participatory slum upgrading psup programme...informality and slums and other informal settlements....

PARTICIPATORYSLUM UPGRADINGPROGRAMME PSUP

TRANSFORMING THE LIVES OF ONE BILLION

SLUM DWELLERS

An initiative of the ACP Secretariat, funded by the European Commission, and implemented by UN-Habitat

Participatory Slum Upgrading Programme (PSUP) Recommendations for Sustainable Neighborhood Planning in slums and other informal settlement contexts

SDG 11 Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable.

Target 11.1 By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slums.

Target 11.3 By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated, and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries.

NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONSFOR CITY-WIDE, PARTICIPATORY SLUM UPGRADING

ContentsIntroduction – purpose of the quick guide .........................................................................................................01

Key considerations for planning in participatory slum and informal settlement upgrading .................01

The challenges and opportunities of urban planning in slums ..........................................................01

Guide from Global frameworks .................................................................................................................03

Ways to promote inclusion and prevent the challenges of slums by urban design ....................03

PSUP key neighborhood planning recommendations

for transforming slums incrementally and sustainably ..................................................................................05

Concluding comments ............................................................................................................................................07

Table 5: Rationale behind the development of the

PSUP neighborhood planning design recommendations. ............................................................................08

Bibliography ...............................................................................................................................................................13

01RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SUSTAINABLE

NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING IN SLUM AND OTHER INFORMAL SETTLEMENT CONTEXTS

Introduction – purpose of the quick guideDrawing on the experience from the Participatory Slum

Upgrading Programme (PSUP), international research on slum

and informal settlement upgrading, this quick guide provides

planning design recommendations for slum and informal

settlement upgrading, building on and enhancing UN-Habitat’s

current five principles for sustainable neighborhood planning1.

The guide outlines the rationale for these recommendations

which aim to strengthen the implementation of sustainable

design frameworks in those urban contexts with high levels of

informality and slums and other informal settlements.

The proposals are meant to both guide upgrading but also

prevent new slums emerging. The recommendations are

thus on the one hand, a technical guide to incrementally

address local planning challenges so that a path towards the

sustainable neighborhood planning can be established. On the

other hand, the recommendations can act as a preventative

tool to analyze current planning situation in urban contexts

with informality and slums, to guide specific and new ‘at scale’

urban upgrading and renewal processes.

Key considerations for planning in participatory slum and informal settlement upgrading

The challenges and opportunities of urban plan-ning in slumsWith an estimated one billion slum dwellers living in urban

centers today2, the challenge of urban poverty, high levels of

informality and slums and other informal settlements, remains

significant. A sustainable response to the ‘five deprivations’3 of

adequate space, adequate shelter, secure tenure and adequate

access to water and sanitation – also continues to be urgent.

International laws such as the Right to Adequate Housing are

a reminder of the binding obligations to address basic quality

1 UN-Habitat (2014). A New Strategy of Sustainable Neighborhood Planning: Five Principles.

2 UN-Habitat (2015). Slum Almanac: tracking improvements to the lives of slum dwellers.

3 TheOfficialdefinitionofslumswasadoptedbyanexpertgroupmeetinginNairobiin200Xandhasformedthebasisofmeasuringtheprevalenceofslumsdwellersglobally,particularlyintheMDG’s.

of life factors for all, under a human rights banner4.

A key challenge for planning – both in terms of governance,

spatial planning and local area design - is how it can

contribute to the global challenge of slums and informal

settlements given that these contexts are often reflective

of ongoing deep seated governance and institutional

dysfunction, weak land management and limited planning

capacity. These challenges are of particular concern given

that the number of slum and informal settlement dwellers

is increasing and the degrees of spatial and socio-economic

disparities are growing in many regions of the world5.

A second key challenge is how planning can help foster a

more positive view of slum and informal settlement dwellers

as urban dwellers with rights and contributions to make.

Finally, and a third challenge is how planning can help

promote the spatial and social integration of unplanned

areas so that all urban dwellers and locations - planned and

unplanned – are connected with each other. Slums and other

informal settlements for example, are often left outside of

formal planning considerations because they are considered

to be occupying land ‘illegally’. This is despite the fact that

there are often limited or no low-cost housing options for

poor urban dwellers. Furthermore, there are often deeply

held negative stereotypes about slum and informal settlement

dwellers which undermines their active inclusion in broader

planning and development processes6.

Figure 1 below provides a graphic representation of the

spatial disparities in Nairobi Kenya as a result of many of the

factors highlighted above. In this graphic slum and informal

settlement dwellers occupy only a small fraction of the built

area and yet constitute the majority of the city’s inhabitants,

which makes those areas, indicated in red, the most dense but

least serviced.

4 The Right to Adequate housing is recognized in the Universal DeclarationofHumanRightsandtheInternationalCovenantonEconomic,SocialandCulturalRightsaswellasinmanynationalconstitutions.SeeamongothersUN-HabitatandOfficeoftheUnitedNationsHighCommissionerforHumanrights.TheRighttoAdequateHousing. Fact Sheet No. 21.

5 UN-Habitat (2015). Slum Almanac: tracking improvements to the lives of slum dwellers.

6 WIEGO(2013).MenandWomenintheInformalEconomy–AStatisticalReport.WIEGO(2014).WIEGOWorkingPaper(Statistics)No2 April 2014.



Figure I: Building density of Nairobi, Kenya. The red areas indicate more than 9 building per acre7.

7 2005LandUse&BuildingDensity,GISData:https://nairobigismaps.wikischolars.columbia.edu/2005+Land+Use+%26+Building+Density

At the same time, however, and especially in context of

developing countries, it is important to note that in many

urban contexts, an informal ‘version’ of ‘planning’ is usually

undertaken. Parallel planning systems are functioning

whereby local communities (local leaders in particular) and

even the private sector are making decisions about local

design - the roads and the placement of plots and houses

- according to local habits, cultural norms on land deemed

available.

In sum, these are all challenges that local area planning and

design must consider given that many urban regions, especially

in Africa and Asia, have high levels of informality and slum and

other informal settlement conditions (see Box 1).

BOX 1: Key features of urban areas with high levels of informality and slums

Slums and informal settlements have the following key features that must be accounted for in planning design:�� Many aspects fall outside formal planning systems and frameworks

(land, housing design and materials, plot and street layout, building code compliance).�� Very limited security of tenure but often a dynamic mix of land use

arrangements and claims.�� High levels of mixed land use and multi-function activities being

undertaken in most spaces by different groups. �� Limited divisions between public and private. Spaces are

multifunctional and often defined by informal economy and livelihood generation activities. Homes and streets are often used as spaces of production.�� Often highly dense and sometimes overcrowded conditions often

most visibly represented in small shack houses tightly packed together made of unsafe and non-durable materials.�� Mobility spaces prioritized for walking and small carts, vending, but

often not well connected with the rest of the city.�� Sometimes located on geographically hazardous land or in a

climate vulnerable area. �� Limited mix of people from different socio-economic backgrounds

but often a mix of people according to other identity categories (ethnicity, religion, permanent or transitory citizens).



Table 1 below provides a visual representation of the potential differences between slum and informal settlement areas and

formal gated communities according to UN-Habitat’s current 5 principles for sustainable neighborhood planning.

less developed contexts8 as well as the practical experience

of UN-Habitat’s Participatory Slum Upgrading Programme

(PSUP) which is based in 35 countries around the world and

160 urban centres. Planning clearly has a key role to play

in harnessing and strengthening the positive components

of slums and other informal settlements and the capacity

of those living there, and in integrating them back into the

broader urban environment.

Ways to promote inclusion and prevent the chal-lenges of slums by urban designA key goal of planning in neighborhoods with high levels of

informality and slums and other informal settlements, is how

to integrate those living there, via participatory and inclusive

approaches, into the broader urban context, while at the same

8 SeeforexampleWatson(2009)andMartin(2014)andUN-Habitat(2009).

Table I - Applying the recommended 5 planning principles in the slum context

Principle Indicator Current Range

Principle I Street land-use 0-15%

Multifunction streets 45-65%

Principle II Population density 80-100%

Density 0-20%

Economic use 60-90%Principle III 10-30%

Mixed-use built space Residential use 10-30%70-100%

Single tenure 80-100%Principle IV 80-100%

Social Mix Socio economic diversity 0-30%0-20%

IdentityMix 50-80%0-20%

Single Block function 0-10%Principle V 90-100%

Limited land-use specilaisation Secure tenure 0-10%80-100%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Percentage

KeyCurrent range in SlumsCurrent range in Gated Communities

Table 1: Contrast between a slum context and a gated community within a developing country major city according to UN-Habitat’s current 5 sustainable neighborhood planning principles.

Guide from Global frameworksIt is important to note that the proposed Participatory Slum

Upgrading Programme (PSUP) neighborhood planning design

recommendations, respond to a range of international

frameworks that support sustainable and inclusive slum

upgrading (such as the Sustainable Development Target

11.1), the current internationally agreed definition on a slum

household (defined by deprivations in relation to water,

sanitation, durable housing, overcrowding and security of

tenure) and UN-Habitat’s proposed New Urban Agenda which

focuses on how the positive elements of urban environments

can be harnessed to benefit all urban residents including slum

and informal settlement dwellers.

The proposed PSUP recommendations also reflect inputs

from global debates on optimum approaches to planning in



time, help develop tangible improvements to the lives of slum

dwellers via their physical living conditions.

