Global State of National Urban Policy 2021

3. Key trends and characteristics of NUP

Abstract

This chapter presents key trends and characteristics of NUP in terms of form, contents, stage, thematic scope and institutions. All 162 countries studied have national-level urban policies, although in different forms, at different development stages and with varying thematic foci. Based on a comprehensive survey across 86 countries, combined with desk research information for an additional 76 countries, the chapter reveals that NUPs matured since the first edition of the global monitoring in 2018. They take more explicit forms, advanced to implementation stage and integrate wider social and environmental objectives, including climate resilience.

Key findings

• The report identified 162 NUPs. Among them, 91 NUPs are identified in an explicit form, and compared with the first edition of the report, the share of explicit NUPs has risen from 51% to 56%. Regionally, the Latin America and the Caribbean region has the highest share of explicit NUPs (68%).

• Explicit NUPs typically have a stronger focus on ‘defining a vision’ (90% of surveyed NUPs), ‘integration and co‑ordination of cross-sectoral policies’ (83%) and ‘promotion of a system of cities approach’ (83%), while striving less to ‘rely on robust urban scale data and ensures regular monitoring and evaluation’ (52%).

• NUPs have overall entered more operational stages. The share of NUPs in the implementation or monitoring and evaluation stages slightly increased from 61% in 2018 to 62% in 2020. Overall, NUPs in the diagnosis stage have reduced from 12% to 7%, while those in the formulation stage have increased from 11% to 20%.

• Spatial structure and human development are the two most common thematic areas in NUPs, with 80% and 78% of NUPs respectively, giving moderate or extensive attention to such themes. Climate resilience has had more attention as a thematic area, rising from 36% in 2018 to 48% in 2020, although this is still the lowest of the five themes, indicating that NUPs have addressed a wider range of thematic areas.

• Fifty-four countries out of 86 countries (63%) rely on a ministry or agency specialising in urban issues to lead the NUP process. These ministries or agencies are, to a large extent, specialised in housing, infrastructure, spatial planning, environment and urban development.

Forms of NUP

This section analyses forms of NUP. It examines NUPs in an explicit form and in other national-level policies with a spatial focus on urban areas or an important impact on urban areas.1 Examples of such policies include national development strategies with dedicated focuses on urban areas and 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 that incentivises the use of electric vehicles in urban areas or prioritises urban infrastructure development). It is crucial that such policies have been understood and analysed as NUP in this study in order to better reflect the broader spectrum of national level policies with an urban component.2 This approach has enabled a country without an explicit form of NUP to identify a policy which either provides the most comprehensive and strategic vision for urban development or affects urban areas the most. These policies were considered and analysed as part of NUPs for the country.

For this analysis, an explicit NUP is 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’. The definition is consistent with the 2018 report. The data was collected mainly through the country survey (86 countries) and complemented with desk research, including the UN-Habitat NUP database.

The 162 countries analysed in the report have a NUP in some form or stage. Of these 162 countries, 91 (56%) have or are developing an explicit NUP (Figure 3.1). This is an increase from the 2018 report, where 76 out of 150 countries (51%) had an explicit NUP (UN-Habitat/OECD, 2018[1]).

Figure 3.1. Forms of NUP, n = 162

Note: Data are drawn from the OECD/UN-Habitat/Cities Alliance National Urban Policy Country Survey 2020, the UN-Habitat NUP database and countries’ websites.

The survey data and desk research also indicate a regional variation in the distribution of explicit NUPs. Across the regions in aggregate, the Latin America and the Caribbean region led with the highest share of explicit NUPs (68%) followed by Africa (58%), Asia and the Pacific (57%), Arab States (53%) and Europe and North America (50%) (Figure 3.2).

Figure 3.2. Forms of NUP by region, n = 162

Note: A country which has both explicit NUPs and other national policies with an urban focus is grouped in ‘Explicit NUPs’. Data are drawn from the OECD/UN-Habitat/Cities Alliance National Urban Policy Country Survey 2020, the UN-Habitat NUP database and countries’ websites.

The NUP country survey data showed that, regardless of whether a country had an explicit NUP or not, 91% of the 86 responding countries identified at least one other national-level policy with a major focus and impact on urban areas.

Non-explicit policies respond to urban issues across different sectors and scales, as is the case of the national economic and social development plans in Thailand, the national spatial development policies in Bulgaria, and regional and territorial development strategies in Armenia and the Czech Republic. Sectoral policies and programmes include the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Programme, housing policies in Eswatini and Nigeria, the national transport plan in Norway and the State Housing Plan 2018‑2021 in Spain. Several other countries indicated they have a range of such policies.

In some cases, sectoral policies affecting urban areas (housing, sanitation and mobility) are managed within one ministry, such as the Regional Development Ministry in Brazil. However, given the broad sector issues and thematic areas identified with impacts on urban areas, in most cases such policies are spread across different government ministries and departments. This provides a clear indication of the multi-sector and dimensional focus and co‑ordination required to achieve sustainable urbanisation.

Characteristics of NUP

In addition to forms of NUP, the report also examined the characteristics of NUPs. The NUP country survey collected responses from 86 countries, with 58 ‘explicit NUPs’ and 28 ‘other NUPs’.

Explicit NUPs

Explicit NUPs evaluated from the survey demonstrate a high level of comprehensiveness. Among a wide range of 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 (see Chapter 1), the country survey found the three most common characteristics to be: i) “NUP defines strategic, long-term, and shared vision for national urban development” (52 out of 58 countries, or 90%), ii) “integrates and co‑ordinates cross-sectoral policies” (48 out of 58, 83%), and iii) “applies an integrated territorial perspective, promoting a system of cities approach and connectivity between urban and rural areas” (48 out of 58, 83%) (Figure 3.3). However, a few other characteristics are nearly equally commonly selected, including “develops co‑ordination mechanisms among and across different levels of government, clarifying roles, responsibilities and resources” and “ensures and promotes engagement and participation of sub-national governments and stakeholders”.

Fewer number of countries (36 out of 58, 62%) consider their NUP “develop implementation mechanisms with legal, regulatory and financial tools and support capacity development”. Laws are a primary means of NUP implementation. Clear legislative frameworks and instruments, including capacities to enforce and regulate, must be embedded in the NUP process. Likewise, combined with human resources, effective financial allocation can reduce implementation gaps and policy failures (UN-Habitat, 2014[2]). The NUP implementation mechanism will be discussed in Chapter 4.

