Refining MDG Targets and Indicators For The Urban Poor: Some Provocative Thoughts - Paper

The views expressed in this paper/presentation are the views of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the
views or policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), or its Board of Directors, or the governments they
represent. ADB does not guarantee the source, originality, accuracy, completeness or reliability of any statement,
information, data, finding, interpretation, advice, opinion, or view presented, nor does it make any representation
concerning the same.
Refining the Targets and Indicators of the MDGs for the Urban Poor:
Some Provocative Thoughts
by: Florian Steinberg, Asian Development Bank1
SUMMARY
In 2010 UN-Habitat published its State of the World’s Cities 2010/2011 report on “bridging the
urban divide” which conveyed that a major breakthrough has been achieved in the reduction of
slum dwellers in the developing world. Progress in China, India and Indonesia was attributed to
these developments. Indeed, the target of improving the lives of 100 million slum dwellers was
achieved 10 years ahead of time. Upon scrutiny of the UN-Habitat data it appears however, that
the evidence presented is thin, and the method of substantiation lacking. This paper suggests
that developing countries, donors and UN-Habitat need to undertake fresh efforts to strengthen
targeting meaningful accomplishment and monitoring of MDG 7. A more relevant target of 50%
of the expected slum population should be established for the coming decade. Further it is
suggested that more measures are required to accelerate inclusive urban development in order
to achieve more real progress on the ground that is dealing with existing slums and the
prevention of new ones.
INTRODUCTION
The Millennium Development Goals (MDG) of 2000 had set as one of its targets to bring 100
million urban slum dwellers out of slum conditions. 2 The target of achieving “by 2020 a
significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers” is sub-target 7D of the
MDG 7 that is devoted to ensure environmental sustainability. Besides the notion of slums,
MDG target 7C also aims to “halve by 2015, the number of people without sustainable access to
safe drinking water and basic sanitation”.
In 2010, UN-Habitat reported in its State of the World’s Cities 2010/2011 publication that the
“slum target” has been achieved ten years ahead of time, and that the lives of 227 million slum
dwellers have been improved. However the observation is being added, that the target was set
too low at the outset. 100 million represented in 2000 only about 10% of the total world slum
population.
The good news was that “China and India alone achieved the global slum target by improving
the lives of 125 million slum dwellers”; and “North Africa is the only sub-region in the developing
world where both the number and proportion of slum dwellers have steadily declined… No
single country has managed to halve their slum population. The more successful (Indonesia,
Morocco, Argentina, Colombia, Egypt, Dominican Republic) reduced slum incidence by 30 to
nearly 50 per cent.” 3 How did China, India and Indonesia accomplish their successes? How
was this measured, and have measures been undertaken in a manner that will sustain the
progress reported, how will they assure that progress reached is not wiped out by climate
events or any other kind of development?
1
Senior Urban Development Specialist, South East Asia Department. The views expressed in this paper do not
necessarily represent views of the Asian Development Bank.
2
http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/mdg2007.pdf p. 26
3
UN-Habitat.2010. State of the World’s Cities 2010/2011 – Bridging the Urban Divide. Earthscan. London-
Washington, DC. p. 30.
1
In 2010, UN-Habitat reported that world-wide the absolute number of slum-dwellers has actually
increased from about 777 to 827 million due to rapid urbanization. According to UN-Habitat a
"do-nothing" approach will further increase slum populations, reaching nearly 900 million world-
wide by 2020. 4
The paper will argue that there is a need to refine existing targets and measurement of
indicators reporting progress. Further, the paper argues that more measures are needed on the
ground in dealing with existing slums and the prevention of new ones.
WHAT ARE SLUMS?
As defined by the United Nations agency UN-HABITAT, a slum is a run-down area of a city