Planning must:

�� Address key practical design and context/locality issues

considering broader governance frameworks such as the

presence or absence of pro-poor policy, building codes

versus enforcement practice, land management and

institutional collaboration and capacity.

�� Recognize that the divisions between the formal and

informal, legal and illegal, formal planning codes and

improvised planning outcomes represent blurred lines

between government, market systems and the informal

economy.

�� Recognize the value and rights of slum and informal

settlement dwellers. Slums and other informal settlements

are often spaces which represent a diverse informal

economy which operates in parallel with but also often

aligned to - the formal economic system. Often this

informal economy is closely linked to local physical spaces

and dynamics and infrastructure than the formal economy,

through e.g. street vending, open kitchens, home based

workshops and the informal transport system.9

�� Understand land management systems considering a

continuum of land rights through the provision of security

of tenure is also key in planning processes10 - both as a

direct outcome of planning (i.e security of tenure for slum

dwellers often results from good planning interventions) as

well as a necessary fundamental component to undertake

effective planning and slum and informal settlement

upgrading (so the provision of secure tenure is more likely

to promote the provision of effective basic services and

mobility infrastructure).

�� Adopt a flexible position in what are often unpredictable

planning conditions (unclear enforcement of planning

regulations, complex governance arrangements), large scale

9 Thesignificanceoftheinformaleconomyanditslaborerswasconfirmedin2015bytheInternationalLabourOrganizationduringthe104thsessionon12June2015inRecommendationNo.204concerningtheTransitionfromtheInformaltotheFormalEconomy(Conference,2015)

10 (UN-Habitat,SecureLandRightsforAll,2008),http://www.gltn.net/index.php/land-tools/gltn-land-tools/continuum-of-land-rights

informality and the impact of long-standing local cultural

norms, coupled with limited planning capacity.

�� Engage a broad range of stakeholders, including slum and

informal settlement dwellers themselves who have a right

and need to be engaged but are often not formally trained

in planning or familiar with development processes.

�� Adopt a focus which is orientated towards city-wide

approaches to both address the immediate deprivation

and livelihood issues in slum and other informal settlement

contexts, but also start to facilitate integration and build

prevention capacity and activity. In these contexts, planning

is urgently required but needs to take on a different role

than in other developed contexts (so often a stronger

governance and capacity development focus rather than

purely technical).

�� Recognize that planning also contributes to the prevention

of slums and other informal settlements, through the

upgrading process. It creates the window of opportunity

for change (positive mind-set towards slum dwellers

and towards participatory planning) and ultimately a

more preventative and forward thinking approach to

urbanization. Slum and informal settlement upgrading

starts to address the challenges at hand as it starts to

create the necessary working relationships required for

sustainable urban development as well as the governance

arrangements for preventions. It also (and importantly),

builds the knowledge, capacity and skills around all

dimensions of planning such that urban decision makers

can start to plan in advance.



PSUP key neighborhood planning recommendations for transforming slums incrementally and sustainably In light of the discussion thus far and in view of UN-Habitat’s

commitment to promote participatory, incremental, city-wide

slum upgrading, the following PSUP recommendations are

suggested for sustainable neighborhood planning design.

1. Planning Design Recommendation 1: Give more recognition and emphasis to the provision of

multi-dimensional public/common good space for socio-

economic development (for livelihoods, cultural expression

and social networks), provision of utility and waste

management infrastructure and mobility.

�� Strengthen the link between roads, sidewalks and

utilities infrastructure (as opposed to highlighting just

streets, sidewalks and recreation spaces) as well as

the connections points for formal and informal public

transport systems.

�� Highlight the space for community /social services and

space for recreation, public gathering and cultural

activities.

�� Recognize and preserve the flexible, multi-use nature of

these spaces.

2. Planning Design Recommendation 2:

Recognize overcrowding in many slum and other informal

settlement contexts but in the context of the broader urban

environment for equitable development.

�� Recent data shows that the average density in large

urban areas worldwide is between 4,000-10,000 persons

per square kilometer (51.4%). Additionally 18.3% live

in slightly higher density urban settings (10,000,20,000

persons per square kilometer – of which most tend to be

in developing country urban areas11. The key consideration

in slum and informal settlement upgrading in regard to

density, is to reduce overcrowding and start to promote a

city-wide approach to density that ensures a more equitable

distribution of the urban form which doesn’t fall unfairly on

the most vulnerable or privilege certain groups according to

their socio-economic status.

11 Dempgraphia(2016).WorldUrbanAreas.12thAnnualEdition:2016-04.

�� To promote equitable development, consider the density

of people per km² alongside considerations of both the

building coverage (say of >50 per cent) with a FAR (say

of 1.5 plus). This can help balance vertical and horizontal

building distribution – if applied at a city-wide scale.

�� Promote a minimum of 2-storey development in slum and

other informal settlement areas. These neighborhoods are

often naturally dense, however, they are often not so dense

in terms of the horizontal built-up area and lack vertical

development.

�� Consider the development of a density range (so both a

minimum and maximum) and the importance of and its

application across the whole urban context to achieve

equity and sustainability.


Recognize and preserve the already existing mixed land use

in slums and other informal settlements.

�� Give greater emphasis to preserving the existing mixed

land use and facilitate security of tenure, to strengthen

livelihood and informal economy activities in slums and

informal settlements. Aligning principles 1 and 3 will help

facilitate this.

�� Emphasize a mix of uses within the urban built up

space including residential, livelihood activities and

other economic use recognizing that in some areas the

percentage of residential might be slightly higher or lower

depending on the dynamics of the area and the current

regulations.

�� Combine preservation and upgrading with mechanisms to

integrate the slum and informal settlement activities into

the broader urban fabric.

�� Where feasible and safe, preserve and facilitate mixed use

within the home space, i.e preserve the overlapping uses

of livelihood/economic and residential with some facility to

ensure a safe and not over crowded residential component.

�� Discourage any area that is 100% residential.


Recognize and preserve the current social mix and diversity

in slums.



�� Promote social mix in slums and other informal settlements

to foster inclusion and diversity.

�� Promote the availability of houses in different price ranges

and tenure types accommodate different income ranges

and socio-economic diversity

5. Planning Design Recommendation 5: Recognize the

multiple land uses of slums and informal settlements and

the rarity of single function blocks/land-use specializations.

�� The multi-dimensional activity on blocks should be understood

and preserved as positive elements both within slums and

other informal settlements and in terms of contributing to the

dynamism of the broader urban environment. This principles

also contribute to Principle 3 and 4.


Promote climate resilient design.

�� Encourage the enactment or incorporation of climate

resilient features in the local planning design and housing

structures.

�� Facilitate the development of zoning laws, detailed

planning regulations and land-use plans ensure

that housing is only built in non-hazardous areas

(environmentally and geographically).

Table 2 below provides a summary of the recommendations

for neighborhood planning design in slums.

Table II - Detailed additional planning recommendations and actual situation in slumsRecommendation Indicator Current range in percent Tangible Benefits

PDR I Street & Land-use Recommended range: 30-45% LED/cul tura l express ion/

Multifunction streets mobility ( sidewalks / roads / streets) 0-10% mobi l i ty+inter-ci ty

(unbuilt space) util ity (sewege/ streetlight etc.) 0-5% connectedness /safety

public services (hospitals, parks etc. 0-5%

High Density / Recommended range 40-70% LED/energyeffiecient

Planning Design Slums: vertical 80-90% (BC=100% / FAR=1) affordabi l i ty/safety/

Recommendation II horizontal 80-100% (BC=50% / FAR=1.5) increased access ibi l i ty

Density InformalSettlement:vertical 0-15% (BC=50% / FAR=1) affordabi l i ty/safety/ horizontal 80-100% (BC=50 / FAR=1.5) increased access ibi l i ty

Planning Design Recommended Mixed-use range: 55-70% LED/Safety/

Recommendation III economicaluse/informaleconomy 60-90% gendersens i tivi ty/

Mixed-use built space residentialuse(exclusive) 10-30% conserves land

Planning Design Single tenure 80-100% inclus ivecommunities /

Recommendation IV Socio-economic diversity 15-40% encourages divers i ty/

Social Mix Identity Mix 50-80% s trengthen socia l netwerk

PDR V Single Block Function 0-10% community level invest. in

Limited land-use Secure tenure 0-10% hous ing and neighborhood

specilaisation investments /LED

PDR VI s trenghten cl imate res i l ience

Resilient Design and prevention planning

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Percentage

* recognizing that residential spaces are also used for livelihood / LED activities

KeyPDR Planning Design Recommendation

Current range for slumsRecommended range 5 priciples - PSUP additionsRecommended range following current 5 planning priciplesOverlap of current and recommended rangeFlexibilty for multi-use

BC= Building coverageFAR= Floor Area Ratio

Table 2: PSUP recommendations for sustainable neighborhood planning design12.

12 ThankstoKatharinaManeckeforhersubstantivetechnicalinputsintothisdocument.HanneVrebosalsomadeinputsintoanearlyversionofthedocument.



Concluding commentsSlum and other informal settlements are different from formal

urban areas. While they are often considered deprived spaces

and clearly lack many basic and essential infrastructure and

services, they also contain elements that can be preserved and

that indeed, could add a dynamic dimension if incorporated

into the rest of the urban environment. Slum and informal

settlement dwellers arguably have a right as well as capacity,

skills and knowledge that can be harnessed through such city-

wide integration efforts. Local planning and design can be an

important step to facilitating those connections.

