This chapter presents the objectives and methodology of the report. The chapter begins by introducing the context in which global monitoring of national urban policy (NUP) is conducted, including why NUP has become a focus for governments. An overarching objective of the report is to support policymakers by providing robust data and evidence on how countries use NUP to enhance sustainable urban development, advance global agendas and address challenges magnified or revealed by the COVID-19 crisis. The methodology applied for this report builds and expands on the first edition launched in 2018. Major improvements include a dedicated country survey on NUP extended to 86 countries and two new thematic strands offering more specific evidence in relation to the role of NUP in (1) advancing the Sustainable Development Goals and other global urban agendas, and (2) spearheading a systems approach to build low-carbon and climate-resilient cities.
Global State of National Urban Policy 2021
1. Introduction and methodology
Abstract
Global monitoring of national urban policy: The context
A national urban policy (NUP) is defined as “a coherent set of decisions through a deliberate government-led process of co‑ordinating and rallying various actors towards a common vision and goal that will promote more transformative, productive, inclusive and resilient urban development for the long term” (UN-HABITAT/OECD, 2018[1]).
Almost half the world’s population (48%) currently lives in cities. The urban population has more than doubled over the last 40 years, increasing from 1.5 billion people in 1975 to 3.5 billion in 2015, and is projected to reach 55% in 2050 (OECD/European Commission, 2020[2]). As the dynamic urbanisation process continues to offer opportunities and challenges, cities and urban areas have become increasingly important policy targets for national governments (OECD, 2014[3]). International communities have recognised such policy needs and have taken actions to support countries’ efforts to develop and implement NUP. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), for example, has long been carrying out National Urban Policy Reviews, building on its work on urban development for decades (OECD, 2019[4]). UN-Habitat has supported more than 55 countries in the development and implementation of their NUPs (UN-HABITAT/OECD, 2018[1]).
Recent global processes have reaffirmed the importance of urban policies for sustainable development and the crucial role that national governments can play in this process. In particular, the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in 2015 and the New Urban Agenda (NUA) in 2016 have provided a strong rationale for countries to develop or review their NUP frameworks.
The NUA has put explicit emphasis on NUP as one of its five pillars of implementation,1 and calls for measures to enhance the ability of governments to develop and implement such over-arching policies. In 2019, NUP was designated by the United Nations Statistic Commission as a monitoring tool for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through Indicator 11.a.1 (see Chapter 6 for details). Such developments provided a window of opportunity to scale up the uptake of NUP as a powerful policy process to help governments shape and implement urban policies (UN-HABITAT/OECD, 2018[1]).
A NUP can also play a stronger role in the current challenging times. The COVID-19 pandemic plays out unevenly across cities, regions and rural areas within any one country, and many cities have been on the frontline of the response to the crisis. In a context of emergency, cities have played a crucial role in implementing nation-wide measures (e.g. lockdowns) and have become laboratories for bottom-up and innovative policies and actions towards long-term recovery. The crisis prompted cities to rethink how they deliver services and how they plan their space, amongst other things. NUP can play a key role in driving the paradigm shift towards green, smart and inclusive cities by driving a shared vision for the future of cities, guiding policy reforms and supporting bottom-up and local innovative urban strategies (OECD, 2020[5]). The path to recovery from this unprecedented crisis calls for strong, multi-level dialogue, for which NUP will remain a key co‑ordinating instrument, engaging policymakers, town planners and city dwellers.
Since 2016, the OECD, UN-Habitat and Cities Alliance have been collaborating to develop a regular and systematic NUP monitoring framework at the global scale under the framework of the National Urban Policy Programme (NUPP). In February 2018, the first edition of such a monitoring was jointly launched by UN-Habitat and the OECD in the report Global State of National Urban Policy at the 9th World Urban Forum. The objective of the report was to monitor and evaluate the progress of NUP at the global level, with commonly defined methodologies and processes. It provided policymakers, practitioners and academia with evidence and country-level experiences (Box 1.1).