lacking one or more of the following five features: “(i) durable housing (a permanent structure
providing protection from extreme climatic conditions); (ii) sufficient living area (no more than
three people sharing a room); (iii) access in improved water (water that is sufficient, affordable
and can be obtained without extreme effort); (iv) access to improved sanitation facilities (a
private toilet, or a public one shared with a reasonable number of people); and (v) secure tenure
(de facto or de jure secure tenure status and protection against forced eviction).Since
information on the secure tenure is not available in the UN-Habitat database, only the first four
indicators are used to define slum households, and then to estimate the proportion of the urban
population living in slums” 5
ACCOMPLISHMENTS BY 2010
Asia is the region with the greatest number of urban slum dwellers, seeking an improved quality
of life, as well as employment and education opportunities. What they encountered, and
continue to encounter, are only recently-empowered local governments, just beginning to
address responsibilities decentralization has brought with limited authorities. In 2001 an
estimated 60% of the world’s total slum dwellers, or some 554 million persons, lived in Asian
cities, but in 2010 this figure still stood at 505 million slum dwellers.
Asia stood at the forefront of successful efforts to reach the slum target, with governments in the
region improving the lives of an estimated 172 million slum dwellers between 2000 and 2010.
According to UN-Habitat, China and India combined lifted more than 125 million slum dwellers
out of slum conditions. In the case of China it is stated that 65.5 million urban residents who
were living with one or more factors of shelter deprivations saw improvements in their ‘day-to-
day’ conditions. China has targeted old villages within the boundaries of expanding cities or
(temporary) housing for migrant workers through provision of access to slum dwellers of 20
million new and affordable housing units through government equity grants.6 Economic reforms,
modernization and pro-poor policies seem also to have contributed to a reduction the number of
slum dwellers, as increased incomes resulted in a reduction of slum dwellings.
In the case of India, 59.7 million slum dwellers have been assisted, and slum prevalence fell
from 41.5% in 2000 to an estimated 28.1% in 2010, a relative decrease of 32%. India has taken
up poverty alleviation and slum improvement through urban development policies which are (i)
enhancing the productivity of the urban poor through increased building skills and microcredit,
(ii) through in-situ slum improvement projects, (iii) through providing security of tenure in
4
As in footnote 3, p. 33.
5
6
2
unauthorized settlements and improved access to serviced low-cost housing and subsidized
housing finance; and (iv) encouragement of the urban poor to participate in decision-making.7
After China and India, the most significant improvements are recorded in Indonesia, Vietnam
and Turkey. For instance, Indonesia improved the lives of 21.2 million slum dwellers, a 33%
decrease; Indonesia’s urban slum population decreased from 34.4% in 2000 to an estimated
23% in 2010.8 At the subregional level, the greatest advances were recorded in Southern and
Eastern Asia (73 and 72 million people, respectively, followed by South-East Asia (33 million).In
contrast, West Asia failed to make a contribution as the number of slum dwellers in the
subregion increased by 12 %.9
NEED FOR MORE REALISTIC MDG TARGETS AND INDICATORS
While these data of China, India and Indonesia are particularly impressive, it needs to be asked
how these data have been computed, and what they actually represented. The sources
provided by UN-Habitat in its 2010 flagship report on State of the World’s Cities 2010/2011, are
simply stated as “UN-Habitat – Global Urban Observatory (GUO), 2009 (with 2010 data as
predictions).10 Additionally, for China and India, personal communication is being cited which by
itself is weak evidence of MDG results. Seemingly, neither the respective countries nor the
donor community have undertaken any significant studies of accomplishments.11 The above
suggests that UN-Habitat’s GUO is dealing with quite an imperfect system of MDG monitoring
that is calling for improvements. The GIUO as such seems rather underfunded and operating on
a shoestring budget.
Additionally, it needs to be asked whether the accomplishments will be sustainable? Will