The recommendations for upgrading projects outlined in this

document, are aimed to guide technical practitioners as well

as urban managers – including those community leaders who

are often on the ground in local neighbourhoods making

key design decisions. They provide guidelines which support

and promote improve local amenity, physical design as well

as key socio-economic and cultural outcomes – strengthened

economic development, safety, the functional provision of

basic services and improved mobility.

The table in the following pages outlines the rationale behind

the recommendations. It draws on the experience from the

Participatory Slum Upgrading Programme and outlines some

observations for each proposed recommendation as well as

facts and figures from urban centres in developing country

contexts. Column three re-states the PSUP recommendation

including broad and specific guidelines and column four then

proposes some associated urban planning implementation

actions.

08

Tab

le 5

: Rat

iona

le b

ehin

d t

he d

evel

op

men

t o

f th

e P

SUP

nei

ghb

orh

oo

d p

lann

ing

des

ign

reco

mm

end

atio

ns.

The

tabl

e al

so p

rovi

des

sugg

estio

ns f

or a

ssoc

iate

d im

plem

enta

tion

actio

ns.

Obs

erva

tion

s fr

om c

ount

ry le

vel w

ork

on p

ublic

spa

ce

and

com

mon

are

asSo

me

exam

ples

PSU

P Im

plem

enti

ng R

ecom

men

dati

ons

for

sust

aina

ble,

par

tici

pato

ry, c

ity-

wid

e sl

um u

pgra

ding

and

pr

even

tion

and

the

dev

elop

men

t of

a n

’hoo

d de

sign

pla

nA

ssoc

iate

d U

rban

Pl

anni

ng im

plem

enta

tion

ac

tion

s

Slum

s ar

e of

ten

lack

ing

in a

dequ

ate

spac

e fo

r pu

b-lic

/ co

mm

on g

ood

activ

ities

. Thi

s in

clud

es s

pace

for

liv

elih

ood

activ

ity, m

eetin

g sp

ace,

cul

tura

l exp

res-

sion

and

rec

reat

ion.

It a

lso

incl

udes

ade

quat

e sp

ace

for

mob

ility

and

inte

r ur

ban

conn

ectio

ns r

epre

sent

-ed

in a

sho

rtag

e of

roa

ds/s

tree

t, s

idew

alk

as w

ell a

s sp

ace

for

publ

ic u

tiliti

es. A

ll th

ese

spac

es a

nd t

heir

uses

req

uire

att

entio

n in

pla

nnin

g an

d de

sign

. Pu

blic

spa

ce o

ften

pla

ys m

ultip

le r

oles

in s

lum

s w

here

pub

lic a

nd p

rivat

e di

men

sion

s ov

erla

p. D

e-pe

ndin

g on

the

tim

e of

day

and

day

of

the

wee

k,

com

mon

are

as a

re u

sed

for

mob

ility

, liv

elih

ood

gene

ratio

n, u

tility

fun

ctio

ns, b

oth

indi

vidu

al a

nd

colle

ctiv

e an

d re

crea

tion.

The

mul

ti-di

men

sion

ality

of

pub

lic s

pace

sho

uld

be u

nder

stoo

d an

d th

e po

si-

tive

elem

ents

– e

spec

ially

in r

elat

ion

to li

velih

ood

gene

ratio

n, r

ecre

atio

n an

d sa

fety

- p

rese

rved

.‘P

ublic

spa

ce’ c

an b

e a

cont

entio

us t

erm

in s

lum

s.

The

divi

sion

bet

wee

n th

e ‘p

ublic

’ and

‘priv

ate’

is

ofte

n fle

xibl

e co

mpa

red

with

oth

er u

rban

are

as a

nd

spac

es a

re a

lso

cont

este

d an

d ap

prop

riate

d. P

ublic

sp

ace

tend

s to

be

unde

rsto

od m

ore

in t

erm

s of

its

‘use

val

ue’ t

han

as a

fixe

d en

tity

in it

s ow

n rig

ht.

Land

for

pub

lic s

pace

is a

lso

high

ly c

onte

sted

and

sy

mpt

omat

ic o

f br

oade

r po

litic

al in

tere

sts

and

land

m

anag

emen

t dy

sfun

ctio

n. T

he g

over

nanc

e ar

-ra

ngem

ents

aro

und

land

mus

t be

cle

arly

con

nect

ed

with

pla

nnin

g de

sign

pro

posa

ls in

slu

ms

in r

elat

ion

to p

ublic

/com

mon

spa

ce.

Mos

t sl

um d

wel

lers

ten

d to

wal

k an

d do

n’t

own/

use

priv

ate

cars

. The

roa

d/st

reet

, sid

ewal

k co

nfigu

-ra

tion

mus

t co

nsid

er a

ll us

es–

espe

cial

ly li

velih

ood

gene

ratio

n -

and

thus

wha

t m

obili

ty s

truc

ture

s ar

e ap

prop

riate

and

will

con

nect

to

the

rest

of

the

city

. Prio

ritiz

ing

one

type

ove

r th

e ot

her

shou

ld b

e av

oide

d.

Spac

e fo

r ut

ility

and

ser

vice

infr

astr

uctu

re is

oft

en

mis

sing

in s

lum

env

ironm

ents

(rep

rese

ntin

g so

me

of t

he k

ey d

epriv

atio

ns).

Stre

ets

shou

ld f

urth

er b

e un

ders

tood

as

‘fac

ilita

-to

rs’ f

or e

ffec

tive

utili

ty a

nd s

ervi

ce in

fras

truc

ture

so

that

a w

iden

ed r

oad

netw

ork

is a

lso

perh

aps

bett

er

acce

pted

in s

lum

upg

radi

ng a

ctiv

ities

.C

onsi

der

an in

crem

enta

l app

roac

h in

clud

ing

a la

w-

ful r

eloc

atio

n pr

oces

s if

nece

ssar

y.30

% f

or s

tree

ts/r

oads

/sid

ewal

ks a

lone

is a

‘big

ju

mp’

– in

ter

ms

of c

ost,

dis

rupt

ion,

man

agem

ent

of a

pro

cess

- f

or g

over

nmen

ts a

nd o

ther

sta

ke-

hold

ers

in s

lum

upg

radi

ng p

roje

cts.

Nai

robi

: Cor

e: 1

1,5

%

with

7,3

km

str

eet/

km2

Nai

robi

: Tot

al: 3

,8 %

w

ith 7

,3 k

m s

tree

t/km

2

Kib

era:

3%

of

land

al-

loca

ted

to s

tree

ts/r

oads

. Li

mite

d sp

ace

allo

cate

d fo

r si

dew

alks

.Ba

ngui

ove

rall:

6%

1D

akar

: Cor

e: 8

.0 %

w

ith 7

,7km

str

eet/

km2

Med

ellin

: Cor

e: 2

5,2

%

with

18,

1 km

str

eet/

km2

Med

ellin

: Tot

al: 1

6,6

%

with

11,

9 km

str

eet/

km2

Sao

Paul

o: C

ore:

19,

5 %

with

16,

1 km

str

eet/

km2

Sao

Paul

o: T

otal

: 14,

5 %

with

12,

0 km

str

eet/

km2

Lago

s: C

ore:

14,

0 %

w

ith 1

3,5

km s

tree

t/km

2

Lago

s: T

otal

: 10,

0 %

Man

ila: C

ore:

15,

2 %

w

ith 1

9,5

km s

tree

t/km

2

Man

ila: T

otal

: 10,

0 %

w

ith 1

2,8

km s

tree

t/km

2

Cai

ro: C

ore:

15,

7 %

w

ith 1

5,7

km s

tree

t/km

2

Cai

ro: T

otal

: 11,

0 %

w

ith 1

1,0

km s

tree

t/km

2

Con

clus

ion:

Slu

m c

on-

text

s, a

long

side

oth

er

urba

n ar

eas

in m

any

LDC

, str

uggl

e to

ful

fill

any

publ

ic s

pace

/com

-m

on a

rea

requ

irem

ents

an

d ha

ve o

n av

erag

e 10

% f

or r

oads

and

st

reet

s. T

hese

con

text

s re

quire

the

pro

mot

ion

of a

ll fo

rms

of p

ublic

sp

ace.

1. P

rovi

de (p

ublic

/com

mon

goo

d) m

ulti

-use

spa

ce fo

r so

cio-

econ

omic

dev

elop

men

t (f

or li

veli-

hood

s, cu

ltur

al e

xpre

ssio

n an

d so

cial

net

wor

ks),

spac

es fo

r ut

iliti

es a

nd b

asic

infr

astr

uctu

re

and

mob

ility

Broa

d re

com

men

dati

ons:

Reco

gniz

e th

at s

lum

s ar

e of

ten

com

mon

are

a/pu

blic

spa

ce d

efici

ent.

Re

cogn

ize

the

man

y di

ffer

ent

land

-use

act

iviti

es w

hich

tak

e pl

ace

in t

he p

ublic

/com

mon

ar

eas

of s

lum

s so

a r

ange

of

spac

es r

equi

red

(str

eets

, sid

ewal

ks, s

pace

s fo

r m

arke

ts, s

talls

, et

c ).

