Urban governance and access to basic services

In many developing country cities poor people suffer from insecure and over-crowded housing as well as inadequate access to water and sanitation. Municipal governments play a primary role these areas, but often fail to provide basic services. As a consequence, poor people have explored informal ways of gaining access to water, land and shelter.

Research from the University of Birmingham analyses how urban governance affects the quality and extent of basic services, housing and access to land. The study examines ten cities in developing countries and reviews ways in which poor people obtain access when formal systems fail.

Provision of water and sanitation is substandard in various ways:

• Piped supplies do not cover many households in poor neighbourhoods. In Bangalore, India more than half the population depends on public fountains, which are often contaminated.
• Supply is erratic, with water being available only for short periods a day. In Mombasa, Kenya many people with water connections have not had water for several years.
• In some cities, many people are obliged to defecate in public or into plastic bags. In Kumasi, Ghana, nearly 40 percent of the population depend on 240 poorly maintained public toilets.

Most cities cannot supply the rapidly increasing demand for land and housing. Many governments have made little effort to ensure access to low-income groups. On the contrary, planning and building regulations usually impede poor people’s efforts.

Given the situation, poor people use alternative means of gaining access to services, land and shelter. These informal contacts and networks often involve ethnic, caste or political affiliations. Residents may organise to lobby elected representatives and bargain votes for services. Residents dig their own wells or buy from private water vendors, at high cost. Elsewhere, residents make unauthorised connections or evade the formal application process by directly paying a technician to install water pipes.

Similarly, land is sometimes allocated through traditional systems of authority providing some scope for poor people to access housing and land. However, with increasing pressure on urban land, such non-commercial options are increasingly rare.

While the private and community sector have a part to play, the main responsibility for providing urban services lies with municipal governments. Municipal governments, however, often lack both the resources and the political will to do their part. The authors conclude that provision will depend on the following urban governance themes:

• Developing a national policy framework that sets clear guidelines in terms of responsibilities and pricing policies; decentralisation is often incomplete, leaving uncertainty and conflict over who is responsible for what.
• Greater responsiveness to poor people – official recognition of informal settlements can facilitate upgrading and access to housing land.
• Accountability through elections and other mechanisms influences how responsive city governments are to the needs of poor people, contributing to better service provision.
• Small-scale, informal activities play an important role in service delivery. Contracting out to private companies, however, can disadvantage poor communities if adequate safeguards are not introduced.
• Community based organisations and NGOs often act as mediators between the government and communities advocating on behalf of poor people but they generally cannot provide infrastructure or services on a wide scale, so they must work closely with local governments and communities and the private sector.
• External agencies provide funding crucial for bulk investments into infrastructure and slum improvement. However, sustainability issues arise and often municipal governments are only partially involved in the projects.

Source(s):
‘Accessing Land and Services: Exclusion or Entitlement?’ by Fiona Nunan and Nick Devas, pages 164-185, in ‘Urban Governance, Voice and Poverty in the Developing World’, Earthscan: London, edited by Nick Devas 2004

Funded by: Department for International Development, UK

id21 Research Highlight: 19 January 2006

Further Information:
Nick Devas
International Development Department.
School of Public Policy
University of Birmingham
Birmingham B15 2TT
UK

Tel: +44 (0)121 414 5036
Fax: +44 (0)121 414 5032
Contact the contributor: c.n.devas@bham.ac.uk

International Development Department, University of Birmingham, UK

Other related links:
'Pro-poor growth in the city: are City Development Strategies the answer?'

'Decentralisation: do poor people benefit from local government expenditure decisions?'

'Can local governments generate enough revenue to deliver services?'

'New management model for water and sanitation in Peru'