physical structures of habitat be maintained (or improved) over time? Will density levels stay
what they are or come down eventually? Will basic infrastructure services be maintained by
combined efforts of the authorities and communities? And will tenure security remain unaltered,
or can threats of urban renewal or redevelopment be averted?
In theory, UN-Habitat’s Global Urban Observatory (GUO) is supposed to monitor data for
countries and major urban areas, on the above five dimensions of slum life. However, in
practice there seem to exist many obstacles to do so. Data collection, usually a local
government task that is being coordinated at national levels, is largely deficient. Instead,
stopgap measures like random surveys are being applied to establish numerical bases for rough
estimates which are then extrapolated according to prevailing trends. Obviously, these
measures of data generation have shortcomings, are not very profound and adequate.
The current situation calls upon developing countries, donors and the United Nations to re-
examine tools and processes for establishing MDG targets and for more accurate monitoring in
the areas that are critical to the existence of slums:
(i) habitat quality – physical characteristics and resilient technologies;

(ii) habitat density – space available per person;
(iii) access to basic infrastructure:
a. water
7
8
9
As in footnote 3, p. x.
10
As in footnote 3, p. 39, Figure 1.3.1
11
As in footnote 3, p. 49, endnotes 6 and 7.
3
b. sanitation
c. solid waste collection
d. drainage and flood control
e. electricity and other services
(iv) secure tenure.
The achievement of MDGs will not be complete if attention is not given to concrete measures to
deal with existing slums and the prevention of new ones. This requires not only continued but
reinforced attention. The following section will be dealing with a set of suggestions how inclusive
urban development can be achieved.
Apparently, UN-Habitat is suffering from a scarcity of resources, and the GUO in particular
seems under-resourced.
Since the original target of the MDG 7D was severely understated, the donor community and
the United Nations need to assess whether MDG 7D really makes any sense. A more relevant
target – say of 50% of the expected slum population - should rather be the established target for
the coming decade.
HOW CAN INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT BE ACHIEVED?12
Besides MDG monitoring, there is a need to accelerate the creation of inclusive cities through
the up-scaling of successful and path-breaking innovations. There is a need to move ahead with
national MDG agendas, and develop concrete urban development approaches that deal with
existing slums and prevent the creation of new ones.
Addressing the Existing Urban Context
Many existing urban situations call for remedial investment to provide basic services such as
water, sanitation, and solid-waste management that are not yet available in slums and informal
settlements. Remedial investment is also urgently required for programs that focus on
retrofitting existing community infrastructure, housing and schools, and historic urban areas,
through participatory methods of interventions and developments. An illustrative list of inclusive
urban redevelopment options shows a variety of activities that inclusive urban redevelopment
initiatives could support:
Water supply and sanitation. Developing countries can increase activities through private
sector partnerships and cofinancing to address the growing demand for water supply,
wastewater treatment, and sanitation in unserviced areas and settlements in a city, including
slums and informal settlements. The focus on slums is deserved; the infrastructure projects built
in specific informal settlements will need to become part of citywide service systems that will
help in setting user fees and recover project construction costs.
Slum upgrading programs. Slum upgrading focuses on the provision of basic urban services
that have not kept pace with urban growth. It requires a comprehensive approach to expand its
range of activities to include home improvements, resettlement schemes, on-site walk-up
apartment development, shelter retrofit, and site protection schemes. These will help to reduce
12
This section draws from ADB.2010. Inclusive Cities. (draft brochure). Manila. The will also be expanded in a
forthcoming publication: ADB. 2011. Inclusive Cities. Manila.
4
vulnerabilities, increase home improvement and expansion initiatives so as to improve a