Reco

gniz

e th

at t

he d

ivis

ion

betw

een

publ

ic a

nd p

rivat

e sp

aces

in s

lum

con

text

s is

not

de-

fined

and

tha

t m

any

activ

ities

, esp

ecia

lly t

hose

rel

ated

to

livel

ihoo

d an

d ec

onom

ic d

evel

op-

men

t, d

epen

d on

thi

s fle

xibi

lity

and

the

fluid

ity o

f th

e co

mm

on a

reas

. Su

ppor

t m

ulti-

func

tiona

l com

mon

are

as in

slu

ms

that

sup

port

man

y di

ffer

ent

activ

ities

w

hich

are

bot

h tim

e an

d da

y de

pend

ent:

Re

cogn

ize

the

gend

er d

imen

sion

to

publ

ic s

pace

as

wom

en f

ulfil

l bot

h ca

ring

and

fam

ily

rela

ted

and

livel

ihoo

d ac

tiviti

es. M

any

slum

s ha

ve s

igni

fican

t pr

opor

tions

of

fem

ale

head

ed

hous

ehol

ds w

hich

mus

t be

acc

ount

ed f

or in

pla

nnin

g fo

r pu

blic

spa

ce a

nd a

cer

tain

inte

r-fa

ce w

ith r

esid

entia

l esp

ecia

lly f

or w

omen

. Pr

omot

e co

mm

on s

pace

con

nect

ions

and

link

s vi

a st

reet

s, s

idew

alks

, liv

elih

ood

infr

astr

uc-

ture

(mar

ket

plac

es) t

o th

e re

st o

f th

e ur

ban

envi

ronm

ent.

Suc

h lin

kage

s ar

e cr

itica

l to

impr

ovin

g th

e liv

es o

f sl

um d

wel

lers

. Li

nk p

ublic

/com

mon

spa

ce w

ith a

ran

ge o

f ba

sic

infr

astr

uctu

re d

evel

opm

ent

requ

ired

in

slum

s (c

onsi

der

in t

erm

s of

the

5 d

epriv

atio

ns –

acc

ess

to im

prov

ed w

ater

, san

itatio

n fa

cili-

ties)

and

in t

erm

s of

how

it is

link

ed w

ith o

ther

bro

ader

urb

an in

fras

truc

ture

. For

exa

mpl

e,

link

utili

ty in

fras

truc

ture

with

sid

ewal

k/st

reet

/roa

ds, s

houl

d in

corp

orat

e dr

aina

ge f

or s

torm

w

ater

and

san

itatio

n, w

ater

, the

pro

visi

on o

f el

ectr

icity

and

str

eet

light

ning

. Thi

s w

hich

w

ould

als

o fa

cilit

ate

the

disc

ussi

on a

nd d

ecis

ion

mak

ing

arou

nd s

tree

t w

idth

and

tru

nk

infr

astr

uctu

re c

onne

ctio

ns f

or o

ptim

al in

tegr

atio

n to

the

bro

ader

urb

an f

abric

.C

onsi

der

the

diff

eren

t m

obili

ty r

equi

rem

ents

of

slum

dw

elle

rs in

the

sho

rt t

erm

(les

s ca

r fo

cuse

d, c

onne

ctio

ns b

etw

een

mai

n an

d se

cond

ary

road

s) a

s w

ell a

s th

e lo

ng t

erm

mob

ility

re

quire

men

ts f

or b

road

er u

rban

inte

grat

ion

(cap

acity

for

ran

ge o

f ve

hicl

es t

o pa

ss t

hrou

gh).

Se

curit

y of

ten

ure

and

land

gov

erna

nce

arra

ngem

ents

for

pub

lic s

pace

mus

t be

con

side

red

and

fact

ored

into

all

stag

es o

f pl

anni

ng a

nd d

esig

n pr

oces

ses.

Sp

ecifi

c re

com

men

datio

ns:

Prom

ote

the

curr

ent

prin

cipl

e 1

in t

erm

s of

the

mul

tiple

act

iviti

es b

eing

und

erta

ken

in t

hose

sp

aces

. Th

is w

ill h

ighl

ight

the

impo

rtan

ce o

f co

mm

on g

ood

area

s an

d ut

ility

/pro

sper

ity

func

tions

tha

t th

ey e

ngen

der/

resu

lt in

. C

onsi

der

revi

sing

the

cur

rent

30%

spa

ce d

esig

nate

d fo

r st

reet

s an

d an

effi

cien

t st

reet

net

-w

ork

- to

incl

ude

all c

omm

on s

pace

s. T

he g

ap b

etw

een

curr

ent

prac

tice

in u

rban

are

as w

ith

a hi

gh in

cide

nce

of s

lum

s an

d in

form

ality

and

the

cur

rent

prin

cipl

e, s

ugge

sts

that

30%

is

even

a s

igni

fican

t ju

mp

from

the

cur

rent

pra

ctic

e (1

0%) i

ndic

ated

in c

olum

n 2.

C

onsi

der

desi

gnat

ing

20%

for

str

eets

, sid

ewal

ks in

clud

ing

prov

isio

n fo

r dr

aina

ge c

hann

els

(util

ity f

unct

ions

), w

ith a

n em

phas

is o

n ad

ditio

nal s

pace

s fo

r liv

elih

ood

gene

ratio

n an

d lo

cal

econ

omic

dev

elop

men

t.C

onsi

der

desi

gnat

ing

10%

for

rec

reat

ion/

com

mun

ity s

pace

/ser

vice

s/fa

cilit

ies.

Con

side

r pr

eser

ving

an

agre

ed %

of

the

curr

ent

acce

ss c

onfig

urat

ion

to p

rese

rve

exis

ting

livel

ihoo

d ge

nera

tion

activ

ities

and

to

pres

erve

acc

ess

to h

omes

as

appr

opria

te.

Con

side

r a

regu

latio

n th

at p

rovi

des

a co

mm

on s

pace

with

in h

ighe

r de

nsity

bui

ldin

gs f

or

trad

ing

and

livel

ihoo

d ge

nera

tion.

Und

erta

ke a

n in

vent

ory

of p

ublic

spa

ces

incl

ud-

ing

info

rmal

live

lihoo

ds

via

a pa

rtic

ipat

ory

enu-

mer

atio

n pr

oces

s. G

ive

prio

rity

to u

nder

stan

d-in

g th

e ge

nder

dim

en-

sion

s an

d th

e w

ays

that

yo

uth

are

enga

ged.

Use

ob

serv

atio

n te

chni

ques

.M

ap t

he s

tatu

s of

util

-ity

, inf

rast

ruct

ure

cond

i-tio

ns a

nd o

ptio

ns t

o lin

k sl

ums

with

bro

ader

ur

ban

infr

astr

uctu

re.

Use

a p

artic

ipat

ory

plan

ning

pro

cess

to

unde

rsta

nd t

he h

is-

tory

aro

und

spac

e fo

r co

mm

unity

act

iviti

es t

o in

form

pla

nnin

g an

d ex

plor

e op

tions

exi

st f

or

law

ful r

eloc

atio

n.

Prio

ritiz

e se

curin

g co

mm

on s

pace

s fo

r th

e co

mm

unity

as

an

entr

y po

int

for

slum

up

grad

ing

activ

ities

. Th

is p

rom

otes

the

val

ue

of s

ocio

-eco

nom

ic a

c-tiv

ities

in s

lum

s an

d th

e ‘c

omm

on g

ood’

for

sus

-ta

inab

le u

rban

izat

ion,

pr

omot

es c

onse

nsus

bu

ildin

g, b

uild

s ca

paci

ty

in lo

cal c

omm

uniti

es

and

othe

r st

akeh

olde

rs.

Revi

ew p

lans

to

ensu

re

how

key

tra

nspo

rt n

et-

wor

ks a

nd b

asic

ser

vice

in

fras

truc

ture

can

be

conn

ecte

d to

slu

m a

nd

info

rmal

set

tlem

ent

cont

exts

for

city

-wid

e in

tegr

atio

n.

09

Obs

erva

tion

s fr

om c

ount

ry le

vel w

ork

on p

ublic

spa

ce

and

com

mon

are

asSo

me

exam

ples

PSU

P Im

plem

enti

ng R

ecom

men

dati

ons

for

sust

aina

ble,

par

tici

pato

ry, c

ity-

wid

e sl

um u

pgra

ding

and

pr

even

tion

and

the

dev

elop

men

t of

a n

’hoo

d de

sign

pla

nA

ssoc

iate

d U

rban

Pl

anni

ng im

plem

enta

tion

ac

tion

s

Obs

erva

tions

fro

m c

ount

ry le

vel w

ork

on d

ensi

ty

and

com

pact

ness

Som

e ex

ampl

esIm

plem

entin

g Re

com

men

datio

ns f

or p

artic

ipat

ory,

city

-wid

e sl

um u

pgra

ding

and

pre

vent

ion

Ass

ocia

ted

Urb

an P

lan-

ning

impl

emen

tatio

n ac

tions

Man

y sl

ums

and

info

rmal

set

tlem

ents

are

alre

ady

natu

rally

den

se e

nviro

nmen

ts a

nd p

rovi

de a

n ex

-am

ple

of t

he b

enefi

ts o

f hi

gh d

ensi

ty li

ving

for

the

re

st o

f th

e ur

ban

cont

ext.

How

ever

, som

e sl

ums

are

also

not

ver

tical

ly d

ense

an

d th

is c

ause

s se

vere

ove

r-cr

owdi

ng (a

t th

e ho

ri-zo

ntal

leve

l).Fu

rthe

rmor

e, o

ver-

crow

ded

slum

s ar

e of

ten

in s

tark

co

ntra

st t

o th

e lo

w d

ensi

ty in

oth

er p

arts

of

the

urba

n en

viro

nmen

t.