The least considered characteristic by explicit NUPs was “relies on robust urban scale data and ensures regular monitoring and evaluation” (30 out of 58 countries, 52%). The result is consistent with one of the key findings of the first edition of the report, which identified inadequate access to the urban data, knowledge and tools for evidence-based policymaking as a key challenge (UN-Habitat/OECD, 2018[1]). Robust urban scale data should be a basis for the formulation, monitoring and evaluation of NUP, and is thus an essential part of NUP. This point was also emphasised during the Habitat III process; the Policy Unit 3 Policy Paper advised that NUP should be grounded in the most current and comprehensive qualitative and quantitative data and this in itself is a process of improving collection of disaggregated urban data (United Nations, 2016[3]). Continuous data collection and monitoring should be undertaken throughout the NUP process to be able to track progress over time and assess policy impacts. This will be further discussed in Chapter 5.

Figure 3.3. Key characteristics of NUPs in explicit forms, n = 58

Note: Country respondents could select multiple characteristics fulfilled by their explicit NUP. Data are drawn from the OECD/UN-Habitat/Cities Alliance National Urban Policy Country Survey 2020.

NUPs in non-explicit forms

The top two characteristics of the reported NUPs in non-explicit forms are “to ensure and promote engagement and participation of sub-national governments and stakeholders” (19 out of 28 non-explicit NUPs, or 68%) and “to develop implementation mechanisms with legal, regulatory and financial tools, and capacity development” (19 out of 28, 68%), followed by “to develop co‑ordination mechanisms among and across levels of government, clarifying roles, responsibilities and resources” (18 out of 28, 64%) (Figure 3.4). The overall result suggests that NUPs in non-explicit forms are more focused on the process, including an emphasis on stakeholder engagement and implementation and co‑ordination mechanisms.

There are distinct characteristics between explicit NUPs and other NUPs. As discussed previously, explicit NUPs are often “defining strategic, long-term and a shared vision for national urban development”, whereas a much lower number of ‘non-explicit’ NUPs (17 out of 28 countries, or 61%) has such a character. Similarly, not many NUPs in non-explicit forms are “integrating and co‑ordinating cross-sectoral policies” (15 out of 28, or 54%) or “applying an integrated territorial perspective” (15 out of 28, or 54%). This result is not surprising, as the policies analysed here focus on sectoral contents such as economic, spatial, human development, environmental sustainability and climate resilience rather than integrated urban development.

Finally, the NUP survey found that only 46% (13 out of 28) of non-explicit NUPs “rely on robust urban scale data and ensure regular monitoring and evaluation”. The result was similar to the case for explicit NUPs.

Figure 3.4. Key characteristics of NUPs in non-explicit forms, n = 28

Note: Country respondents could select multiple characteristics fulfilled by their other national policy with an urban focus. Data are drawn from the OECD/UN-Habitat/Cities Alliance National Urban Policy Country Survey 2020.

Stage of development of NUP

The NUP process has five stages: feasibility, diagnosis, formulation, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation. The NUP country survey and supplementary research evaluated the progress made by different countries in the NUP development process since 2018.

The result shows that NUPs have progressed to more operational stages since 2018. Out of 157 NUPs with available information, 38% were in the development stages (11% in feasibility, 7% in diagnosis, 20% in formulation) and 62% are being or have been implemented (46% in implementation, 16% in monitoring and evaluation) (Figure 3.5). These numbers are analysed at face value and need careful interpretation, as some countries are in the process of revising their NUPs or formulating a new one, and thus reported stages of development in flux rather than static. Compared to 2018, the largest progress was from the diagnosis to formulation stage, reported by countries such as Jordan, Myanmar and Zambia. NUPs in the diagnosis stage reduced from 12% to 7%, while those in the formulation stage increased from 11% to 20%. Countries such as the Czech Republic, Malawi, Saudi Arabia and Sweden reported progressing from the development to the implementation stage (Table 3.1). The share of NUPs in the implementation or monitoring and evaluation stages slightly increased from 61% in 2018 to 62% in 2020.

Figure 3.5. Stages of development of NUP in 2018 and 2020, n = 150 (2018), n = 157 (2020)

Note: No information was available for five NUPs out of the 162 NUPs identified. Data are drawn from the OECD/UN-Habitat/Cities Alliance National Urban Policy Country Survey 2020, UN-Habitat/OECD (2018), Global State of National Urban Policy, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264290747-en, the UN-Habitat NUP database and countries’ websites.

Table 3.1. Major progress in NUP stage of development from 2018 to 2020, in selected countries

Progress in existing NUPs
Change in stage of development (2018 to 2020)	Country
Feasibility to Formulation	Bolivia, Iran
Diagnosis to Formulation	Jordan, Myanmar, Zambia
Diagnosis to Implementation	Czech Republic, Saudi Arabia
Feasibility to Implementation	Malawi, Tanzania
Formulation to Implementation	Australia, Slovak Republic, Sweden
New NUP introduced
Stage of development of new NUP	Country
Feasibility	Korea, Greece
Diagnosis	Romania
Formulation	Colombia, Ecuador, Finland, Lithuania, Mexico, Netherlands
Implementation	Chile, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ethiopia, Serbia, Spain

Note: Data are drawn from the OECD/UN-Habitat/Cities Alliance National Urban Policy Country Survey 2020 and UN-Habitat/OECD (2018), Global State of National Urban Policy, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264290747-en.

Out of 91 explicit NUPs, 9 (10%) are in the feasibility stage, 6 (7%) in the diagnosis stage, 22 (24%) in the formulation stage, 38 (42%) in the implementation stage and 16 (17%) in the monitoring and evaluation stage (Figure 3.6). In 2018, a larger proportion (30%) of the explicit NUPs were in early development stages (feasibility and diagnosis). The new wave of explicit NUPs is now reaching the formulation and implementation stages.

The majority of NUPs in non-explicit forms (65%) are operational (51% in implementation and 14% in monitoring and evaluation) and 35% are in the development stages (14% in feasibility, 7% in diagnosis and 14% in formulation).

Figure 3.6. Stages of explicit and non-explicit NUPs in 2020, n = 91 (explicit NUPs), n = 66 (non-explicit NUPs)

Note: No information was available for five out of the 71 non-explicit NUPs identified. Data are drawn from the OECD/UN-Habitat/Cities Alliance National Urban Policy Country Survey 2020, UN-Habitat/OECD (2018), Global State of National Urban Policy, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264290747-en, the UN-Habitat NUP database and countries’ websites.

Thematic scope of NUP

Analysis of the thematic scope was undertaken for 113 NUPs with available data out of 119 NUPs that are in the formulation stage or beyond. For continuity with the 2018 edition, the same five broad thematic categories were analysed in 2020: economic development, spatial structure, human development, environmental sustainability and climate resilience. The level of attention given to each thematic area was assessed on a scale from low to moderate to extensive, with commonly defined principles (see Chapter 1). The data shows that spatial structure has the highest attention among the five thematic areas, with 80% of NUPs giving this moderate or extensive attention. Human development, economic development and environmental sustainability follow, with 78, 67 and 64% respectively (Figure 3.7). Climate resilience was the least considered thematic area among the five themes, with 48% of NUPs giving moderate to extensive attention to them.

