Global conversations around financing urban development typically neglect the importance of coordinating the activities of different stakeholders behind a shared vision for their city. In particular, low-income and other marginalized groups must be seen as entrepreneurs and partners in service delivery to enhance the efficacy of resource use and to reduce poverty. This paper explores the creation of non-traditional business models and alliances to invest in informal settlements. It presents examples from India, Kenya, Pakistan, Thailand and Zimbabwe, where local authorities, commercial banks and other formal actors have co-financed and co-delivered urban plans, housing and infrastructure through collaborations with organized groups of the urban poor. These groups make three critical contributions: financial resources, detailed information on the composition of informal settlements, and capabilities for collective decision-making and action. These contributions are underpinned by the financial and social capital developed through collective saving, and enable the delivery of complex urban improvements at scale.

Local government have a pivotal role in city planning. However, meeting the conflicting priorities such as plan for urbanization, promote economic prosperity, ensure environmental sustainability besides creating safe, vibrant and liveable places, create major challenges for local administration. While rapid urbanization continue to displace people from their local places, the frequency of disaster events at the local scale and increasing disaster risks place unique challenges on people and their places. This emphasises the need for local government to understand the local places and invest in planning for cities that improve resilience and enhance human connectivity to their places. Meeting these multidimensional needs in local spaces require embedding local and scientific knowledge, past experiences and community expectation to plan and design cities that also deliver multiple social outcomes. Both place-based approach to city planning and creating disaster resilient cities have gathered momentum, however, they continue to occur in isolation. Maximizing these multiple social, environmental and economic outcomes, emphasize the need to align both resilience principles for sustainable urbanization and place based approach planning concepts to plan for places for people. Drawing from these principles and organizational change theory, a conceptual framework is proposed that provide a new lens for local government to plan for place based resilient cities. This place based approach for resilient cities framework incorporates the thinking for change as a dynamic process across the time scales and by understanding the relationship between people and their place. The model proposed is in an Australian context, yet has significant implication for communities at all levels when planning for places for people.

Using Mumbai as an illustrative example, it examines SDG progress for the city and its slum settlements for three selected targets: access to water, sanitation and decent housing. 

This book is about the role that ideas, institutions, and actors play in structuring how we govern cities and, more specifically, what projects or paths are taken. Global changes require that we rethink governance and urban policy, and that we do so through the dual lens of theory and practice.

: This paper describes the work of an alliance formed by three civic organizations in Mumbai to address poverty – the NGO SPARC, the National Slum Dwellers Federation and Mahila Milan, a cooperative representing women’s savings groups. It highlights key features of their work which include: putting the knowledge and capacity of the poor and the savings groups that they form at the core of all their work (with NGOs in a supporting role); keeping politically neutral and negotiating with whoever is in power; driving change through setting precedents (for example, a community-designed and managed toilet, a house design developed collectively by the urban poor that they can build far cheaper than public or private agencies) and using these to negotiate support and changed policies (a strategy that develops new “legal” solutions on the poor’s own terms); a horizontal structure as the Alliance is underpinned by, accountable to and serves thousands of small savings groups formed mostly by poor women; community-to-community exchange visits that root innovation and learning in what urban poor groups do; and urban poor groups undertaking surveys and censuses to produce their own data about “slums” (which official policies lack and need) to help build partnerships with official agencies in ways that strengthen and support their own organizations. The paper notes that these are features shared with urban poor federations and alliances in other countries and it describes the international community exchanges and other links between them. These groups are internationalizing themselves, creating networks of globalization from below. Individually and collectively, they seek to demonstrate to governments (local, regional, national) and international agencies that urban poor groups are more capable than they in poverty reduction, and they also provide these agencies with strong community-based partners through which to do so. They are, or can be, instruments of deep democracy, rooted in local context and able to mediate globalizing forces in ways that benefit the poor. In so doing, both within nations and globally, they are seeking to redefine what governance and governability mean.