Urban Governance and its Significance
Introduction
Governance is
the conscious management of regime structures with a view to enhancing the
public realm. Governance refers to the process whereby element in society wield
power and authority, and influence and enact policies and decisions concerning
public life and economic and social development.
The concept of
governance is not n new however, it means different thing to different people.
Therefore we have to get our focus right. The actual meaning of the concept
depends on the level of governance we are talking about, the goals to be
achieved and the approached being followed. Governance therefore not only
encompasses but transcend the collective meaning of related concept like the
state, governance regime and good government.
It is clear that
the concept of governance has over the years gained momentum and a wider
meaning. Apart from being an instrument of public affairs management of a gauge
of political development.
Urban governance
has become a useful mechanism to enhance the legitimacy of the public realm. It
has also become an analytical framework or approach to comparative politics.
Increasing
attention has been paid to forms of urban governance or how public and private
sector actors cooperate in generating new policies. Infact almost everywhere
urban governance structures have been found. This apparent ambiguity of
governance network has ushered in a new era for urban studies but it raises the
issue of whether the difference can be measured and used in explaining other
dimensions of city difference.
The argument that the ambiguity problems does
not reflect a fatal deficit In urban governance concept but is rather a
correctable problems of methods. Urban governance research would benefit
greatly from the more widespread use of existing descriptive method and
techniques which produce result that are easy to compare across cities and
thus, expand the basis for inductive theory building.
The relationship between urban governance
and city development processes
The notion of
governance is broader than government as it incorporates a lot more
stakeholders than just governmental agencies. In addition, the term goes beyond
management, focusing on the mechanisms and processes of administration,
management and implementation. Thus governance is process oriented,
highlighting the progress in decision making, decision taking and
implementation” Given that governance is a neutral concept. there is a
possibility of actors, mechanisms, processes and institutions to create
positive as well as negative outputs. Urban governance which is considered to
foster city development processes such as urban poverty reduction, a more
equitable share of economic growth and the increase of’ local ownership in
development projects, thus adding up to the concept of social inclusion.
Recognizing that social exclusion is wider than poverty, often regarded as
static income poverty, the quality of governance is considered to determine the
ability of urban dwellers to participate in urban facilities and services. Five
principles of urban governance, namely effectiveness, equity, accountability,
participation and security.
Effectiveness
for economic facilities, equity for social opportunities, and participation for
political freedom, accountability for transparency guarantees and security for
protective security. Thus economic opportunities could be measured ‘by the
effectiveness of production and exchange as perceived by the local population.
Furthermore social facilities could be reflected by the degree of equity
existing in a society as well as political freedom could be measured by the
level of participation. While transparency guarantees are associated with
accountability, protective security is suggested to be expressed by a security
assessment. These relationships are based on “the more inclusive idea of
capability deprivation” as a development obstacle, instead of the “exclusive
concentration on income poverty”.
MAJOR CHALLENGES ON URBAN GOVERNANCE IN
NASARAWA
Given the rapid
pace of urbanization in developing countries, urban decision makers face a
variety of challenges which are outlined in the following. However, these
cannot be examined separately since they all interact. Thus a city’s financial
resources impact on its capacity to meet development goals just like its ability
to manage diversity and security issues depends on its financial and capacity
dimension.
Capacity
The inability of
cities in the south to keep pace with rapid urban growth first arose in the
1960s and 1970s. At that time slum and squatter settlements grew in number and
extend throughout the developing world. Since central as well as municipal
authorities appeared to be overextended by the situation, often trying to limit
these processes by zoning, low income residents reacted either via building uncoordinated
individual dwellings or arranging “land-invasions”. Recognizing the impact of
such developments, many countries initiated centralized housing banks and
construction agencies. While those were able to account for the construction of
a considerable amount of housing units, they were incapable of keeping pace
with immigration levels just as maintenance was poor. Hence international
agencies, government departments or similar bodies like housing boards,
employed two more collaborative approaches, namely the “sites and services
projects” and the “squatter upgrading projects”. While the sites and services
approach aimed at enabling low income citizens to build their homes on
marginally serviced plots via assistance in form of training and loans, the second
one regularized land tenure and improved services in slum settlements. However,
in the course of time strategies shifted towards reforms in the governance of
urban services including Public Private Partnerships (PPP) and cooperation with
NGOs.
Given their
rapid growth, cities of the south face severe problems regarding service
provision. While the urban administration is often responsible for a variety of
sectors such as waste, electricity, health, education and transport, there is
often a lack of qualified professional staff to meet these responsibilities. In
addition, for the most part urban fiscal resource bases and the level of
service demand are not in line at all. Such conditions are commonplace in
cities of the developing world since the devolution of duties and
responsibilities does not always coincide with the authority to generate
sufficient financial capital.