community’s quality of life, and expand its livelihood opportunities in an integrated manner.
Shelter upgrading programs. Recent disasters have demonstrated just how vulnerable
existing shelter is, especially poorly constructed and provisional shelter of the poor. Conditions
in Haiti, not unlike those in Asia’s urban areas, serve as an example of what neglect can mean.
Focused retrofit programs in slums would reduce vulnerability and call attention to the issue.
The financing could be through community-based financial entities and microfinance
organizations as new partners.
Community facilities retrofit programs. Equally vulnerable are the community facilities
throughout Asia and the Pacific, including schools, that were to be safe havens for students and
community members during and after disasters and unrest. Recent experiences in Asia—such
as in India, Pakistan, and the PRC—have illustrated just how vulnerable schools are.
Infrastructure retrofit programs. Existing infrastructure can be made more resilient to climate
change impacts and disaster events of increasing frequency and intensity. Segregating service
systems and installing control valves segregate damaged segments of pipe can limit damage
and maintain safe water supplies especially important in times of emergencies.
Historic urban areas conservation. Historic urban areas are underutilized assets of a city.
They attract tourism, which is a growing source of employment for the poor in service industries.
Historic urban areas are also the home to increasing numbers of poor migrants occupying
shared facilities with limited services, if any at all. Improving the historic housing stock does not
5
necessarily mean gentrification but can also be carried out in support of the families living in the
tenements as cooperatives or on a leasehold basis, and at the same time conserve the historic
value of the areas. Financing conservation requires innovative mechanisms to capitalize
microlenders and solidarity groups to on-lend to self-help groups and small-scale developers.
Urban heritage districts in Kathmandu. Source: F. Urban heritage districts in Beijing. Source: F.
Steinberg Steinberg
Housing finance support. Support to the formal housing finance system can target
microfinance entities, nongovernment organizations (NGOs), and community-based
organizations (CBOs) serving the poor. Credit for housing and home improvements is a growing
opportunity for formal sector housing institutions. Controlling risk working with microfinance
entities and NGOs has been enhanced through technology such as prepaid payment
mechanisms and digital monitoring of payments. Bulk lending to microfinance entities,
community-based financial organizations, and NGOs offers improved opportunities for poor
families to gain access to credit to improve their livelihood and living conditions. Technical
assistance for working out the modalities, terms, and conditions for bulk lending constitute an
important capacity building aspect for donor support.
Slums of Hope or Slums of Despair
Many informal settlements in Asia and the Pacific may be labeled as slums. However, it needs
to be noted that these informal settlements are not uniform, and all differ. Instead of being
purely an environmental and social problem, many of these represent hopes and opportunities,
rather than just being the problem itself. Slum inhabitants often see these settlements as
opportunities, and they will do everything possible to improve or upgrade them. These
conditions can be in stark contrast to those areas where there is limited scope physically and
environmentally for regularization and improvement, often known as “slums of despair”.
6
Addressing the Future Growth of Cities
The future growth of cities implies three spatial tendencies which will determine much of the
future work:
 Densification of existing built-up areas;

 Urban expansion at the fringes through high-density, low rise development to avoid
inefficient sprawl; and
 Satellite cities or new towns (green field development).
An illustrative inclusive urban redevelopment initiative would provide a stream of capital

investment support necessary for land development and settlement upgrading. Poverty
reduction depends on the development of options for the poor. Through local government,
private sector, and civil society initiatives in partnership with ADB, support can focus on the
development of new land and shelter options for the poor—guided land development with sites
and services, reception areas, and innovative incremental low-rise high density housing
solutions—to better and more safely house growing urban populations.
7
An illustrative inclusive urban redevelopment portfolio that addresses future growth activities
could include the following:
1. Structural Initiatives
Basic urban services. These are water supply, wastewater treatment, and sanitation systems
that have been the principal components of urban infrastructure development programs. These
citywide systems need to be considered as ongoing efforts to provide, operate, maintain, and
expand basic services in growing cities. How to create a stream of support to accomplish this is
the issue, and local government becomes a key player working with the private sector in
creating commercially viable projects such as in Ahmedabad, India that are financed through its
domestic bond market.
8
Mitigation infrastructure. The definition of urban infrastructure must now be expanded to