In comparison to 2018, the analysis indicates that NUPs have become more comprehensive, covering wider thematic areas. Between 2018 and 2020, the shares of NUPs giving extensive or moderate attention to four of the five themes have remained high: spatial structure (78% in 2018 and 80% in 2020), human development (83% in 2018 and 78% in 2020), economic development (69% in 2018 and 67% in 2020) and environmental sustainability (68% in 2018 and 64% in 2020). In contract, the data indicates a large improvement in climate resilience, rising from 36% in 2018 to 48% in 2020. Although the results of the comparison need to be interpreted carefully,3 they indicate that NUPs have overall extended their thematic scope.

The analysis by five global regions indicates that the attention (moderate and extensive) to spatial structure was more evident in the NUPs in Europe and North America (88%), Latin America and the Caribbean (88%) and the Arab States (82%) and least evident in Africa (60%) (Figure 3.8). On the other hand, human development was more prevalent in NUPs from the Arab States (88%), Asia and the Pacific (83%), Latin America and the Caribbean (81%) and in Africa (80%). Interestingly, 80% of NUPs from Asia and the Pacific and 69% of those from Latin America and the Caribbean indicated to have moderate or extensive attention to environmental sustainability, implying the magnitude of the theme.

Figure 3.7. Levels of attention given to selected themes in NUP, n = 113

Note: No information was available for 6 out of the 119 NUPs that are in the formulation stage or beyond. Data are drawn from the OECD/UN-Habitat/Cities Alliance National Urban Policy Country Survey 2020, the UN-Habitat NUP database and countries’ websites.

Figure 3.8. Moderate to extensive attention to themes of NUP by region, n = 113

Note: No information was available for 6 out of the 119 NUPs that are in the formulation stage or beyond. Data are drawn from the OECD/UN-Habitat/Cities Alliance National Urban Policy Country Survey 2020, the UN-Habitat NUP database and countries’ websites.

In addition to the analysis of the five broad thematic categories, levels of attention to 20 sub-themes were also analysed in the NUP country survey 2020 (Table 3.2). The results revealed more precise priorities in NUPs at the global scale, as well as some gaps across sub-themes within a broad thematic category. Under the theme of ‘human development’, for example, the data shows that relatively less attention is given to ‘promoting social cohesion and fighting against spatial segregation (with 24 NUPs with extensive attention), compared with other sub-themes such as ‘ensuring access to basic urban services and infrastructure (39 NUPs)’ and ‘ensuring adequate and affordable housing’ (32 NUPs). Under ‘spatial structure’, two sub-themes given the most extensive attention were ‘tackling urban sprawl’ (34 NUPs) and ‘sustainable mobility’ (32 NUPs), while slightly less attention was given to ‘promoting urban-rural connectivity’ (29 NUPs) and ‘developing public spaces’ (27 NUPs).

Table 3.2. Levels of attention of NUPs by sub-theme, n = 69

Theme	Sub-theme	Extensive	Moderate	Low
Spatial structure	Tackle urban sprawl, pursue sustainable land use and promote compact and connected cities	34	22	2
	Recognise urban-rural interdependency and promote connectivity between urban and rural areas	29	26	5
	Pursue sustainable mobility (e.g., foot, bike, public transit) in and between urban areas	32	16	9
	Develop public space as economic, human and environmental assets for cities	27	25	6
Economic development	Apply a system of cities approach and promote balanced territorial development in a country, connectivity among cities	31	22	3
	Increase productivity and competitiveness in cities of all sizes	27	24	6
	Promote education and skills in labour market in cities	10	24	23
	Adapt technological innovation	12	25	17
Human development	Alleviate poverty	24	18	15
	Ensure access to basic urban services and infrastructure (e.g., water, sanitation, waste management, public transport, digital infrastructure)	39	15	3
	Ensure adequate and affordable housing	32	15	8
	Promote social cohesion and fight against spatial segregation	24	23	9
Environmental sustainability	Promote circular economy in cities	13	25	20
	Promote sustainable urban consumption and production patterns	12	29	16
	Improve air and water quality	21	30	7
	Reduce GHG emissions and promote low-carbon transition in cities	22	24	11
Climate resilience	Identify risks and promote disaster risk management strategies	24	22	11
	Promote risk-sensitive land use in urban areas	28	18	11
	Promote green and blue infrastructure, ecosystems, biodiversity and nature-based solutions	19	29	9
	Develop disaster risk financing mechanisms	13	13	31

Note: The sum of each row is smaller than the total number of NUPs (69), due to the fact that not all countries provided answers to all the sub‑themes. Data are drawn from the OECD/UN-Habitat/Cities Alliance National Urban Policy Country Survey 2020.

The NUP country survey 2020 also identified thematic focuses other than the five themes. Common answers were on education, culture and social integration, among others. NUPs in Bolivia and Mexico give particular attention to indigenous communities, while gender and inter-generational integration are key themes in the NUP of Brazil. In Finland, immigration and newcomer policies are covered by its NUP. Moreover, smart cities, smart technologies and urban innovation are reported as important themes in NUPs in the Czech Republic, Finland, Madagascar, Malawi and Portugal.

Institutions leading the NUP process

Regarding the institutions leading their NUP process (Figure 3.9), 54 out of 86 countries (63%) rely on a ministry or agency specialised in urban issues to lead the NUP process. These ministries or agencies are to a large extent specialised in housing, infrastructure, spatial planning, environment and urban development. Examples include the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development in New Zealand and Chile’s National Council for Urban Development. In 35 countries (41%) a ministry or agency in charge of general national planning or development is leading the process. Examples include the Ministry of Finance in Estonia, the Planning Administration in Israel, the Ministry of Transport and Local Government in Iceland, the Ministry of Sustainable Development and Tourism in Montenegro, the Federal Ministry of the Interior, Building and Local Community in Germany, and the Office of the National Economic and Social Development Council in Thailand. In Hungary, the Prime Minister’s Office is taking the lead. In some countries, the Ministry for Local Government is leading the NUP process, for example Norway and Zambia. Six countries reported that the ministry responsible for regional development is leading the NUP process: Brazil, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Latvia, Poland. In Austria, the Ministry for Agriculture, Regions and Tourism is co‑ordinating the NUP process.

In some countries, two or more ministries are co-leading the NUP process. For example, in Finland the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment is co-leading it with the Ministry of the Environment. In Tanzania, the President’s Office, Regional Administration and Local Government, and two other ministries are involved in leading the NUP process.