The Global State of National Urban Policy report serves as a critical source of information and analysis for policymakers and urban professionals as it establishes the foundation for understanding how and in what forms NUPs have been developed, implemented and monitored globally. It also paves the way for the definition of a common methodology to monitor the progress of NUP at the global level. At the same time, it responds to the need for better reporting and collecting of information about the status of NUP at the global level, not only to support countries’ NUP development but also to track the contribution of NUP to the implementation of the SDGs and the New Urban Agenda (UN-HABITAT/OECD, 2018[1]).
Box 1.1. First edition of the Global State of National Urban Policy report: key findings
The 2018 Global State of National Urban Policy report was based on regional studies by UN-Habitat and a study of the OECD member countries by the OECD. It provided a first attempt at assessing NUP trends, opportunities, challenges and ways forward, by analysing 150 NUPs. The key findings include:
The 150 NUPs examined were evenly distributed between explicit NUPs (76) and partial, or implicit, NUPs (74). While globally, 92 countries (61%) were already implementing their NUPs, the majority of explicit NUPs (51%) were still in earlier stages of development. Rapidly urbanising regions such as Africa, the Arab States, and Asia and the Pacific presented the highest proportions of explicit NUPs, as well as NUPs in earlier stages of development. They were also more likely to have dedicated a specialised urban agency to the implementation of their NUP, indicating a high level of political attention to urbanisation.
Spatial structure and economic development were the two sectors most extensively covered by NUP. In contrast, attention to climate change resilience and environmental sustainability was weakest; of the 108 NUPs in or beyond the formulation stage, only 11 (10%) of NUPs gave extensive attention to climate change resilience and 28 (26%) to environmental sustainability.
NUP can be an opportunity to balance top-down and bottom-up approaches in their institutional articulation, by redefining and strengthening national and sub-national roles and responsibilities for increased coherence, efficiency and legitimacy. Further involvement of sub-national government in NUP processes was often restricted by a lack of capacities. Levels of stakeholder engagement also remained low to moderate for the NUPs examined.
In most regions, a lack of resources (human, technical and financial) was the most difficult challenge to successfully implementing NUP, which calls for more detailed research on implementation and capacity gaps, as well as the instruments and best practices available to overcome them.
Source: UN-HABITAT/OECD (2018), Global State of National Urban Policy, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264290747-en.
Objectives of the report
In view of conducting periodic monitoring of NUP at the global scale, the OECD, UN-Habitat and Cities Alliance have decided to jointly develop the second edition as a key output of the Workplan 2019‑2020 of the NUPP. An overarching objective is to assist national governments in advancing their NUP processes, especially in creating a stronger link between NUP and urban-related global agendas, and in mainstreaming climate action into NUP. More specifically, this report aims to:
Define common methodologies to analyse different forms, stages of development, thematic areas of focus, as well as implementation of NUP and to provide state-of-the-art and comprehensive monitoring of NUP at the global scale.
Benchmark the progress of NUP across peer countries and inform future actions to advance NUP processes.
Understand the current governance structure of NUP in countries and identify policy and capacity gaps to effectively advance NUP.
Provide in-depth analysis and assessment on the roles of NUP to advance the SDGs and climate action.
Assist local, regional, national governments and international institutions to better understand the current state of NUP at the global scale and where future support effort should be directed.
Highlight key evidence and successful NUPs to support improved comparative learning on pitfalls to avoid and good practices to replicate.
Methodology
Overview
In order to ensure continuity, the same methodological framework as the first edition is applied for this report, including the five categories for the stage of development of NUP. At the same time, this report introduces methodological improvements in order to lead to more accuracy and improved relevance, as well as to increase engagement of countries in the process. Major improvements include:
Country inputs and feedback. The first edition largely relied on expert assessment with limited direct inputs from countries for data collection, except for a dedicated country survey and peer-review at the OECD Working Party on Urban Policy for OECD countries. For greater accuracy of information and a more participatory approach, this report engaged countries more extensively throughout the monitoring and drafting process. In particular, the second edition relies on a common country survey sent to all United Nations Member States. In addition, key findings and earlier drafts were shared and cross-checked with the respective countries and peer-reviewed in several fora (e.g. meetings of NUPP partners, meetings of the OECD Working Party on Urban Policy).