include mitigation infrastructure; the impacts of climate change and natural disasters on cities
now require it. Mitigation infrastructure becomes a critical component of urban planning and will
influence how and what kind of land will be developed; the location of lifeline facilities, schools,
and safe havens; and the building standards for mixed-use, high-density, and low-rise housing.
Mitigation infrastructure includes citywide flood control systems such as that in Iloilo in the
Philippines; early warning systems in Thailand and Indonesia; site protection schemes; and
retaining walls and sea groins in Sri Lanka to protect beachfront fishing communities and
coastal cities.
Guided land development and sites and services programs. ADB support for proactive land
development in urban expansion areas will radically change the tenor of local governance that is
now stuck in a cycle of reactive remedial efforts to upgrade existing squatter areas. New sites
and services can guide the urban population to safe well-serviced settlements. If there are no
shelter alternatives available for low-income families, cities will always be afflicted with slums
and informal settlements and their problems of overcrowding, vulnerability, and quality of life
issues.
Innovative shelter solutions. Incremental housing features core housing and site and services
as the preferred type of physical solutions available to the poor depending on the capacity of a
family to pay. House and plot solutions are being looked at differently as climate change
impacts are being felt. The shape of cities may change to accommodate a climate sensibility.
Higher densities in inner-city multi-family walk-up apartments are today viewed as being more
“green” since they reduce urban sprawl and commuting. How the issue of climate change and
9
the demands it places on the built environment impacts housing design and options remains to
be seen, as apartment living for street dwellers has received mixed reviews. Inclusive urban
redevelopment can support pilot projects of medium-density through medium-rise apartments
that may be culturally acceptable and at the same time contribute to a more livable city that is
socially inclusive. Engineering and community participation can contribute to more climate
sensitive urban growth. This new relationship requires donor support.
2. Nonstructural Supportive Initiatives
Information base. Answering the question “How do I know what I think I know?” provokes a
review of the information base of a city. Understanding what needs to be done through an
updated inclusive information base is the basis for planning and implementing targeted
improvements in the built environment.
Tenure resolution. Resolving tenure issues is critical to improving slums; without tenure
families will limit their investments in the security and resilience of their homes and sites. The
tenure situation of informal settlements would be one of the key data sets to be included in the
city information base.
Education. Awareness campaigns need to focus on slum improvements, relocation