Fifteen countries (22%) indicated that the NUP leading institution is ‘not clearly defined’ as there is not a national ministry with clear mandate for urban issues, and urban policy is dealt with as part of different sectoral policies at national level. This is the case for Costa Rica, Eswatini, Kazakhstan, Nepal, Netherlands, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia and Sweden.

Figure 3.9. Institutions leading the NUP, n = 86

Note: Respondents were allowed to select multiple responses. Data are drawn from the OECD/UN-Habitat/Cities Alliance National Urban Policy Country Survey 2020.

Ways forward

The findings of this chapter indicate that NUPs have become more explicit, operational and comprehensive since 2018. Of the 162 identified NUPs, 91 (56%) are identified as explicit NUPs, compared with 51% in 2018; many NUPs have advanced from diagnosis to formulation and implementation stages; and the levels of extensive and moderate attention increased for four out of five thematic areas.

In light of the COVID-19 recovery, countries face an increasing need for strengthening place-based decision-making and coherence in urban development. NUPs should play a more explicit role in developing a strategic and shared vision and co‑ordinating policies across sectors and levels of government. A more clearly formulated NUP can drive more coherence across different urban policies undertaken at the national level (OECD, 2017[4]), and provide more effective support to cities and towns to tackle their complex challenges (United Nations, 2016[3]).

In addition to explicit NUPs, the survey stressed the importance of other national level policies that affect urban areas, which interconnect to form a systemic NUP framework. Such policies were found to ensure and promote engagement, participation, co‑ordination and implementation mechanisms.

Countries should also continue to make their NUPs more comprehensive, by giving attention to a wide range of themes reflecting their urban policy contexts. Growing attention to climate resilience as a thematic area of NUPs indicates that NUPs are becoming an integrated urban management and planning systems

Finally, the analysis highlighted the lack of comprehensive and disaggregated urban data as a key challenge in the formulation of NUPs. Strategies to improve the collection of disaggregated urban data need to be put in place as the basis of NUP formulation and to ensure regular and effective monitoring and evaluation of such policies.

Annex 3.A. List of NUP

Annex Table 3.A.1.  List of NUP (identified from the NUP country survey)