Sufficient Financial Resources
As
aforementioned, the lack of capacity to meet service demand is highly linked to
an inadequate fiscal situation. Although there are several reasons for that,
the devolution of responsibilities without sufficient financial authorities to
the local level is a major one. While some authors point out that this process
has begun to change, however this comes about at a very slow pace. A major
factor for this disparity is that cities’ revenues are generally based on
property taxes and service fees instead of more lucrative and collectible ones
like income taxes. While generation of revenues in southern cities is yet
difficult to undertake, most municipalities are dependent for up to one-third
of their financial resources on other governmental levels. However, even these
mandated revenues are not always reliable. Given enormous corruption, the
financial dimension brings about tremendous challenges on urban governance.
While recognizing these hindrances, some countries started to implement laws
ensuring that a certain amount of central state revenues is directed to
municipalities.
As
municipalities face the problem of generating revenues, “informal” mechanisms
of budget generation can emerge. Thus there is evidence of Chinese local
governments gaining “off-budget revenues”. Those are composed of donations by
enterprises to specific public projects, profits from township-owned
enterprises or incomes from the leasing of public land to enterprises Although
there is controversy on the legitimacy of such revenues, evidence shows that
off budgets foster local participation and ownership in urban governance.
Cultural and Socio-Economic Diversity
One of the major
difficulties that cities in developing countries have to face is cultural and
socioeconomic diversity. Against the background of polarization and
segregation, this challenge has a social as well as a spatial dimension. Thus
the lack of coherence arises in dual structures.
Gated
communities offering exclusive schools and private water services stand opposed
to illegal settlements without drainage, scant electricity and high crime
rates. Given such a fragmented socio-spatial urban structure, some authors
recognize “the widespread retreat of the idea that networked services are
‘public’ services that should be available to all at standard tariffs”.
Security Measures
As crime rates
are increasing in cities throughout the developing world, security has become a
governance issue ever since. Hence the security dimension of city governance
“implies that there are adequate mechanisms/process/systems for citizens’
security, health and environmental safety” and “signifies there are adequate
conflict resolution mechanisms through the development and implementation of
appropriate local policies on environment, health and security for the urban
areas.’ In this regard rapid urbanization is considered to exacerbate the
ability of authorities to face security and safety demands due to three
factors. First, the incidence of crime and violence is likely to be higher in
larger cities since they concentrate victims, crime opportunities and markets
for stolen items. Second, prison regime is assumed to be hampered by less
expenditure on law enforcement per capita as well as a lower degree of
community cooperation with the police. Finally larger cities are presumed to
house a higher rate of crime-prone individuals and potential criminals. Against
this background the issue of security is highly relevant since it has an
enormous impact on the social capital in both formal and informal urban
institutions. Thus crime and insecurity are challenging the governability of
social institutions as well as the cohesion of neighborhoods and communities.
Authority
Since all
dimensions of challenge mentioned above are interlinked, this applies to
authority as well. As mentioned earlier, developing countries have undergone
massive change in the course of democratization and decentralization processes.
While these transitions brought about devolution of powers and authorities to
the local level, they were accompanied by massive demographic growth and
geographical expansion. However, the urban growth, generally taking place at
the fringes, is not necessarily in line with administrative borders.
In addition,
central governments still hold major responsibilities instead of devolving them
o local authorities. Thus housing, land, education or healthcare oftentimes remain
in the hands of the central state or private agencies, constraining
responsiveness of local authorities to the poor.
Furthermore,
particularly urban city in Nasarawa shows a tendency to assign public duties to
a wide range of development agencies, public utility companies, or slum
clearance boards. Hence transparency and accountability are weak since these
authorities are subject to competition, exacerbating maintenance and the
operation of services.
Urban governance and poverty reduction
There is a broad
consensus among academics and practitioners on the significant role of
governance for poverty alleviation at the local level. Recognizing poverty
reduction as one of the major goals of the international development agenda,
one has to explore the interface between urban governance and poverty. Thus a
range of characteristics that are specifically faced by the urban poor can be
identified.
§
Commoditization (reliance on the cash economy)
§
Overcrowded living conditions (slums, squatter
settlements)
§
Environmental degradation (density, exposure and
location of marginal settlements)
§
Social fragmentation, violence, insecurity (loss
of social capital)
Such risks are
enforced by corruption, inappropriate policies and inadequate legal frameworks,
giving way to social exclusion. As aforementioned, these issues are
governance-related, thus revealing the strong interrelationship between
governance and poverty. It is in this context, that governance structures need
to address urban poverty in a proper manner. ‘Therefore it is important to
explore how poverty is approached as well as regarded by major stakeholders. Do
local authorities tend to ignore informal settlements? Does eviction take
place? Are pro-poor policies implemented or do they only exist formally? Are there
special pricing policies targeting the poor? These questions provide essential
information about the governance situation in cities of developing countries.