opportunities and new shelter options, hazard management, disaster preparedness, water and
sanitation issues, health issues, access to credit and construction technologies improvement,
among other things.
Capacity building. Capacity building for national and local governments; private sector; NGOs
and community-based organizations can help improve livelihood opportunities and access to
credit; improved resilient building technologies; and transparent project design, management,
and implementation.
Codes and Development Standards. Codes and standards need to be formulated that
accommodate incremental housing and infrastructure development, resilient building methods
and retrofit guidance.
CONCLUSIONS
UN-Habitat’s State of the World’s Cities 2010/2011 report raises more questions than it can
answer, and thus exposes weaknesses in the current status and quality of MDG work. It triggers
questions about the sources of data computations, and whether any substantial studies have
been undertaken. This also raises the question whether personal estimates (see footnote 11)
can be considered a sufficient and adequate source for important parts in the Status of the
World’s Cities report. It seems obvious that there is a need to improve country systems and UN-
Habitat’s capacity to produce better data on MDG progress. Funding and donor support to the
activities of the Global Urban Observatory needs to be revisited if the achievement of MDG 7 is
seriously being pursued. A more relevant target, of 50% of the expected slum population at
2020, should rather be the established target for the coming decade. If cities are not able to deal
with their still massive slum problem, they are likely to risk environmental and health targets and
run the risk of jeopardizing the economic performance of their own economic success. A “do
nothing”- approach is unacceptable not only from a MDG perspective, but also from the goal of
making cities competitive and inclusive. Cities and governments need to weigh these options.
10
Appendix 1
Urban Asia and Slums
URBAN POPULATION AT MID-YEAR BY MAJOR AREA, PROPORTION OF URBAN POPULATION URBAN SLUM POPULATION AT MID-YEAR BY
REGION AND COUNTRY (Thousands) LIVING IN SLUM AREA MAJOR AREA, REGION AND COUNTRY
(Thousands)
Major area,
region,
1990 1995 2000 2005 2007 1990 1995 2000 2005 2007 1990 1995 2000 2005 2007
country or
area
ASIA
China 314,845 380,553 454,362 530,659 561,251 43.6 40.5 37.3 32.9 31.0 137,272 153,985 169,600 174,587 173,988
Mongolia 1,264 1,357 1,397 1,464 1,497 68.5 66.7 64.9 57.9 57.9 865.8 905.3 906.8 847.5 866.7
Bangladesh 22,396 27,398 32,893 39,351 42,191 87.3 84.7 77.8 70.8 70.8 19,552 23,206 25,574 27,860 29,871
India 219,758 253,774 289,438 325,563 341,247 54.9 48.2 41.5 34.8 32.1 120,746 122,376 120,117 113,223 109,501
Nepal 1,692 2,361 3,280 4,269 4,712 70.6 67.3 64.0 60.7 59.4 1,194 1,589 2,099 2,591 2,798
Pakistan 34,548 40,676 47,884 55,135 58,487 51.0 49.8 48.7 47.5 47.0 17,620 20,271 23,304 26,189 27,508
Cambodia 1,222 1,613 2,161 2,753 3,022 78.9 964 1,273 1,705 2,172 2,385
Indonesia 55,922 70,188 88,918 108,828 116,832 50.8 42.6 34.4 26.3 23.0 28,407 29,912 30,620 28,574 26,852
Lao People's 629 815 1,148 1,551 1,740 79.3 1,230
Democratic
Republic
Myanmar 9,986 11,270 12,860 14,700 15,575 45.6 6,703
Philippines 29,863 37,053 44,621 53,032 56,503 54.3 50.8 47.2 43.7 42.3 16,224 18,817 21,080 23,175 23,891
Thailand 15,974 17,416 18,893 20,352 21,021 26.0 5,291
Viet Nam 13,403 16,284 19,204 22,454 23,888 60.5 54.6 48.8 41.3 38.3 8,109 8,897 9,366 9,274 9,137
Iraq 12,906 14,878 16,993 18,729 19,316 16.9 16.9 16.9 52.8 52.8 2,182 2,516 2,873 9,889 10,199
Jordan 2,350 3,366 3,755 4,341 4,642 15.8 686
Lebanon 2,472 2,961 3,244 3,473 3,560 53.1 1,844
Saudi Arabia 12,449 14,358 16,614 19,120 20,138 18.0 3,442
Syrian Arab 6,224 7,314 8,524 10,049 10,726 10.5 1,055
Republic
Turkey 33,949 38,974 44,126 49,097 51,101 23.4 20.7 17.9 15.5 14.1 7,947 8,055 7,911 7,610 7,202
Yemen 2,577 3,688 4,776 6,104 6,729 67.2 4,102
Source: UN-Habitat. 2010. State of the World's Cities 2010/2011: Bridging the Urban Divide. Earthscan. London-Washington.
11
Proportion of Urban Population Living in Slums 1990–2010