Nai

robi

: K

iber

a: 1

08,0

00 p

eopl

e/km

2Le

s C

ayes

, Hai

tii3:

City

: 7,

985

peop

le/k

m2

Slum

s: 5

3,28

8 pe

ople

/km

2A

ntan

anar

ivo,

Mad

a-ga

scar

4C

ity:1

5,44

1 pe

ople

/km

2St

udie

d sl

um: b

etw

een

33,1

40 –

89,

252

peop

le/k

m2

Dak

ar, S

eneg

al5

City

:29,

700

– 55

,530

peop

le/k

m2

Stud

ied

slum

: bet

wee

n 22

0,24

6 pe

ople

/km

2C

oncl

usio

n: m

any

LDC

ci

ties

are

alre

ady

way

ab

ove

the

reco

mm

end-

ed m

inim

um d

ensi

ty s

o th

is in

dica

tor

beco

mes

le

ss r

elev

ant

to t

hem

.

2. E

nsur

e eq

uita

ble

and

effic

ient

mul

ti-le

vel d

ensi

ty a

nd c

ompa

ctne

ss

Broa

d re

com

men

datio

ns:

The

key

cons

ider

atio

n in

slu

m u

pgra

ding

in r

egar

d to

den

sity

, is

to 1

) red

uce

over

crow

ding

an

d 2)

pro

mot

e a

city

-wid

e ap

proa

ch t

o de

nsity

tha

t en

sure

s a

mor

e eq

uita

ble

dist

ribut

ion

whi

ch d

oesn

’t f

all u

nfai

rly o

n th

e m

ost

vuln

erab

le.

Mor

e di

scus

sion

mig

ht b

e re

quire

d on

und

erst

andi

ng o

ptim

al d

ensi

ty r

ange

s an

d w

ould

su

gges

t th

at t

hese

mus

t be

acc

ompa

nied

by

cons

ider

atio

ns o

f eq

uity

. Re-

visi

t qu

estio

n of

de

nsity

ran

ges

cons

ider

ing

city

-wid

e de

nsity

dis

trib

utio

n an

d la

test

figu

res

on c

ity u

rban

de

nsity

.C

urre

nt fi

gure

is le

ss r

elev

ant

in s

ome

slum

s (a

t le

ast

15,0

00 p

eopl

e/km

2) b

ut b

oth

a m

ini-

mum

and

max

imum

den

sity

ran

ge w

ould

be

usef

ul t

o de

velo

p.

Revi

ew d

ensi

ty in

slu

ms

in t

erm

s of

bro

ader

urb

an d

ensi

ty n

orm

s. P

rom

ote

equi

tabl

e de

nsity

ac

ross

the

who

le u

rban

con

text

, con

side

red

at t

he c

ity-w

ide

scal

e to

man

age

over

-cro

wdi

ng

in s

lum

s.

Spec

ific

reco

mm

enda

tions

:If

the

dens

ity o

f 15

,000

peo

ple

per

km²

is a

gree

d, in

clud

e co

nsid

erat

ions

of

both

the

bui

ld-

ing

cove

rage

of

>50

per

cen

t co

mbi

ne w

ith a

FA

R of

1.5

plu

s as

the

urb

an d

ensi

ty f

orm

u-la

tion.

Thi

s ca

n he

lp b

alan

ce v

ertic

al a

nd h

oriz

onta

l bui

ldin

g di

strib

utio

n � i

f ap

plie

d at

a

city

-wid

e sc

ale.

Prom

ote

vert

ical

den

sity

bot

h in

ter

ms

of fl

oor

area

rat

io (2

plu

s fo

r ve

rtic

al, s

lum

dep

riva-

tion

defin

ition

of

over

crow

ding

mig

ht b

e us

eful

to

man

age

unsu

stai

nabl

e de

nsity

/).

Prom

ote

‘bui

ldin

g co

vera

ge’ o

f ar

ound

60%

whi

ch in

clud

es p

rivat

e an

d pu

blic

spa

ce).

Reco

gniz

e th

at s

lum

s ar

e al

read

y of

ten

usin

g sm

all p

lot

size

s an

d ar

e al

so c

onsi

dere

d ov

er-

crow

ded

so t

he s

lum

defi

nitio

n of

ove

rcro

wdi

ng m

ust

also

be

disc

usse

d al

ongs

ide

any

plot

si

ze fi

gure

. A d

wel

ling

unit

figur

e at

the

nei

ghbo

rhoo

d le

vel m

ight

be

usef

ul.

Con

side

r th

e ag

reed

slu

m d

epriv

atio

n de

finiti

on t

o re

duce

ove

rcro

wdi

ng in

slu

ms

(no

mor

e th

an 3

per

sons

to

shar

e a

room

).

Und

erta

ke p

artic

ipat

ory

enum

erat

ion

to u

nder

-st

and

hous

ing

dens

ity

type

s, h

ouse

hold

con

-fig

urat

ions

(int

ra-h

ouse

-ho

ld r

elat

ions

) and

thu

s ac

tual

slu

m d

wel

ler

num

bers

and

den

sity

di

men

sion

s.C

ompa

re c

urre

nt s

lum

de

nsity

with

city

-wid

e de

nsiti

es a

nd p

roje

cted

po

pula

tion

grow

th t

o in

form

fut

ure

plan

ning

.C

olla

te a

nd r

epor

t fig

ures

hig

hlig

htin

g an

y cu

rren

t de

nsity

div

ides

ac

ross

the

urb

an a

rea

city

to

info

rm p

lann

ing.

Map

cul

tura

l nor

ms

in

rela

tion

to b

uild

ing

de-

sign

s, u

sage

of

room

s,

land

and

sec

urity

of

tenu

re t

o in

form

den

-si

ty d

iscu

ssio

ns.

10

Obs

erva

tion

s fr

om c

ount

ry le

vel w

ork

on m

ixed

land

us

eSo

me

exam

ples

Impl

emen

ting

Rec

omm

enda

tion

s fo

r pa

rtic

ipat

ory,

cit

y-w

ide

slum

upg

radi

ng a

nd p

reve

ntio

nA

ssoc

iate

d U

rban

Pl

anni

ng im

plem

enta

tion

ac

tion

s

Slum

s ar

e al

read

y of

ten

very

mix

ed in

ter

ms

of la

nd

use

alth

ough

the

spa

tial/p

hysi

cal a

rran

gem

ent

is

ofte

n no

t or

gani

zed

and

mig

ht m

ask

the

rang

e of

ac

tivity

bei

ng u

nder

take

n.Ba

sic

serv

ices

and

sec

urity

of

tenu

re a

re o

ften

m

issi

ng in

slu

ms

and

prov

isio

n fo

r th

em a

lmos

t no

n-ex

iste

nt.

In m

any

slum

s, r

esid

entia

l hou

sing

exi

sts

alon

gsid

e lo

cal e

cono

mic

dev

elop

men

t an

d liv

elih

ood

initi

a-tiv

es o

r co

ntai

ns e

nter

pris

es w

ithin

the

hom

e sp

ace.

The

land

-use

in s

lum

s is

sel

dom

sta

tic a

nd o

ften

ch

ange

s ra

pidl

y, e

ven

depe

ndin

g on

the

tim

e of

th

e da

y. I

n m

any

inst

ance

s, t

he c

apac

ity f

or fl

exib

le

mix

ed la

nd u

se is

an

asse

t as

it r

espo

nds

to p

eopl

e’s

need

s, p

artic

ular

ly in

rel

atio

n to

live

lihoo

d ge

nera

-tio

n an

d ec

onom

ic d

evel

opm

ent.

Aro

rom

i, A

kure

, Nig

eria

: 2

8% r

esid

entia

l, 15

.6%

com

mer

cial

, 51

.7%

mix

ed, 5

.4%

pu

blic

, 0%

ope

n6

3. D

urin

g sl

um u

pgra

ding

pre

serv

e ex

istin

g m

ixed

land

use

incl

udin

g th

e in

form

al e

cono

my

activ

ities

, and

fac

ilita

te s

ecur

ity o

f te

nure

and

acc

ess

to b

asic

urb

an s

ervi

ces

to

inte

grat

e th

em in

to t

he b

road

er u

rban

fab

ric.

Broa

d re

com

men

datio

ns:

Giv

e gr

eate

r em

phas

is t

o pr

eser

ving

the

exi

stin

g m

ixed

land

use

and

fac

ilita

te s

ecur

ity o

f te

nure

, to

stre

ngth

en li

velih

ood

and

info

rmal

eco

nom

y ac

tiviti

es.

Com

bine

thi

s w

ith m

echa

nism

s to

inte

grat

e sl

ums

and

the

activ

ities

, int

o th

e br

oade

r ur

ban

fabr

ic.

Whe

re f

easi

ble

and

safe

, pre

serv

e an

d fa

cilit

ate

mix

ed u

se w

ithin

the

hom

e sp

ace,

i.e

pres

erve

the

ove

rlapp

ing

uses

of

livel

ihoo

d/ec

onom

ic a

nd r

esid

entia

l with

som

e fa

cilit

y to

en

sure

a s

afe

and

not

over

cro

wde

d re

side

ntia

l com

pone

nt.