Supplementary data and information. While the country survey provides the primary source, this report also includes expert assessment gathered through desk research, relating to the form, development stage and thematic scope of NUP (only the five main themes, not sub-themes), as well as national urban agencies. Data and statistics were derived from government databases and websites, other country-level NUP studies and reviews and from partner institutions of the National Urban Policy Programme, including OECD National Urban Policy Reviews and the UN-Habitat NUP database.
Monitoring and evaluation of SDG target 11.a. This report assesses whether or not NUPs contain the elements of the newly revised indicator 11.a.1, which relates to the “number of countries that have national urban policies or regional development plans that: (a) respond to population dynamics, (b) ensure balanced territorial development, (c) increase local fiscal space”.
In-depth analysis on NUP’s contribution to climate action and resilience. This report includes a deep-dive on climate-related risks in cities to help drive the low-carbon transition in cities, and advice on how NUP frameworks can effectively support local climate action. Greater attention to NUP’s contribution to urban climate resilience and low-carbon transition had been identified as a way forward in the first edition of the global monitoring.
Expert group. An expert group consisting of academics, practitioners and international organisations was set up to support the peer-review process.
NUP country survey
A joint OECD, UN-Habitat and Cities Alliance NUP country survey was designed in 2019 and carried out in 2020, in consultation with several experts, OECD countries (Canada, France, Italy, Mexico, Norway, Poland and the United States) and NUPP partners. It consists of 40 questions addressing both topics covered in the first edition of the report (e.g. NUP form and stage, stakeholder engagement) as well as new topics (e.g. definition of a NUP, SDGs, climate action and resilience) (Figure 1.1 and Box 1.1):
Questions 1-3 aimed to map the varied policy environment surrounding NUP in the world, taking into account the diversity of institutional settings in which NUP is embedded.
Questions 4-9 addressed key characteristics of NUP: form, characteristics, stage of development and thematic scope. Where feasible, results were compared with the data from the first edition to understand key trends in the evolution of NUP at the global scale.
Questions 10-17 related to alignment, co‑ordination and engagement of sub-national governments and stakeholders in the NUP process.
Questions 18-25 asked how countries have deployed legal and institutional frameworks, financial and capacity-building instruments for effective implementation of NUP, as well as monitoring and evaluation mechanisms.
Questions 26-31 were dedicated to linking NUP and global agendas, with special attention to SDGs. They provided an assessment of how NUP contributes to the achievement of SDG target 11.a and other global urban agendas.
Questions 32-40 collected new data and information regarding how countries integrate urban climate resilience and the low-carbon transition into NUP.
Figure 1.1. Key questions addressed in the joint NUP country survey
Note: Boxes outlined in dark blue are new themes covered in the NUP country survey prepared for this report. The boxes outlined in grey were covered in the first edition of the report and were hence also included in the survey and in this report.
Box 1.2. NUP Country Survey: 40 questions
Mapping the policy environment for NUP
Q1. Does your national government have a definition of a NUP?
Q2. What are the three major outcomes you hope to achieve through a NUP?
Q3. What competences and responsibilities for urban policies / urban development does your national government have?
Key characteristics of NUP
Q4. Does your country have, or is in the process of developing, an explicit NUP?
Q5. Does your country have other national-level policies with a focus or a major impact on urban areas?
Q6. Does your country have policies that affect your country’s urban areas but not at the national scale?
Q7. Please use the box below to provide your country’s profile on the current NUP, highlighting recent changes.
Q8. In which stage of development is your NUP?
Q9. Does your NUP have a theme(s)? What level of attention does it grant to the following themes?
Alignment and co‑ordination
Q10. Which national ministry/agency is leading your NUP process?
Q11. What mechanisms exist to align your NUP with other sectoral policies at the national level?
Q12. What mechanisms exist to ensure vertical policy alignment between the NUP and sub-national plans and policies?
Q13. What mechanisms exist in your NUP to facilitate horizontal policy alignment among local governments in and between urban areas?
Engagement of sub-national governments and stakeholders in the NUP process
Q14. Have sub-national governments been engaged with/contributed to each phase of the NUP process? If so, to what extent?
Q15. Have non-governmental stakeholder groups been engaged in different phases of the NUP process? If so, to what extent?
Q16. What means have been/are being used to ensure the participation of urban residents in the NUP process?