Urban Population at Mid-Year by Major Area, Region (Thousands) a Urban Slum Population at Mid-year by Region (Thousands) b
Major region
1990 1995 2000 2005 2007 2010 1990 1995 2000 2005 2007 2010
or area
Developing
1,424,631 1,676,635 1,949,244 2,231,883 2,350,358 2,534,978 656,739 718,114 766,762 795,739 806,910 827,690
Regions
Northern
57,402 65,141 72,397.5 80,145.8 83,435 88,666 19,731 18,417 14,729 10,708 11,142 11,836
Africa
Sub-Saharan
146,564 182,383 222,733 269,246 289,938 323,525 102,588 123,210 144,683 169,515 181,030 199,540
Africa
Latin America
and the 313,852 353,457 394,099 432,554 448,006 471,777 105,740 111,246 115,192 110,105 110,554 110,763
Caribbean
Eastern Asia 365,574 436,582 513,919 592,873 624,430 671,795 159,754 177,063 192,265 195,463 194,020 189,621
Southern 315,726 368,423 423,518.3 479,718.3 504,697 545,766 180,449 190,276 194,009 192,041 191,735 190,748
South-eastern
139,355 169,980 206,682.6 245,895.5 262,101 286,579 69,029 76,079 81,942 84,013 83,726 88,912
Asia
Western Asia 84,584 98,922 113,979.9 129,355.1 135,576 145,164 19,068 21,402 23,481 33,388 34,179 35,713
Oceania 1,572 1,748 1,914.8 2,095.6 2,176 2,306 379 421 462 505 524 556
Urban Population at Mid-Year by Major Area, Region (Thousands) a Urban Slum Population at Mid-year by Region (Thousands) b
Major region
1990 1995 2000 2005 2007 2010 1990 1995 2000 2005 2007 2010
or area
Developing
34.9 37.5 40.1 42.7 43.7 45.3 46.1 42.8 39.3 35.7 34.3 32.7
Regions
Northern
48.6 50.1 51.3 52.5 53.0 53.7 34.4 28.3 20.3 13.4 13.4 13.3
Africa
Sub-Saharan
28.2 30.6 32.8 35.0 35.9 37.3 70.0 67.6 65.0 63.0 62.4 61.7
Africa
Latin America
and the 70.6 73.0 75.3 77.5 78.3 79.4 33.7 31.5 29.2 25.5 24.7 23.5
Caribbean
Eastern Asia 30.0 33.9 38.1 42.5 44.3 46.8 43.7 40.6 37.4 33.0 31.1 28.2
Southern 26.5 27.7 29.0 30.2 30.8 31.8 57.2 51.6 45.8 40.0 38.0 35.0
South-eastern
31.6 35.3 39.7 44.1 45.8 48.2 49.5 44.8 39.6 34.2 31.9 31.0
Asia
Western Asia 61.5 63.1 64.6 65.9 66.4 67.1 22.5 21.6 20.6 25.8 25.2 24.6
Oceaniac 24.4 24.1 23.6 23.3 23.3 23.4 24.1 24.1 24.1 24.1 24.1 24.1
a
United Nations Population Division, World Urbanization Prospects: The 2007 Revision
b
Population living in household that lack either improved water, improved sanitation, sufficient living area (more than three persons per room), or durable housing
c
Trends date are not available for Oceania. A constant figure does not mean there is no change
Source: UN-Habitat. 2010. State of the World's Cities 2010/2011: Bridging the Urban Divide. Earthscan. London-Washington.
12

Refining MDG Targets and Indicators For The Urban Poor: Some Provocative Thoughts - Paper

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Refining MDG Targets and Indicators For The Urban Poor: Some Provocative Thoughts - Paper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The views expressed in this paper/presentation are the views of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the

WHAT ARE SLUMS?

NEED FOR MORE REALISTIC MDG TARGETS AND INDICATORS

Additionally, it needs to be asked whether the accomplishments will be sustainable? Will

(i) habitat quality – physical characteristics and resilient technologies;

HOW CAN INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT BE ACHIEVED?12

Addressing the Existing Urban Context

vulnerabilities, increase home improvement and expansion initiatives so as to improve a

Slums of Hope or Slums of Despair

Addressing the Future Growth of Cities

 Densification of existing built-up areas;

An illustrative inclusive urban redevelopment initiative would provide a stream of capital

Mitigation infrastructure. The definition of urban infrastructure must now be expanded to

2. Nonstructural Supportive Initiatives

Education. Awareness campaigns need to focus on slum improvements, relocation

Urban Asia and Slums

Proportion of Urban Population Living in Slums 1990–2010

You might also like