Responding Country (n=86)	Name of NUP	Year	Explicit NUP	Stage	National urban agency	Weblink
Algeria	Politique aménagement du territoire, urbanisme et ville	2010	Yes	Implementation	Ministère de l’Habitat, de l’Urbanisme et de la Ville (MHUV) Ministère de l’Intérieur, des Collectivités Locale et de l’Aménagement du Territoire (MICLAT)	Loi n° 10-02 du 29 juin 2010 portant approbation du Schéma National d'Aménagement du Territoire. https://www.joradp.dz/FTP/jo‑francais/2010/F2010061.pdf
Armenia	National Urban Strategy	2019	Yes	Formulation	Urban Development Committee	In progress
Australia	“Smart Cities Plan” and (its main delivery mechanism) “City Deals”	2016	Yes	Implementation	Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications	https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/cities/city-deals/ https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/cities/smart-cities/plan/index.aspx
Austria	Strengthening centres of cities and towns	2019	No	Implementation	Austrian Conference on Spatial Planning	https://www.oerok.gv.at/raum/themen/staerkung-der-orts-und-stadtkerne
Azerbaijan	Urban Planning and Construction Code		No	Implementation		https://apa.az/az/i%%CC%87nfrastruktur/milli-sehersalma-ve-tikinti-normativ-senedleri-bazirlanacaq-547331
Belgium	Développement d’une offre ferroviaire suburbaine type RER	2015	No	No information	SNCB	https://www.belgiantrain.be/fr/about-sncb/themes/rer
Bolivia	Politica Nacional para el Desarrollo Integral de Ciudades (National Policy for the Integral Development of Cities)	Under development	Yes	Formulation	Ministry of Public Works, Services and Housing/Vice-ministry of Housing and Urbanism	http://www.urbanobolivia.org/
Brazil	National Policy for Urban Development (Politica Nacional de Desenvolvimento Urbano – PNDU)	Under development (to be launched in 2021)	Yes	Formulation	Ministry of Regional Development	No link (to be launched in 2021)
Bulgaria	Regional Development Policy (Regional Development Act; National Spatial Development Concept of the Republic of Bulgaria)	2018 (originally 2008)	No	Implementation	Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works	https://www.mrrb.bg/bg/zakon-za-regionalnoto-razvitie/ https://www.mrrb.bg/bg/nacionalna-koncepciya-za-prostranstveno-razvitie-za-perioda-2013-2025-godina/
Burkina Faso	Politique nationale de l’habitat et du développement urbain	2008	Yes	Implementation	Ministère de l’Urbanisme et de l’Habitat	N/A
Cabo Verde	Política nacional do ordenamento do território e urbanismo (National policy on spatial planning and urbanism)	2019	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministério das Infraestruturas do Ordenamento do Território e Habitação	https://www.governo.cv
Canada	Investing in Canada Infrastructure Programme	2017	No	Implementation	Infrastructure Canada	https://www.infrastructure.gc.ca/plan/icp-pic-INFC-eng.html
Chile	Política Nacional de Desarrollo Urbano	2014	Yes	Implementation	National Council for Urban Development	https://cndu.gob.cl/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/L4-Politica-Nacional-Urbana.pdf
Colombia	Política de Ciudades 4.0	2019	Yes	Formulation	Ministerio de Vivienda, Ciudad y Territorio	In progress
Costa Rica	National urban development policy 2018‑2030 and action plan 2018-2022	2018	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Housing and Human Settlements (MIVAH)	http://www.mivah.go.cr/Biblioteca_Politicas_Politica_y_Plan_Nacional_Desarrollo_Urbano.shtml
Croatia	Spatial Development Strategy of the Republic of Croatia	2017	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Construction and Physical Planning	https://mgipu.gov.hr/o‑ministarstvu‑15/djelokrug/prostorno-uredjenje-3335/strategija-prostornog-razvoja-republike-hrvatske/4096
Cuba	National Land Planning Scheme; the National Urban Policy of Cuba	2018	Yes	Implementation	Institute of Physical Planning (IPF)	In progress
Czech Republic	The principles of urban policy of the Czech Republic	2017	Yes	Implementation	The Ministry for Regional Development	https://www.mmr.cz/getmedia/ede18d30-7bc2-4d2b-9011-f527446872e8/ZUP_2017.pdf?ext=.pdf
Denmark	Danish Act on Urban Renewal and Urban Development; Danish Planning Act	2015	No	Implementation	Ministry of Business and Growth; Ministry of Immigration, Integration and Housing	https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/2015/1041 https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/2013/587
Ecuador	Agenda del Hábitat Sostenible del Ecuador 2036	2019	Yes	Formulation	Ministerio de Desarrollo Urbano y Vivienda	http://habitatsostenible.miduvi.gob.ec/
Estonia	National regional policy	2014	No	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of Finance	https://www.rahandusministeerium.ee/et/regionaalareng-ja-poliitika
Eswatini	Housing Policy	2001	No	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of Housing & Urban Development	N/A
Ethiopia	National Urban policy	2005, modified 2013	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Urban Development and Construction	N/A
Finland	National Urban Strategy (under preparation - several initiatives, programmes and contract-based policy are actual forms of the NUP)	2019	Yes	Formulation	Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment, Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Finance	N/A
France	Politique de la Ville	2014	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministère de la cohésion des territoires et des relations avec les collectivités territoriales (MCTRCT) et l’Agence nationale de la cohésion territoriale (ANCT)	…
Germany	Nationale Stadtentwicklungspolitik	2008	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Federal Ministry of the Interior, Building and Community	https://www.nationale-stadtentwicklungspolitik.de/NSPWeb/DE/Home/home_node.html
Ghana	Ghana National Urban Policy Framework and Action Plan	2012	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development	http://www.mlgrd.gov.gh/ctn-media/filer_public/35/5f/355fece2-831e-4682-9a2e-fea73e4f334a/nup_framework___action_plan.pdf
Greece	Spatial and Urban Planning Reform [Law 4296/2014]; Environmental Improvement and Private Urban Planning [Law 4280/2014]	2014	No	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of Environment and Energy	N/A
Guatemala	National Urban Development Policy	In progress	Yes	Feasibility	CIV-Viceministerio de Desarrollo urbano y Vivienda	N/A
Honduras	Law of Territorial Ordinance of Honduras	2003	No	Implementation	Ministerial Office of Socialisation and Digital Accompaniment of Presidential Projects	N/A
Hungary	Modern Cities Programme	2017	No	Feasibility	Prime Minister’s Office	N/A
Iceland	Höfuðborgarstefna (Capital-city policy)	In progress (2022)	Yes	Feasibility	Ministry of Transport and Local Government	In progress (basis for NUP is set in strategic regional plan for Iceland 2018-2024, “C.4 Capital-city policy”: https://www.stjornarradid.is/library/02-Rit--skyrslur-og-skrar/Byggdaaaetlun_2018-2024_ENSKA.pdf https://www.stjornarradid.is/verkefni/sveitarstjornir-og-byggdamal/byggdamal/adgerdaaaetlun/adgerd/?itemid=7bb569f6-b2b1-11e8-942c-005056bc530c
Iran	National Urban Policy and Smart City Strategy Programme	In progress	Yes	Formulation	Ministry of Road and Urban Development (MoRUD)	N/A
Ireland	National Planning Framework	2018	No	Formulation	Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government	http://npf.ie
Israel	Comprehensive National Outline Plan for Construction, Development and Conservation (also referred to as NOP 35, National Master Plan 35 or Tama 35)	2016	No	Implementation	Israel Planning Administration	https://www.gov.il/he/Departments/General/tama_35_docs
Italy	National Program for Metropolitan Areas 2014‑2020	2019	No	Implementation	Agency for Territorial Cohesion	http://www.ponmetro.it/
Japan	National Spatial Strategy	2015	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism	http://www.mlit.go.jp/common/001127196.pdf
Jordan	National Urban Policy	In progress	Yes	Formulation	Ministry of Local Administration (MoLA)	N/A
Kazakhstan	Decree of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On approval of the State program for development of regions for 2020-2025”	2019	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan	http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/P1900000990
Kuwait	Kuwait National Development Plan	2017	No	Formulation	General Secretariat of the Supreme Council for Planning and Development	http://www.newkuwait.gov.kw/home.aspx
Latvia	Regional Policy (strategy document – Regional Policy Guidelines 2021-2027)	2019	No	Implementation	The Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development of the Republic of Latvia	http://polsis.mk.gov.lv/documents/6588
Lebanon	National Physical Master Plan of the Lebanese territory	2005	No	Formulation	Council for Development and Reconstruction	https://www.iau-idf.fr/fileadmin/DataStorage/Institut/Noc_competences/liban_SDATL_english.pdf
Lithuania	Comprehensive Plan of the Territory of the Republic of Lithuania	2019	Yes	Formulation	Ministry of the Environment	http://www.bendrasisplanas.lt/2019/12/13/en/
Luxembourg	Aménagement du territoire	2018	No	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministère de l’Énergie et de l’Aménagement du territoire, Département de l’aménagement du territoire	N/A