Q17. Have special measures been included in the NUP process to ensure that your NUP is sensitive to vulnerable urban populations?
Implementation
Q18. Which implementation mechanisms exist for your NUP?
Q19. What are the greatest challenges you face for implementing your NUP at the national level?
Q20. What are the major sources for financing which have been/are being used to implement your NUP?
Q21. To what extent is the implementation of your NUP dependent on sub-national governments?
Q22. What are challenges faced by sub-national governments, a key implementation partner of your NUP?
Data collection, monitoring and evaluation
Q23. What kind of data do you use for your NUP process?
Q24. Which monitoring and evaluation frameworks currently exist for your NUP process?
Q25. How have you used or do you intend to use the results of the monitoring and evaluation of your NUP?
NUP and global agendas
Q26. Please indicate which of the following international agreements your NUP refers to or intends to help achieve.
Q27. Does your NUP and Regional Development Plan meet the SDG 11.a target?
Q28. Which other SDGs is your NUP contributing to?
Q29. Is the leading NUP ministry/agency also responsible for the implementation and monitoring of SDG 11 in your country?
Q30. Are SDG targets and indicators integrated in your NUP monitoring and evaluation framework?
Q31. Please share a few examples of successful practices / lessons learned in your NUP that promotes its alignment with the global agendas.
The Role of NUP in Urban Climate Resilience and the Low-Carbon Transition
Q32. Is climate change explicitly addressed in your NUP?
Q33. What are or have been the challenges or obstacles to integrating climate change in your NUP?
Q34. Please use the box below to provide a detailed description of how your NUP is addressing climate change.
Q35. What are the key objectives of mainstreaming climate action in your NUP?
Q36. Which urban low-carbon transition/mitigation actions are addressed by your NUP?
Q37. Which urban climate adaptation actions are addressed by your NUP?
Q38. Which mechanisms (regulatory, fiscal, information, etc.) are used to implement the climate action in your NUP?
Q39. Which mechanisms exist to co‑ordinate climate action (across sectors, across levels of government) in your NUP?
Q40. Have special measures been included in the NUP process to ensure that your NUP can improve the resilience of vulnerable urban populations to the impacts of climate change?
The survey was shared with OECD member countries at the 26th session of the OECD Working Party on Urban Policy (20 November 2019) and with all the United Nations Member States through their Permanent Missions by the UN-Habitat Governing Bodies Secretariat in December 2019. Cities Alliance also circulated the survey to their government member countries (Brazil, Chile, France, Germany, Ghana, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, Uganda, United Kingdom and United States). The survey was available in English, French and Spanish and contained 40 questions. Responses were collected between January and June 2020. Overall, 86 countries submitted consolidated responses.
Definitions
NUP
This report applies the same definition as the first edition of the report: a NUP is defined as “a coherent set of decisions derived through a deliberate government-led process of co‑ordinating and rallying various actors for a common vision and goal that will promote more transformative, productive, inclusive and resilient urban development for the long term” (UN-HABITAT/OECD, 2018[1]). However, given the fact that a variety of NUP definitions exist across countries, the report also collected such definitions through the NUP country survey to better understand the diverse contexts surrounding NUPs in different countries (Chapter 1).
Form of NUP
An explicit NUP has been defined as a policy with “a title of ‘national urban policy’ or variant such as ‘national urbanisation policy’ or ‘national urban strategy’ or ‘national urban development strategy’ (UN-HABITAT/OECD, 2018[1]). This survey collects key information on existing explicit NUPs (Chapter 3).
The first edition of the report included a “partial, or implicit NUP” category to acknowledge that a policy document that is not explicitly labelled as NUP could, in practice, function as a NUP. Defined as having “many of the elements of a NUP but not yet brought together as a formal, or explicit NUP” (UN-HABITAT/OECD, 2018[1]). This term is no longer used in this second report. Rather, to account more comprehensively for the impact of national level policies affecting urban areas, the report analyses other national-level policies with a spatial focus on urban areas or an important impact on urban areas (Chapter 3). These include, for example, national development strategies with some dedicated focus on urban areas or national-level sectoral policies and plans (e.g. housing, energy, transport, land-use) with elements addressing the urban level (e.g. a national-level transport plan incentivises the use of electric vehicles in urban areas or that grants priority to urban infrastructure development). Including such information in the analysis is crucial to better understand the broader spectrum of national level urban policies, in particular for certain federal or highly decentralised countries where policy documents that are “comparable” to an explicit NUP exist at either the state level or the regional level rather than at the national level.