Clo

sely

alig

ned

with

prin

cipl

e 1

and

3 be

caus

e in

slu

m a

nd in

form

al s

ettle

men

t co

ntex

ts t

he

divi

sion

bet

wee

n th

e ex

tern

al/in

tern

al/p

ublic

/priv

ate

is o

ften

blu

rred

and

the

use

of

spac

e co

nnec

ted.

The

live

ly, p

rodu

ctiv

e el

emen

ts s

houl

d be

und

erst

ood

and

pres

erve

d.

Spec

ific

reco

mm

enda

tions

:Pr

omot

e m

ultip

le la

nd u

se a

nd m

ixed

use

act

iviti

es w

ithin

the

30

to 5

0 pe

r ce

nt b

uilt

area

pe

rcen

tage

.

Dis

suad

e th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

are

as in

to m

ono

func

tiona

l spa

ces.

I.e

that

the

re s

houl

d ne

ver

be 1

00%

res

iden

tial a

nd t

he d

ivis

ion

betw

een

resi

dent

ial a

nd e

cono

mic

flex

ible

and

legi

ti-m

atel

y ov

erla

ppin

g in

som

e ci

rcum

stan

ces.

Map

for

mal

and

in

form

al la

nd u

se a

nd

com

pare

with

live

lihoo

d ac

tivity

.C

ompa

re w

ith n

’hoo

d an

d ci

ty-le

vel d

ata

to

unde

rsta

nd n

eeds

for

fu

rthe

r pl

anni

ng.

Prom

ote

build

ing

type

s w

hich

fac

ilita

te a

m

ixed

use

with

spe

cial

at

tent

ion

tow

ards

the

pr

ovis

ion

of s

pace

fo

r sm

all b

usin

esse

s cl

ose

to o

r w

ithin

the

ho

me

sphe

re/s

pace

(in

reco

gniti

on o

f w

omen

’s du

el r

ole

as p

rinci

ple

livel

ihoo

d ge

nera

tor

and

invo

lvem

ent

in c

are

wor

k in

man

y sl

um a

d in

form

al s

ettle

men

t co

ntex

ts).

Slum

s of

ten

exhi

bit

high

leve

ls o

f di

vers

ity a

cros

s di

ffer

ent

iden

tity

cate

gorie

s.

Div

ersi

ty in

slu

ms

is n

ot b

ased

sol

ely

on in

com

e le

v-el

s. T

hey

ofte

n co

ntai

n a

mix

of

ethn

ic g

roup

s an

d te

nure

sec

urity

typ

es, h

ouse

hold

com

pila

tions

and

si

zes

for

exam

ple

(tho

ugh

thes

e us

ually

fal

l out

side

of

the

cur

rent

lega

l fra

mew

ork)

. Th

is n

atur

al d

iver

sity

pro

mot

es a

deg

ree

of s

ocia

l m

ix. H

owev

er, c

ities

with

a h

igh

prop

ortio

n of

sl

ums

ofte

n re

flect

dee

p so

cio-

econ

omic

and

spa

tial

segr

egat

ion.

The

re is

als

o ve

ry li

ttle

mix

ing

of lo

w

cost

hou

sing

in t

he m

ore

afflu

ent

area

s to

fac

ilita

te

mix

ed a

reas

.

In K

iber

a, 1

0 %

7 an

d in

K

iand

i, 4%

ow

ns t

heir

hous

e or

sho

p8Tr

ibe

mix

in N

ai-

robi

’s K

iber

a: L

uo t

ribe

(50.

2%),

Kis

iis (1

5.8%

), Lu

hyas

(15.

1%),

Kam

-ba

s (9

.8%

) and

Kik

uyus

(5

.7%

)9M

ost

slum

s sh

ow t

hat

the

maj

ority

of

dwel

lers

ha

ve v

ery

limite

d or

no

secu

rity

of t

enur

e.

4. P

rese

rve

the

curr

ent

soci

al m

ix a

nd d

iver

sity

in s

lum

s an

d pr

omot

e so

cial

mix

in f

utur

e pl

anni

ng p

roje

cts

acro

ss t

he b

road

er u

rban

con

text

suc

h as

in u

rban

infil

l.Br

oad

reco

mm

enda

tions

:So

cial

mix

mus

t be

con

side

red

in a

mul

ti-di

men

sion

al m

anne

r –

and

incl

ude

cons

ider

atio

ns

of o

ther

typ

es o

f ca

tego

ries

beyo

nd in

com

e st

atus

. For

exa

mpl

e, t

enur

e ty

pes,

iden

tity

and

hous

ehol

d si

ze a

nd c

ompi

latio

n ar

e al

so u

sefu

l ind

icat

ors

of s

ocia

l mix

.Pr

eser

ve t

he p

ositi

ve e

lem

ents

of

dive

rsity

and

incl

usiv

ity in

slu

ms

that

alre

ady

exis

t ac

ross

di

ffer

ent

cate

gorie

s (c

ultu

re, a

ge, r

elig

ion,

eth

nici

ty, d

isab

ility

). U

nder

stan

d th

e lik

elih

ood

of f

emal

e he

aded

hou

seho

lds

as a

key

fea

ture

of

that

soc

ial m

ix.

Prom

ote

publ

ic in

fras

truc

ture

and

ser

vice

s th

at r

epre

sent

mul

tiple

iden

titie

s an

d ne

eds.

Faci

litat

e an

d pr

omot

e th

e in

tegr

atio

n of

thi

s di

vers

ity in

to t

he b

road

er u

rban

con

text

. C

onsi

der

the

impa

ct o

f fo

rced

evi

ctio

ns, r

eloc

atio

n an

d ge

ntrifi

catio

n on

soc

ial m

ix in

any

pr

opos

al (p

artic

ular

ly in

ter

ms

of s

kew

ing

the

soci

o-ec

onom

ic b

ackg

roun

d of

res

iden

ts).

Mix

soc

ial h

ousi

ng w

ith o

ther

for

ms

of h

ousi

ng t

o av

oid

clea

r in

tra-

neig

hbor

hood

spa

tial

segr

egat

ion

part

icul

arly

in in

fill p

roje

cts.

Sp

ecifi

c re

com

men

datio

ns:

Ensu

re a

pro

port

ion

of lo

w c

ost

hous

ing

acro

ss t

he w

hole

urb

an c

onte

xt (%

pro

port

ion?

). En

sure

the

pre

serv

atio

n of

cul

tura

l her

itage

, bot

h in

phy

sica

l for

ms

and

in-t

erm

s of

loca

l art

/m

arke

t ac

tivity

etc

and

hou

sing

des

ign

type

thr

ough

her

itage

ove

rlays

and

via

the

spe

cific

a-tio

n of

land

use

rig

hts

that

pro

mot

e la

nd r

emai

ning

in lo

cal h

ands

and

thu

s th

e pr

eser

vatio

n of

loca

l cul

tura

l her

itage

.

Und

erta

ke p

artic

ipat

ory

enum

erat

ion

to u

nder

-st

and

vario

us id

entit

y ca

tego

ries

and

com

pare

th

ese

to k

now

n ci

ty-

wid

e ca

tego

ries

Prom

ote

the

inte

gra-

tion

of s

lum

s dw

elle

rs

thro

ugh

livel

ihoo

ds,

prom

otin

g in

clus

ive

publ

ic s

pace

s, h

ousi

ng

mix

.Tr

ansl

ate

know

ledg

e in

to b

uild

ing

code

s an

d pl

anni

ng r

egul

atio

ns.

11

Obs

erva

tion

s fr

om c

ount

ry le

vel w

ork

on m

ixed

land

us

eSo

me

exam

ples

Impl

emen

ting

Rec

omm

enda

tion

s fo

r pa

rtic

ipat

ory,

cit

y-w

ide

slum

upg

radi

ng a

nd p

reve

ntio

nA

ssoc

iate

d U

rban

Pl

anni

ng im

plem

enta

tion

ac

tion

s

Slum

s ar

e al

read

y of

ten

very

mix

ed in

ter

ms

of la

nd

use

alth

ough

the

spa

tial/p

hysi

cal a

rran

gem

ent

is

ofte

n no

t or

gani

zed

and

mig

ht m

ask

the

rang

e of

ac

tivity

bei

ng u

nder

take

n.Ba

sic

serv

ices

and

sec

urity

of

tenu

re a

re o

ften

m

issi

ng in

slu

ms

and

prov

isio

n fo

r th

em a

lmos

t no

n-ex

iste

nt.

In m

any

slum

s, r

esid

entia

l hou

sing

exi

sts

alon

gsid

e lo

cal e

cono

mic

dev

elop

men

t an

d liv

elih

ood

initi

a-tiv

es o

r co

ntai

ns e

nter

pris

es w

ithin

the

hom

e sp

ace.

The

land

-use

in s

lum

s is

sel

dom

sta

tic a

nd o

ften

ch

ange

s ra

pidl

y, e

ven

depe

ndin

g on

the

tim

e of

th

e da

y. I

n m

any

inst

ance

s, t

he c

apac

ity f

or fl

exib

le

mix

ed la

nd u

se is

an

asse

t as

it r

espo

nds

to p

eopl

e’s

need

s, p

artic

ular

ly in

rel

atio

n to

live

lihoo

d ge

nera

-tio

n an

d ec

onom

ic d

evel

opm

ent.