Madagascar	National Urban Development Policy	2019	Yes	Implementation	Ministère de l’Aménagement du Territoire, de l’Habitat et des Travaux Publics	N/A
Malawi	National Urban Policy	2019	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development	https://urbanpolicyplatform.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Malawi-Urban-Policy_2nd-April-2019.pdf
Malta	The Strategic Plan for the Environment and Development (SPED)	2015	Yes	Implementation	The document is intergovernmental, since the SPED is a national policy document intended to be applied horizontally within all government however the planning authority oversees the document	https://www.pa.org.mt/en/strategic-plan-details/strategic%%%%%%20plan%20for%20the%20environment%20and%20development
Mexico	National Strategy for Territorial Planning (ENOT), the Sectoral Programme for Agrarian, Territorial and Urban Development 2019-2024; the National Programme for Territorial Planning and Urban Development (PNOTDU); the National Housing Programme (PNV); and the National Land Policy (PNS)	2019	Yes	Formulation	Secretariat for Agrarian, Land and Urban Development (SEDATU)	N/A
Montenegro	National Sustainable Development Strategy 2030 (Nacionalna strategija održivog razvoja do 2030. Godine (NSOR))	2016	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of Sustainable Development and Tourism	http://www.nssd2030.gov.me/
Morocco	Politique de la Ville	2012	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Le Ministère de l’Aménagement du Territoire National, de l’Urbanisme, de l’Habitat et de la Politique de la Ville	http://www.mhpv.gov.ma/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/guide-pv.pdf
Myanmar	National Urban Policy of Myanmar	In progress	Yes	Formulation	Ministry of Construction	In progress
Namibia	National Spatial Development Framework: in line with the Urban and Regional Planning Act 2018	In progress	Yes	Feasibility	Ministry of Urban and Rural Development (MURD)	https://www.lac.org.na/laws/2018/6631.pdf
Nepal	National Urban Development Strategy	2017	Yes	Formulation	Ministry of Urban Development	In progress
Netherlands	Regionale Verstedelijkingsstrategie	In progress	Yes	Formulation	Ministry of Interior and Kingdom Relations	N/A
New Zealand	Government policy statement on housing and urban development	In progress (end 2021)	Yes	Diagnosis	Ministry of Housing and Urban Development	https://www.hud.govt.nz/urban-development/government-policy-statement-gps/
Nicaragua	National Transport Plan	2014	No	No information	Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure	https://openjicareport.jica.go.jp/pdf/12181012_01.pdf
Nigeria	National Urban Development Policy	2012	Yes	Implementation	Federal Ministry of Works and Housing	http://habitat3.org/wp-content/uploads/National-Report-Africa-Nigeria-English.pdf
Norway	White paper on urban sustainability and rural strength	2017	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation	N/A
Panama	National Territorial Planning Policy of Panama	2019	Yes	Diagnosis	Ministerio de Vivienda y Ordenamiento Territorial	www.Miviot.gob.pa, Resolución No. 468-2019 de 27 de junio de 2019
Paraguay	National Housing and Habitat Policy of Paraguay	2018	No	Formulation	Ministerio de Urbanismo Vivienda y Hábitat	https://www.muvh.gov.py/sitio/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/PNVH-Digital.pdf
Peru	National Urban Development Plan “Territory for All” 2006-2015	2006	Yes	Formulation	Ministerio de Vivienda, Construcción y Saneamiento	http://eudora.vivienda.gob.pe/OBSERVATORIO/destacados2/PlanNacionalDesarrolloUrbano20062015.pdf
Philippines	National Urban Development and Housing Framework (NUDHF)	2017	Yes	Implementation	Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development (DHSUD)	https://hlurb.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/services/lgu/clup-guidebook/NUDHF%20Full%20Version%20-%20FINAL.pdf
Poland	National Urban Policy 2023	2015	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Development Funds and Regional Policy	https://www.gov.pl/web/fundusze-regiony/polityka-miejska
Portugal	Sustainable Cities Strategy	2015	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	DG Teertório	https://www.dgterritorio.gov.pt/sites/default/files/publicacoes/Cidades_Sustentaveis2020.pdf
Korea	1. Comprehensive National land Plan; 2. Do comprehensive plan; 3. Si/Gun comprehensive plan; 4. Regional plan; 5. Sector plan	2020	Yes	Feasibility	Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport	N/A
Romania	Project (2019-2021) - Elaboration of urban policy as a tool for strengthening the administrative capacity and strategic planning of urban areas in Romania	2019	Yes	Diagnosis	Ministry of Public Works, Development and Administration	N/A
Russian federation	Spatial development strategy of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2025	2019	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of Economic Development	https://www.economy.gov.ru/material/file/a3d075aa813dc01f981d9e7fcb97265f/130219_207-p.pdf
Rwanda	National Urbanization Policy	2015	Yes	Implementation	Rwanda Ministry of Infrastructure	https://bpmis.gov.rw/asset_uplds/files/National%20Urbanization%20Policy.pdf
Sao Tome and Príncipe	National Spatial Planning	2019	Yes	Formulation	Ministry if Public Works, Infrastructures, Natural resources and Environment (MOPIRNA) / Cabinet of Territorial Planning (PNOT)	https://www.nrv-norvia.com/en/projects/national-plan-for-the-territory-development-of-sao-tome-and-principe
Saudi Arabia	National spatial policy	2019	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs	N/A
Senegal	Lettre de politique sectorielle et du développement du ministère en charge de l'urbanisme	2018	No	Diagnosis	Ministère en charge de l’urbanisme	N/A
Serbia	Sustainable Urban Development Strategy of the Republic of Serbia 2030	2019	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Construction, Transport and Infrastructure	https://www.mgsi.gov.rs/lat/dokumenti/urbani-razvoj https://www.srbija.gov.rs/dokument/45678/programi-planovi-strategije-.php
Slovak Republic	The urban development policy of the Slovak Republic by 2030	2018	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Transport and Construction	https://www.mindop.sk/uploads/media/177add300b0faa6f4201a4d8a240021e77552653.pdf
Slovenia	Spatial Development Strategy of Slovenia	2004	No	Formulation	Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning	https://www.gov.si/assets/ministrstva/MOP/Publikacije/sprs_eng.pdf
Spain	Spanish Urban Agenda	2019	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Transport, Mobility and Urban Agenda	https://apps.fomento.gob.es/CVP/detallepublicacion.aspx?idpub=BAW061 https://www.aue.gob.es/que-es-la-aue#inicio
Sweden	Strategy for Liveable Cities	2018	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of the Environment and Energy; Ministry of Finance (since 2019)	www.regeringen.se/4971fa/contentassets/b5640fd317d04929990610e1a20a5383/171823000webb.pdf Short version in English: https://www.government.se/49f4b6/contentassets/093aaf895dbd44119d5ee023138c0f94/strategy-for-livable-cities---short-version
Switzerland	Politique des agglomérations 2016+ de la Confédération	2016	Yes	Implementation	Office fédéral du développement territorial ARE (DETEC) et le Secrétariat d’État à l’économie (DEFR)	https://www.are.admin.ch/are/fr/home/villes-et-agglomerations/strategie‑et‑planification/politique-des-agglomerations.html
Tanzania	National Human Settlements Development Policy	N/A	No	Implementation	Ministry of Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Development	http://lands.go.tz/uploads/documents/en/1460190379-National_Human_Settlements_Development_Policy_2000_0.pdf
Thailand	The Twelfth National 2017-2021	2017	No	Monitoring and evaluation	Office of the National Economic and Social Development Council of Thailand (NESDC)	https://www.nesdc.go.th/nesdb_en/ewt_dl_link.php?nid=4345
Tunisia	Politiques sectorielles	2019: mobilité / 2015: habitat	No	Feasibility	MDCT/MEHAT/MALE/MT	N/A
Turkey	Integrated Urban Development Strategy and Action Plan (KENTGES) 2010-2023	2010	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of Environment and Urbanisation	https://kentges.csb.gov.tr/kentges-english-i-98653
Turkmenistan	Programme for the development of construction and energy in Turkmenistan for 2019-2025	2019	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Construction and Architecture	N/A
Ukraine	State Strategy of Regional Development for the period until 2020	2014 (with amendments in 2019)	No	Feasibility	Ministry of Communities and Territories Development	https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/385-2014-%%D0%BF
United Kingdom	City Deals	2011	No	No information	Ministry of Housing, Communities and local Government	N/A
United States	Community development block grant	1981	No	No information	U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development	https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg-entitlement/
Zambia	National Urbanisation Policy	2019	Yes	Formulation	Department of Physical Planning, Ministry of Local Government	N/A