Characteristics of NUP
To complement the analysis of the form of NUP, this report also assesses the content of NUP based on key characteristics elaborated out of NUP consideration in the New Urban Agenda and its Action Framework for the Implementation, the Habitat III Policy Paper 3 on National Urban Policies, and the OECD Principles on Urban Policy (Chapter 3). According to these, NUPs usually:
Define a strategic, long-term and shared vision for national urban development.
Apply an integrated territorial perspective, promoting a system of cities approach and connectivity between urban and rural areas.
Integrate and co‑ordinate cross-sectoral policies (urban economy, social inclusion, climate change, technological innovation, etc.).
Develop co‑ordination mechanisms among and across levels of government, clarifying roles, responsibilities and resources.
Develop implementation mechanisms with legal, regulatory and financial tools and supports capacity development.
Ensure and promote the engagement and participation of sub-national governments and stakeholders (citizens, the private sector, academics, etc.).
Rely on robust urban scale data and ensure regular monitoring and evaluation.
Stage of development of NUP
Similar to the first edition, this report divides the stages of development of the NUP process into five categories: “feasibility”, “diagnosis”, “formulation”, “implementation” and “monitoring and evaluation”.
“Feasibility”, the first stage, refers to the period when the country is making the case for NUP and beginning to build stakeholder support and political will for this vision.
“Diagnosis”, the second stage, refers to the period when the country is conducting preliminary analyses to create a NUP.
“Formulation”, the third stage, refers to the period when the NUP is being drafted.
“Implementation”, the fourth stage, refers to the period when the NUP is being put into action.
“Monitoring and evaluation”, the final stage, refers to the period when the outcomes of the NUP are being analysed and evaluated.
Thematic scope of NUP
In the first edition of the report, the thematic scope of NUP was analysed by assessing the degree of attention to five themes: economic development, spatial development, human development, environmental sustainability and climate resilience. The degree of attention devoted to each theme in a NUP (in formulation stage or beyond) was assessed on a scale from low to moderate and to extensive. Below are new principles that guided this assessment in this report. These guiding principles are based on clear criteria and hence mark a methodological improvement compared with the assessment conducted in the first edition of the report.
The “low” category indicates that the thematic area is either not or only briefly mentioned as a concern in the NUP, without much information on the situation nor any guidance or direction for action.
The “moderate” category corresponds to cases in which the NUP provides a clear understanding of the situation relating to the thematic subsection and related opportunities and challenges. For instance, the NUP provides background and analysis of the situation, as well as objectives and general directions to improve it.
The “extensive” category indicates strong importance given to the thematic area, by giving it a prominent place among the objectives of the NUP, providing a detailed analysis of the situation, concrete goals and targets, as well as implementation measures to achieve them (e.g. indicators, roadmap, timeline, budget, etc.).
In this report, these five main themes were complemented by 20 sub-themes (see Table 3.2) for the countries responding to the NUP country survey. Each sub-theme was also assessed according to the “low/moderate/extensive” degree of attention and corresponding principles.
Sub-national government engagement/contribution in NUP
The extent of the engagement/contribution by sub-national governments throughout the NUP process is determined by the roles and responsibilities they have, the opportunities to participate in different stages of NUP, and by their capacity to fulfil such roles and responsibilities. In the first edition of the report, the extent of engagement was assessed at the level of global regions (e.g. Asia and the Pacific), but not at the level of countries as was done in this report. In addition, this report also assessed the extent of engagement according to the new following guiding principles:
A “low level” of engagement/contribution corresponds to limited participation opportunities in the NUP process. For example, the implementation phase corresponds to a situation where sub‑national governments have limited roles and responsibilities to implement a NUP, with limited regulatory, financial and institutional prerogatives.
A “moderate level” of engagement/contribution entails clear roles and responsibilities given to sub-national governments, allowing them to have the opportunity and the capacity to substantially contribute to each phase. For instance, sub-national governments are fully consulted for the identification of problems and policy priorities, and are able to provide local knowledge and data to support national government decisions.