Aro

rom

i, A

kure

, Nig

eria

: 2

8% r

esid

entia

l, 15

.6%

com

mer

cial

, 51

.7%

mix

ed, 5

.4%

pu

blic

, 0%

ope

n6

3. D

urin

g sl

um u

pgra

ding

pre

serv

e ex

istin

g m

ixed

land

use

incl

udin

g th

e in

form

al e

cono

my

activ

ities

, and

fac

ilita

te s

ecur

ity o

f te

nure

and

acc

ess

to b

asic

urb

an s

ervi

ces

to

inte

grat

e th

em in

to t

he b

road

er u

rban

fab

ric.

Broa

d re

com

men

datio

ns:

Giv

e gr

eate

r em

phas

is t

o pr

eser

ving

the

exi

stin

g m

ixed

land

use

and

fac

ilita

te s

ecur

ity o

f te

nure

, to

stre

ngth

en li

velih

ood

and

info

rmal

eco

nom

y ac

tiviti

es.

Com

bine

thi

s w

ith m

echa

nism

s to

inte

grat

e sl

ums

and

the

activ

ities

, int

o th

e br

oade

r ur

ban

fabr

ic.

Whe

re f

easi

ble

and

safe

, pre

serv

e an

d fa

cilit

ate

mix

ed u

se w

ithin

the

hom

e sp

ace,

i.e

pres

erve

the

ove

rlapp

ing

uses

of

livel

ihoo

d/ec

onom

ic a

nd r

esid

entia

l with

som

e fa

cilit

y to

en

sure

a s

afe

and

not

over

cro

wde

d re

side

ntia

l com

pone

nt.

Clo

sely

alig

ned

with

prin

cipl

e 1

and

3 be

caus

e in

slu

m a

nd in

form

al s

ettle

men

t co

ntex

ts t

he

divi

sion

bet

wee

n th

e ex

tern

al/in

tern

al/p

ublic

/priv

ate

is o

ften

blu

rred

and

the

use

of

spac

e co

nnec

ted.

The

live

ly, p

rodu

ctiv

e el

emen

ts s

houl

d be

und

erst

ood

and

pres

erve

d.

Spec

ific

reco

mm

enda

tions

:Pr

omot

e m

ultip

le la

nd u

se a

nd m

ixed

use

act

iviti

es w

ithin

the

30

to 5

0 pe

r ce

nt b

uilt

area

pe

rcen

tage

.

Dis

suad

e th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

are

as in

to m

ono

func

tiona

l spa

ces.

I.e

that

the

re s

houl

d ne

ver

be 1

00%

res

iden

tial a

nd t

he d

ivis

ion

betw

een

resi

dent

ial a

nd e

cono

mic

flex

ible

and

legi

ti-m

atel

y ov

erla

ppin

g in

som

e ci

rcum

stan

ces.

Map

for

mal

and

in

form

al la

nd u

se a

nd

com

pare

with

live

lihoo

d ac

tivity

.C

ompa

re w

ith n

’hoo

d an

d ci

ty-le

vel d

ata

to

unde

rsta

nd n

eeds

for

fu

rthe

r pl

anni

ng.

Prom

ote

build

ing

type

s w

hich

fac

ilita

te a

m

ixed

use

with

spe

cial

at

tent

ion

tow

ards

the

pr

ovis

ion

of s

pace

fo

r sm

all b

usin

esse

s cl

ose

to o

r w

ithin

the

ho

me

sphe

re/s

pace

(in

reco

gniti

on o

f w

omen

’s du

el r

ole

as p

rinci

ple

livel

ihoo

d ge

nera

tor

and

invo

lvem

ent

in c

are

wor

k in

man

y sl

um a

d in

form

al s

ettle

men

t co

ntex

ts).

Slum

s of

ten

exhi

bit

high

leve

ls o

f di

vers

ity a

cros

s di

ffer

ent

iden

tity

cate

gorie

s.

Div

ersi

ty in

slu

ms

is n

ot b

ased

sol

ely

on in

com

e le

v-el

s. T

hey

ofte

n co

ntai

n a

mix

of

ethn

ic g

roup

s an

d te

nure

sec

urity

typ

es, h

ouse

hold

com

pila

tions

and

si

zes

for

exam

ple

(tho

ugh

thes

e us

ually

fal

l out

side

of

the

cur

rent

lega

l fra

mew

ork)

. Th

is n

atur

al d

iver

sity

pro

mot

es a

deg

ree

of s

ocia

l m

ix. H

owev

er, c

ities

with

a h

igh

prop

ortio

n of

sl

ums

ofte

n re

flect

dee

p so

cio-

econ

omic

and

spa

tial

segr

egat

ion.

The

re is

als

o ve

ry li

ttle

mix

ing

of lo

w

cost

hou

sing

in t

he m

ore

afflu

ent

area

s to

fac

ilita

te

mix

ed a

reas

.

In K

iber

a, 1

0 %

7 an

d in

K

iand

i, 4%

ow

ns t

heir

hous

e or

sho

p8Tr

ibe

mix

in N

ai-

robi

’s K

iber

a: L

uo t

ribe

(50.

2%),

Kis

iis (1

5.8%

), Lu

hyas

(15.

1%),

Kam

-ba

s (9

.8%

) and

Kik

uyus

(5

.7%

)9M

ost

slum

s sh

ow t

hat

the

maj

ority

of

dwel

lers

ha

ve v

ery

limite

d or

no

secu

rity

of t

enur

e.

4. P

rese

rve

the

curr

ent

soci

al m

ix a

nd d

iver

sity

in s

lum

s an

d pr

omot

e so

cial

mix

in f

utur

e pl

anni

ng p

roje

cts

acro

ss t

he b

road

er u

rban

con

text

suc

h as

in u

rban

infil

l.Br

oad

reco

mm

enda

tions

:So

cial

mix

mus

t be

con

side

red

in a

mul

ti-di

men

sion

al m

anne

r –

and

incl

ude

cons

ider

atio

ns

of o

ther

typ

es o

f ca

tego

ries

beyo

nd in

com

e st

atus

. For

exa

mpl

e, t

enur

e ty

pes,

iden

tity

and

hous

ehol

d si

ze a

nd c

ompi

latio

n ar

e al

so u

sefu

l ind

icat

ors

of s

ocia

l mix

.Pr

eser

ve t

he p

ositi

ve e

lem

ents

of

dive

rsity

and

incl

usiv

ity in

slu

ms

that

alre

ady

exis

t ac

ross

di

ffer

ent

cate

gorie

s (c

ultu

re, a

ge, r

elig

ion,

eth

nici

ty, d

isab

ility

). U

nder

stan

d th

e lik

elih

ood

of f

emal

e he

aded

hou

seho

lds

as a

key

fea

ture

of

that

soc

ial m

ix.

Prom

ote

publ

ic in

fras

truc

ture

and

ser

vice

s th

at r

epre

sent

mul

tiple

iden

titie

s an

d ne

eds.

Faci

litat

e an

d pr

omot

e th

e in

tegr

atio

n of

thi

s di

vers

ity in

to t

he b

road

er u

rban

con

text

. C

onsi

der

the

impa

ct o

f fo

rced

evi

ctio

ns, r

eloc

atio

n an

d ge

ntrifi

catio

n on

soc

ial m

ix in

any

pr

opos

al (p

artic

ular

ly in

ter

ms

of s

kew

ing

the

soci

o-ec

onom

ic b

ackg

roun

d of

res

iden

ts).

Mix

soc

ial h

ousi

ng w

ith o

ther

for

ms

of h

ousi

ng t

o av

oid

clea

r in

tra-

neig

hbor

hood

spa

tial

segr

egat

ion

part

icul

arly

in in

fill p

roje

cts.

Sp

ecifi

c re

com

men

datio

ns:

Ensu

re a

pro

port

ion

of lo

w c

ost

hous

ing

acro

ss t

he w

hole

urb

an c

onte

xt (%

pro

port

ion?

). En

sure

the

pre

serv

atio

n of

cul

tura

l her

itage

, bot

h in

phy

sica

l for

ms

and

in-t

erm

s of

loca

l art

/m

arke

t ac

tivity

etc

and

hou

sing

des

ign

type

thr

ough

her

itage

ove

rlays

and

via

the

spe

cific

a-tio

n of

land

use

rig

hts

that

pro

mot

e la

nd r

emai

ning

in lo

cal h

ands

and

thu

s th

e pr

eser

vatio

n of

loca

l cul

tura

l her

itage

.

Und

erta

ke p

artic

ipat

ory

enum

erat

ion

to u

nder

-st

and

vario

us id

entit

y ca

tego

ries

and

com

pare

th

ese

to k

now

n ci

ty-

wid

e ca

tego

ries

Prom

ote

the

inte

gra-

tion

of s

lum

s dw

elle

rs

thro

ugh

livel

ihoo

ds,

prom

otin

g in

clus

ive

publ

ic s

pace

s, h

ousi

ng

mix

.Tr

ansl

ate

know

ledg

e in

to b

uild

ing

code

s an

d pl

anni

ng r

egul

atio

ns.

Obs

erva

tion

s fr

om c

ount

ry le

vel w

ork

on m

ixed

land

us

eSo

me

exam

ples

Impl

emen

ting

Rec

omm

enda

tion

s fo

r pa

rtic

ipat

ory,

cit

y-w

ide

slum

upg

radi

ng a

nd p

reve

ntio

nA

ssoc

iate

d U

rban

Pl

anni

ng im

plem

enta

tion

ac

tion

s

The

polit

ics

arou

nd la

nd in

urb

an c

onte

xts

with

hi

gh le

vels

of

info

rmal

ity p

ose

enor

mou

s ch

alle

nges

to

pla

nnin

g in

slu

ms.