Annex table 3.A.2.  List of NUP (identified from desk research)

Country (n=76)	Name of NUP	Year	Explicit NUP	Stage	National urban agency	Weblink
Afghanistan	Urban National Priority Programme 2016-2025	2016	Yes	Feasibility	Directorate of Local Governance	http://policymof.gov.af/home/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Urban-NPP.pdf
Albania	Law on Territorial Planning and Development	2014	No	Implementation	Ministry of Public Works and Transport	http://planifikimi.gov.al/index.php?eID=dumpFile&t=f&f=5636&token=984b991a0c725de5fa11e124cfbb746d25e5d054
Angola	Politica Nacional de Ordenamento do Territorio e do Urbanismo	2015	Yes	Feasibility	Ministry of Territorial Planning and Housing	N/A
Argentina	Politica Nacional Urbana	2019	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of the Interior, Public Works and Housing	https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/2020/03/pnu_final_-_pagina_simple_dec-2019.pdf
Bahrain	National Planning and Development Strategy	2007	No	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of Works, Municipalities Affairs, and Urban Planning	https://upda.gov.bh/en/category/other-laws-and-decrees#
Bangladesh	National Urban Sector Policy	2011	Yes	Implementation	Department of Urban Development; Ministry of Local Government	N/A
Belarus	State Scheme of the Territorial Organisation	2000	No	Implementation	Ministry of Architecture and Construction	N/A
Bhutan	Bhutan National Urbanisation Strategy	2011	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Works and Human settlement, Department of Urban Development and Housing	https://www.mowhs.gov.bt/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Bhutan_National_Urbanization_Strategy_2008.pdf (2008 Strategy)
Bosnia and Herzegovina	Spatial Plan Guide, Republic of Srpska	2007	No	Implementation	Ministry of Spatial Planning, Civil Engineering and Ecology	N/A
Botswana	Town and Country Planning Act	2013	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of Infrastructure and Housing	N/A
Brunei Darussalam	National Land Use Plan	2010	No	Implementation	Ministry of Development Funds	N/A
Burundi	Burundi Vision 2025	2011	No	Implementation	Ministry of Water, Environment, Spatial Planning and Town Planning	https://www.presidence.gov.bi/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Vision-Burundi-2025.pdf
Cambodia	National Urban Development Strategy 2014-2018	2014	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction	https://cambodia.unfpa.org/en/publications/national-strategic-development-plan-2014-2018
Cameroon	Politique Urbaine Nationale	2014	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of Housing and Urban Development	N/A
Chad	Stratégie Nationale de Logement	2015	No	Formulation	Ministry of Urban Planning	N/A
China (People’s Republic of)	National Urbanisation Plan 2014-2020	2014	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Housing and Urban Development	http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2014‑03/16/content_2640075.htm
Comoros	Poverty Reduction and Growth Strategy Paper	2011	No	Implementation	Ministère de l’Aménagement du Territoire, de l’Urbanisme, chargé des Affaires Foncières et des Transports Terrestres	N/A
Congo	National Development Plan	No information	No	Implementation	Ministry of Construction, Urban Planning and Housing	https://www.imf.org/-/media/Websites/IMF/imported-full-text-pdf/external/pubs/ft/scr/2012/_cr12242.ashx
Côte d’Ivoire	Service to Promote Home Ownership Tenure (SPAPF)	2011	No	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of Construction, Housing, Sanitation and Urbanism	N/A
Democratic Republic of the Congo	Decree Urbanism	1957	No	Implementation	Ministry of Infrastructure, Public Works and Reconstruction	N/A
Djibouti	Strategie nationale de Développement Urbain 2012-2015	2012	No	Implementation	Secretary of State for Housing	N/A
Dominican Republic	Organic Law of National development	2012	No	Implementation	Congress	https://www.intec.edu.do/downloads/documents/institucionales/marco-legal/Ley_1-12_LEY_ORGANICA_DE_LA_ESTRATEGIA_NACIONAL_DE_DESARROLLO.pdf
Egypt	National Urban Policy	2015	Yes	Diagnosis	Ministry of Housing, Utilities and Urban Development	N/A
El Salvador	Política Nacional de Vivienda y Hábitat	2015	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Housing and Urban Development	http://observatorio.vivienda.gob.sv/archivo/Pol%C3%ADtica%20Nacional%20de%20Vivienda%20y%20H%C3%A1bitat%20VF.pdf
Eritrea	Master Plan for Cities	No information	No	Implementation	Ministry of Public Works	N/A
Fiji	Urban Upgrading Project	2014	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of Local Government, Urban Development, Housing and Environment	N/A
Gabon	Mooted National Urban Development Policy	2014	No	Diagnosis	Ministry for Promotion and Investment, Public Works, Transportation, Housing and Tourism	N/A
Gambia	Poverty Reduction Strategy 2007-2011	2007	No	Formulation	Ministry of Local Government and Lands	N/A
Guinea	Politique Nationale Urbaine	2017	Yes	Feasibility	Ministère de la Ville et de l’Aménagement du Territoire	N/A
India	National Urban Policy Framework	2018	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs	https://smartnet.niua.org/sites/default/files/resources/nupf_final.pdf
Indonesia	National Policies and Strategies for Urban Development towards Sustainable Competitive Cities for 2045	2015	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of National Development	N/A
Iraq	National Urban Policy	In progress	Yes	Feasibility	Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works	N/A
Kenya	National Urban Development	2012	Yes	Formulation	Ministry of Land and Urban Development	N/A
Kiribati	Kiribati Development Plans 2012-2015	2012	No	Implementation	Ministry of Internal and Social Affairs	http://www.mfed.gov.ki/sites/default/files/kiribati-development-plan-2012-2015.pdf
Kyrgyzstan	National Sustainable Development Strategy 2013-2017	2013	No	Implementation	National Council for Sustainable Development	https://www.un-page.org/files/public/kyrgyz_national_sustainable_development_strategy.pdf
Lao People’s Democratic Republic	Master Plan for Comprehensive Urban Transport in Vientiane Capital	2006	No	Implementation	Urban Development and Administration Authority	N/A
Liberia	National Urban Policy	2015	Yes	Diagnosis	Ministry of Internal Affairs, development of Urban Affairs	N/A
Libya	National Physical Perspective Plan 2006-2030	2006	Yes	Formulation	Urban Planning Agency	N/A
Malaysia	National Physical Plan	2010	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of Housing and Local Government	https://www.planmalaysia.gov.my/index.php/en/lihat-rancangan-fizikal-negara
Maldives	National Strategies for Sustainable development	2009	No	Implementation	Ministry of Housing and Urban Development	N/A
Mali	Politique Nationale de la Ville	2014	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Ministry of Housing, Land Affairs and Urbanism	N/A
Marshall Islands	Vision 2003-2018 Strategic Development Plan Framework	2003	No	Feasibility	Majuro Atoll Local Government	N/A
Mauritania	Master Plan	2020	No	Implementation	Ministry of Equipment, Urbanism and Housing	N/A
Mauritius	National Development Strategy	2006	No	Feasibility	Ministry of Housing and Lands	https://housing.govmu.org/Documents/Planning/nds.pdf
Micronesia	National Strategic Development Plan 2004-2023	2004	No	Feasibility	Department of Housing and Urban Development	https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/linked-documents/cobp-fsm-2015-2017-sd-02.pdf
Moldova	Concept of Sustainable Development of Settlements of the Republic of Moldova	2001	No	Implementation	Ministry of Regional Development and Construction	N/A
Mongolia	Comprehensive National Development Plan	2015	No	Formulation	Ministry of Construction and Urban Development	http://pdc.ceu.hu/archive/00003166/01/millennium_development_goals.pdf (2007 Strategy)
Mozambique	Politica Urbana Nacional	2017	Yes	Feasibility	Ministry of Housing and Lands	N/A
Nauru	National Sustainable Development Strategy 2005-2025	Revised 2009	No	Implementation	Ministry for Finance and Sustainable Development	https://www.sprep.org/att/IRC/eCOPIES/Countries/Nauru/2a.pdf
Oman	National Spatial Strategy and Oman Vision 2040	2010	No	Monitoring and evaluation	Supreme Committee for Town and Planning of the Sultanate of Oman	N/A
Pakistan	Vision 2025	2014	No	Diagnosis	Physical Planning and Housing Section in Planning Commission; Ministry of Climate Change	N/A
Palau	National Master Development Plan 2020	2006	No	Feasibility	Ministry of Public Infrastructure, Industries and Commerce	N/A
Papua New Guinea	National Urbanisation Policy (2010-2030)	2010	Yes	Implementation	Physical Planning Board	N/A
Qatar	National Development Strategy 2011-2016	2011	No	Implementation	Ministry of Development Planning and Statistics	N/A
Samoa	Samoa National Urban Policy	2013	Yes	Implementation	Planning and Urban Management Agency, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment	N/A
Singapore	Master Plan	2015	No	Monitoring and evaluation	Urban Redevelopment Authority	https://www.ura.gov.sg/Corporate/Planning/Master-Plan
Solomon Islands	National Urban Policy (2016-2035)	No information	Yes	Formulation	Ministry of Lands, Housing and Survey	N/A
Somalia	Somali Urban Development Program for the Somali Region	2008	No	Implementation	Ministry of Planning	N/A
South Africa	Integrated Urban Development Framework	2016	Yes	Monitoring and evaluation	Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs	https://iudf.co.za/
South Sudan	National Urban Policy	2012	Yes	Formulation	Ministry of Housing and Physical Planning	N/A
Sri Lanka	Megapolis Plan	2015	Yes	Implementation	Urban Development Authority	N/A
Sudan	National Urban Policy	2016	Yes	Diagnosis	Ministry of Economy and Planning and Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs	N/A
Syrian Arab Republic	National Standards for Regional Planning and Spatial Planning	2014	Yes	Formulation	Higher Commission of Regional Planning	N/A
Timor-Leste	National Strategic Development Plan 2011-2030	2011	No	Feasibility	National Development Agency	N/A
Togo	Declaration of Policy of Urban Sector	No information	No	Implementation	Ministry of Urban Planning and Housing	N/A
Tonga	Tonga Strategic development Framework 2015-2025	2015	No	Implementation	Planning Urban and Management Division	http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/ton168846.pdf
Tuvalu	National Strategy for Sustainable Development 2005-2015	2005	No	Diagnosis	No information	http://prdrse4all.spc.int/sites/default/files/tuvalu_national_strategy_for_sustainable_development.pdf
Uganda	Uganda National Urban Policy	2017	Yes	Implementation	Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development	https://mlhud.go.ug/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/National-Urban-Policy-2017-printed-copy.pdf
United Arab Emirates	Urban and Regional Structure Framework (2030)	No information	No	Implementation	Abu Dhabi Urban Planning Council and Urban Planning Steering Committee	https://www.ecouncil.ae/PublicationsEn/plan-abu-dhabi-full-version-EN.pdf
Uruguay	Law for Land Use and Sustainable Development	2009	No	Implementation	Senate and House of Representatives of the Oriental Republic of Uruguay	N/A
Uzbekistan	Master Plan of Population Settlement	2010	No	Diagnosis	The Uzbek Agency of Communal Services	N/A
Vanuatu	Vanuatu Land Use Planning Policy	2013	No	Implementation	Physical Planning Unity, Ministry of Internal Affairs	http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/van174015.pdf
Venezuela	Urban Land Law	2009	No	Implementation	National Assembly of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela	http://www.pcivil.gob.ve/wp-content/uploads/pdf/marco-legal/LEY-DE-TIERRAS-URBANAS.pdf
Viet Nam	Urban Development Management Law	In progress	Yes	Formulation	Ministry of Construction	N/A
Yemen	Regional Plans	2011	No	Feasibility	Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation	N/A
Zimbabwe	Growth Point/Rural Service Centre Strategy	1970	Yes	Implementation	Department of Physical Planning	N/A