An “extensive level” of engagement/contribution indicates a strong vertical collaboration between level of government, whereby sub-national governments are co-creators and joint implementers of NUP, and actively help adapt it to local needs and contexts.
Stakeholder engagement in the NUP process
Stakeholder engagement can occur throughout all phases of the NUP process and this report therefore assesses the extent of stakeholder engagement in each stage of the NUP process. In the first edition of the report, only qualitative assessments were provided per global region, not at the country level. In addition, this report defines three broad categories of non-governmental stakeholders that can be engaged in the NUP process: the private sector, academia and civil society.
The private sector refers to individuals, for profit and commercial enterprises or businesses, manufacturers and service providers, business associations and coalitions, and corporate philanthropic foundations.
Academia refers to education and research institutions, some of which are not-for-profit organisations.
Civil society refers to a range of non-governmental and not-for-profit organisations that have a presence in public life and that express the interests and values of their members based on ethical, cultural, political, religious or philanthropic considerations. It includes non-profits, community organisations, charities, trade unions, faith-based organisations, indigenous groups and social movements.
The extent of engagement can be determined by the opportunities and capacities that stakeholders are given to participate in and contribute to each stage of the NUP process. The guiding principles below were a new addition to GSNUP 2020, and provide an indication of how the extent of stakeholder engagement in the different stages of the NUP cycle was assessed in this report:
A “low level” of engagement indicates that stakeholders are either not involved at all, simply provided general information, or offered limited opportunities to comment on the NUP process (e.g. public hearing, online consultation).
A “moderate level” of engagement refers to a more targeted and institutionalised process of engagement, with the consideration of different stakeholder groups’ perspectives and opportunities for substantial inputs through representatives and/or consultation platforms.
An “extensive level” of engagement entails collaborative partnership between stakeholder groups and the national government. They can participate in policy dialogues, provide feedback and sometimes affect important decisions at different stages of the NUP process.
For academia for instance, extensive engagement in the diagnosis phase would entail full participation in the process of data collection and analysis; an example of extensive engagement in the formulation phase would be co-drafting.
An extensive engagement of civil society in the monitoring and evaluation phase would mean that civil society organisations fully participate alongside the government in the analysis and evaluation of the impact of the NUP implementation, and that their feedback and experiences are thoroughly considered in the assessment.
For the private sector, an extensive level of engagement in implementation would mean co‑ownership and co-financing, with the private sector actively participating in the achievement of NUP objectives on the ground through investment and public-private partnerships for instance.
Country coverage
The NUPs analysed throughout this report were identified through the NUP country survey (86 NUPs) and desk research (76 NUPs) (Table 1.1). Regional groupings in this report follow the new regional groupings based on United Nations Standard Country and Area Codes (M49) Classifications, with several modifications in order to more adequately align with UN-Habitat regional groupings, which are reflected in the UN-Habitat World Cities Report: Africa; Asia and the Pacific; Arab States; Europe and North America; Latin America and the Caribbean.
Table 1.1. Countries covered in the global monitoring of NUP, per region
References
[5] OECD (2020), “Cities policy responses”, OECD Policy Responses to Coronavirus (COVID-19), OECD, Paris, http://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy-responses/cities-policy-responses-fd1053ff/.
[4] OECD (2019), 20 Years of Urban Policy at OECD, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/cfe/urban-policy-oecd.pdf.
[3] OECD (2014), OECD Regional Outlook 2014: Regions and Cities: Where Policies and People Meet, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264201415-en.
[2] OECD/European Commission (2020), Cities in the World: A New Perspective on Urbanisation, OECD Urban Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/d0efcbda-en.
[1] UN-HABITAT/OECD (2018), Global State of National Urban Policy, OECD Publishing, Paris/United Nations Human Settlements Programme, Nairobi, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264290747-en.
Note
← 1. The Action Framework for the Implementation of the New Urban Agenda (AFINUA) identified the following five pillars for implementation: (1) national urban policies; (2) urban legislation, rules and regulations; (3) urban planning and design; (4) urban economy and municipal finance; and (5) local implementation.