Apart from local authorities’ attitude towards poverty, the legal status of
poor people in cities of the south is of significant importance as well. Since
southern cities oftentimes feature outdated legislation, local authorities are
kept from setting about grievances in informal settlements.
There is also
evidence of the being unable to provide water and remove waste from
unregistered slum areas. In addition, the municipal government is not
authorized to regularize land tenure without the central government’s approval
such legal constraints exacerbate a proper governance approach to poverty to a
vast extend.
In addition to
such crucial elements, the ability of the urban poor to participate in decision
making and to access basic services (e.g. sanitation, health care) is of
particular importance. As those issues have a huge impact on the potential of
poor people to actively take part in urban life, they determine a city’s
character - either inclusive or rather exclusive. This challenge is even
reinforced by intensive competition for resources and political power between
the poor and local or global elites. As cities like Nasarawa are trying to
integrate into the global economy, their internal structures change within the
process. Thus Nasarawa features two types of economies with different links to
governmental structures. On the one hand there is a global corporate economy,
endued with connections to higher levels government. On the other hand there is
a “localized” economy, only possessing connections to local government. Since
almost all decision making on urban development is exercised through higher
level authorities, the localized, often informal economy has only little
influence on such issues.
Since urban
cities are oftentimes overextended in being responsive to the needs of their
poor population, the very resort to informal activities and social networks in
order to sustain their livelihood. However, such livelihood strategies are
again highly dependent on the institutional context. If, for example, informal
trading is exacerbated by legal constraints, this has a huge impact on the
livelihood assets of the poor. In addition, one has to appreciate the fact that
despite sound performance of cities in tackling poverty, the numbers of poor
people may still rise.
Finally, as
cities in the developing world grow so rapidly, they often feature a wide gap
between jurisdictions and their actual size. Hence the issue of boundaries
becomes essential as most of the growth takes place at the fringes, where the
need for services is greatest. Given that the poor communities live outside the
legal responsibilities of municipal governments, their actual infrastructure
situation is oftentimes unbearable. This adds up to another
governance-challenge.
CONCLUSIONS
The present
study of Nasarawa has shown that both city development and urban governance are
concepts that are difficult to measure. However, it is of utmost importance to
keep doing it as data availability and reliability are major concerns in terms
of measuring any type of urban progress, specifically in developing countries
like Nigeria.
Local leaders and decision makers in Nasarawa need to be provided with
guideposts on the state of governance in their cities and communities.
Recognizing that phenomena like mass poverty, poor health conditions and
insufficient education can hardly be ignored, the debate on governance -
understood as a broad system of all stakeholders - has to be intensified. As
the case of Nasarawa has shown, a relatively effective urban government can
positively impact on issues such as waste- management. However, the latter is
relatively easy to achieve while endeavors to counter profound inequality or
education requires much more fundamental changes. Here the low levels of
accountability and equity manifest in poor scores for infrastructure, education
and health care. Recognizing that particularly women and children are most
seriously affected by such grievances, it is essential to foster attempts of
good urban governance in Nasarawa. This statement is also confirmed by the
interpretation of expert interviews, which formed the basis of the diploma
thesis underlying this study. Decision makers need to take into account the
needs of the excluded and disadvantaged. Here an inclusive governance approach
will incorporate the informal economy, the socially disadvantaged and
especially women as they are prone to a variety of discrimination thus holding
key to a variety of development challenges. Bearing this in mind, development
politics and particularly urban planning in Nasarawa has to recognize he
inefficiency of top-down approaches. Hence taking the needs of the marginalized
into account and integrating them into the decision making process is vital for
sustainable urban development in Nasarawa town.
REFERENCE
ALLEN, A., ET AL. (2006). The pen-urban water poor:
citizens or consumers? In: Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 18, No.2, page
333-35 1.
CENTRE OF GOVERNANCE AND DEMOCRACY (2000).
Decentralization and Democratic Local Governance Programming Handbook,
Technical Publication Series, Washington.
CITIES ALLIANCE
(2007). Livable Cities. The benefits of
urban environmental Planning, Washington.
DAVIS, M. (2006): Planet of slums, London.
DEVAS, N. (2005). Metropolitan governance and urban
poverty. In: Public Administration and Development, Vol. 25, No. 4, page 35
1-361.
DEVAS, N. (2004). Chapter 2. Urban Poverty and Governance in an Era UG - Decentralization and
Democratization. In Urban Governance, Voice and Poverty in the Developing
World. Edited by N. Devas et al., London.
DEVAS, N. (2002): Urban
Livelihoods — Issues for Urban Governance and Management. In Urban
Livelihoods. A people-centered approach to reducing poverty. Edited by C.
Rakodi & T. Lloyd-Jones, London.
DEVAS, N. (2001). The connections between urban
governance and poverty. In: Journal of International Development, Vol. 13, page
989-996.