References

[4] OECD (2017), National Urban Policy in OECD Countries, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264271906-en.

[5] OECD/UN-Habitat/Cities Alliance (2020), National Urban Policy Country Survey 2020.

[2] UN-Habitat (2014), The Evolution of National Urban Policies: A Global Overview, UN-Habitat, https://unhabitat.org/the-evolution-of-national-urban-policies.

[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.

[3] United Nations (2016), Policy paper 3: National urban policy, https://habitat3.org/wp-content/uploads/Policy-Paper-3-English.pdf.

Notes

← 1.  In the 2018 report, two types of NUP were identified: explicit NUPs and partial (or implicit) NUPs. An explicit NUP was defined as a policy with “a title of ‘national urban policy’ or variant such as ‘national urbanization policy’ or ‘national urban strategy’ or ‘national urban development strategy’. The category of “partial, or implicit NUP” acknowledged that a policy document that is not explicitly labelled as NUP could in practice function as a NUP. A partial NUP was defined as having “many of the elements of a NUP but not yet brought together as a formal, or explicit NUP”.

← 2.  In the 2018 report, such policies are not clearly defined and understood as NUPs. As a result, several countries indicated that they did not have a NUP (explicit or partial) in their urban policy landscape, even though there were national sectoral policies that have a spatial focus on urban areas.

← 3.  Clearer guidance was provided to assess the level of attention (extensive, moderate or low) for the NUP country survey 2020 as well as for the analysis, compared with the analysis for the 2018 report (see Chapter 1).