CDSs) could provide the framework required to link poor communities and planners responsible for city governance and service delivery. Launched in 1999 by Cities Alliance, CDSs aim to bring poor and vulnerable groups into urban planning and policy development processes. Although the strategy has been adopted in numerous Third World cities, lack of clarity over the appropriate framework to achieve poverty reduction has meant that participation has not brought about the expected benefits.

A report from GHK International considers these constraints and suggests how to formulate and implement a CDS in order to maximise and sustain poverty reduction impacts. Focusing on ensuring the effective participation of the poor, it draws on case studies from Colombo in Sri Lanka, Johannesburg in South Africa and the Bangladeshi city of Khulna, as well as desk research of a large number of other CDSs.

The potential of the CDS is that it provides city managers with the possibility of going beyond existing urban land-use planning tools to develop a framework for pro-poor city growth and sustained development. The CDS merges strategic planning and participatory methods with the aim of achieving an institutionalised process for social transformation and the political empowerment of marginalised groups.

However, applying CDS appears to have frustrated many of those involved in all three of the cities. The researchers found that:

• In Colombo, divergence emerged between the donor priorities and those of the municipal councils. There was disagreement over appropriate service infrastructure as well as unrealistic expectations of donors given municipal councils’ financial and capacity constraints.
• As a result of a lack of understanding among non-poor stakeholders about the poor and their needs, measures to reduce poverty were given low priority.
• Khulna stakeholders demonstrated a lack of consensus as to what they felt the objectives of the CDS should be. A number of key stakeholders were also excluded from the process because participatory consultation was not planned.
• In Khulna, a narrow focus on economic regeneration emerged as the primary means of poverty alleviation, with project proposals largely emphasising physical infrastructure.
• Similarly in Johannesburg, although the process was locally-owned and internally financed, as the CDS emerged out of a fiscal crisis, the debate has been dominated the competing imperatives of promoting growth and reducing poverty.
• In Khulna and Columbo, there was limited follow-up of the planning exercise, largely due to a lack of local ownership of the process.

The CDSs were also limited by the extent to which they were able to analyse and engage with the political context. The short-term perspectives of elected politicians did not fit in with the long-term focus required to implement a successful CDS. There was also an over-reliance on particular ‘champions’ who supported the strategy, such that when they left office, the CDS lost momentum. As local control over centrally-allocated funds was limited, municipal councils were unable to utilise them for their locally-determined poverty initiatives.

CDS is not, however, fatally flawed. Achieving its pro-poor potential is possible if:

• clear guidance and practical tools are given by Cities Alliance on how to design and implement pro-poor strategies
• it is recognised that the task of consultants is to build local ownership and sustainability of the CDS rather than impose solutions
• there is sufficient time to prepare stakeholders to participate
• there are realistic expectations of what can and cannot be achieved in terms of poverty reduction impacts given local capacities
• it is recognised that the poor are highly heterogeneous and may have conflicting interests
• pre-CDS preparation includes analysis of the political context, guidance on communications strategy and partnership development as a means of mobilising resources

Crucially, CDSs need appropriate tools and approaches that inform choice and are able to withstand the pressures of political decisions on resource allocation. Planners can use CDSs to make the move from developing isolated poverty programmes and land-use plans towards mainstreaming pro-poor analyses and creating an institutionalised process for the preparation of strategic and integrated urban development policies. To build ownership and sustainability, the poor themselves need support to build the networks and generate advocates who can articulate their needs and demands.

Source(s):
‘Final report: city development strategies: an instrument for poverty reduction?’ by Janet Gardener, Mehreen Hosain, Nicholas Miles and Jamie Simpson, August 2002

Funded by: DFID (IUDD) R7853

id21 Research Highlight: 16 August 2004

Further Information:
Janet Gardener, Mehreen Hosain and Jamie Simpson
GHK
526 Fulham Road
Fulham
London SW6 5NR
UK

Tel: +44 (0) 207  7471 8000
Fax: +44 (0) 207  736 07 84
Contact the contributor: gardenerj@ghkint.com

Contact the contributor: hosainm@ghkint.com

Contact the contributor: simpsonj@ghkint.com

GHK

Other related links:
Cities Alliance: Cities without Slums

'City politics: a voice for the poor?' Insights #38

See id21's links page on urban governance