Lan

d tit

les

and

secu

rity

of

tenu

re a

re o

ften

unc

lear

and

con

test

ed.

Slum

s re

pres

ent

a gr

oss

mis

s-m

atch

bet

wee

n cu

rren

t fo

rmal

land

sys

tem

s an

d in

form

al la

nd

right

s an

d se

curit

y of

ten

ure

syst

ems

whi

ch o

ften

un

derm

ine

the

need

s an

d rig

hts

of t

he p

oor.

The

se

need

s an

d rig

hts

are

com

poun

ded

by le

gal s

yste

ms

that

giv

e no

flex

ibili

ty t

o di

ffer

ent

secu

rity

of t

enur

e m

odel

s an

d al

so e

ntre

nche

d cu

ltura

l nor

ms

arou

nd

land

ow

ners

hip

as t

he m

ost

viab

le o

ptio

n fo

r se

cu-

rity

of t

enur

e.

Mos

t sl

ums

are

not

acco

unte

d fo

r in

for

mal

zon

ing

plan

s or

reg

ulat

ions

or

are

deem

ed t

o be

som

e-th

ing

else

. Whi

le s

ome

slum

s m

ight

app

ear

to h

ave

sing

le b

lock

fun

ctio

ns t

his

is n

ot r

elat

ed t

o a

sing

le

use

activ

ity. R

athe

r, th

ere

is m

ore

likel

y to

be

wid

e ra

nge

of a

ctiv

ities

bei

ng u

nder

take

n in

any

phy

sica

l bl

ock.

5. E

nsur

e ad

equa

te b

lock

s an

d pr

eser

ve m

ultip

le la

nd u

se.

Broa

d re

com

men

datio

ns:

Prom

ote

and

pres

erve

ade

quat

e bl

ock

size

s in

slu

ms

(defi

ne a

dequ

ate)

.Pr

eser

ve m

ultip

le b

lock

fun

ctio

ns a

nd t

he c

urre

nt m

ixed

land

-use

act

ivity

with

in t

hose

blo

cks

in s

lum

s to

pro

mot

e liv

elih

ood

gene

ratio

n, e

cono

mic

dev

elop

men

t, s

ocia

l and

cul

tura

l act

ivi-

ties

and

safe

ty m

easu

res.

Sp

ecifi

c re

com

men

datio

ns:

Prom

ote

mix

ed la

nd u

se z

onin

g as

per

prin

cipl

e 3.

Sing

le f

unct

ion

bloc

ks s

houl

d co

ver

less

tha

n 10

per

cen

t of

any

nei

ghbo

rhoo

d.

Use

par

ticip

ator

y to

ols

to u

nder

stan

d th

e ne

ighb

ourh

ood

land

an

d te

nure

situ

atio

n su

ch a

s th

e So

cial

Ten

-ur

e D

omai

n M

odel

and

pa

rtic

ipat

ory

enum

era-

tions

.

12

Obs

erva

tion

s fr

om c

ount

ry le

vel w

ork

on m

ixed

land

us

eSo

me

exam

ples

Impl

emen

ting

Rec

omm

enda

tion

s fo

r pa

rtic

ipat

ory,

cit

y-w

ide

slum

upg

radi

ng a

nd p

reve

ntio

nA

ssoc

iate

d U

rban

Pl

anni

ng im

plem

enta

tion

ac

tion

s

Clim

ate

chan

ge a

nd t

he im

pact

of

envi

ronm

enta

l co

nditi

ons

have

a s

igni

fican

t im

pact

on

som

e sl

um

cont

exts

and

man

y sl

um d

wel

lers

.Lo

cal p

lann

ing

desi

gn c

ould

hel

p st

reng

then

re

silie

nce

to c

limat

e ch

ange

thr

ough

the

con

side

r-at

ion

of c

limat

e im

pact

and

nat

ural

haz

ards

in t

he

upgr

adin

g ph

ase

and

in t

he d

evel

opm

ent

of t

he

city

-wid

e sl

um u

pgra

ding

str

ateg

y.Fo

cus

coul

d be

on

two

leve

ls. T

he lo

cal e

nviro

n-m

ent/

nei

ghbo

urho

od le

vel a

nd im

prov

emen

ts t

o th

e ph

ysic

al s

truc

ture

and

des

ign

of t

he h

ouse

. The

ne

ighb

orho

od le

vel

Slum

upg

radi

ng in

Sm

all I

slan

d St

ates

req

uire

par

-tic

ular

att

entio

n to

thi

s ch

alle

nge.

Smal

l Isl

and

Stat

es in

th

e Pa

cific

and

Car

ib-

bean

(Hai

ti) a

re p

art

of

the

slum

upg

radi

ng p

ro-

gram

me

in U

N-H

abita

t an

d ar

e ut

ilizi

ng lo

cal

mat

eria

ls a

nd d

esig

ns t

o im

prov

e in

fras

truc

ture

an

d ho

usin

g re

silie

nce.

6.C

limat

e co

mpa

tible

slu

m u

pgra

ding

and

pre

vent

ion

Broa

d re

com

men

datio

ns:

Con

side

r re

silie

nce

in t

erm

s of

1) i

mpr

ovem

ents

to

hous

ing

stru

ctur

es a

nd 2

) im

prov

emen

ts

to lo

cal c

omm

uniti

es a

nd n

eigh

bour

hood

s.In

stal

l zon

ing

law

s &

reg

ulat

ions

and

land

-use

pla

ns t

o pr

even

t th

at h

ousi

ng is

bui

lt in

ex

pose

d an

d ha

zard

ous

area

s 12

Dev

elop

rel

ocat

ion

polic

ies

and

stra

tegi

es t

hat

prev

ent

forc

ed e

vict

ions

. U

se w

ell k

now

n ap

proa

ches

suc

h as

the

“Bu

ild B

ack

Bett

er”

to g

uide

upg

radi

ng.

Spec

ific

reco

mm

enda

tions

:H

ousi

ng d

esig

n:C

onsi

der

key

aspe

cts

whi

ch p

rom

ote

clim

ate

resi

lienc

e:

Suita

ble

site

top

ogra

phy

(not

on

stee

p or

uns

tabl

e gr

ound

)bu

ildin

g or

ient

atio

n (E

ast-

Wes

t ax

is w

here

mai

n fa

cade

s fa

ce N

orth

-Wes

t),

posi

tion

(e.g

spa

ce f

or v

entil

atio

n in

tro

pica

l clim

ates

), fo

otpr

int

(allo

win

g fo

r gr

een

spac

e, r

ainw

ater

infil

trat

ion)

, dr

aina

ge (m

aint

aini

ng n

atur

al d

rain

age

patt

erns

), lo

cally

sou

rced

mat

eria

ls a

nd a

ppro

pria

te m

ix f

or s

tren

gth

(sel

ect

mat

eria

ls f

or c

limat

e zo

ne

and

ensu

re r

ight

mix

for

str

engt

h)sh

adin

g (d

epen

ding

on

clim

ate

- m

axim

izin

g s

hade

and

ligh

t)co

lour

s (u

se li

ght

colo

urs

to r

eflec

t he

at)

natu

ral v

entil

atio

n (m

axim

izin

g na

tura

l air

stre

ams)

, fo

unda

tions

and

roo

f (e

nsur

ing

suffi

cien

t de

pth

and

stre

ngth

of

foun

datio

n, a

nd s

uita

ble

roof

for

the

clim

ate)

11.

Prom

ote

wat

er c

atch

men

t of

f ro

ofs

and

prom

ote

loca

l ent

erpr

ise

for

affo

rdab

le t

anks

for

ad

ditio

nal w

ater

sto

rage

.U

se b

uild

ing

appr

oach

es t

hat

are

mor

e lik

ely

to p

rom

ote

dura

bilit

y in

tha

t co

ntex

t –

such

as

usin

g kn

ee b

raci

ng t

o en

hanc

e th

e fr

ee m

ovem

ent

of d

ebris

dur

ing

a st

orm

sur

ge12

.N

eigh

bour

hood

des

ign:

Build

app

ropr

iate

infr

astr

uctu

re f

or r

esili

ent

neig

hbor

hood

s an

d re

flect

ing

the

5 de

priv

atio

ns

on s

lum

s.C

onsi

der

key

aspe

cts

such

as:

ade

quat

e st

orm

wat

er d

rain

age,

dur

able

ele

ctric

ity a

nd f

resh

dr

inki

ng w

ater

and

dur

able

com

mun

ity b

uild

ings

. Ex

plor

e bi

ogas

opt

ions

for

loca

l was

te m

anag

emen

t an

d de

dica

te s

ite.

Con

side

r tr

unk

infr

astr

uctu

re t

o pr

ovid

e fo

r th

e ra

pid

entr

ance

/exi

t of

em

erge

ncy

serv

ices

an

d su

itabl

e dr

aina

ge o

f st

orm

wat

er f

or e

xam

ple.

Su

ppor

t in

stal

latio

n of

sui

tabl

e la

ndfil

l site

s an

d th

e re

gene

ratio

n of

tho

se a

lread

y in

pla

ce.

Con

side

r st

orm

wal

ls, b

arrie

rs a

nd a

dditi

onal

brid

ges

in w

ater

pro

ne a

nd c

oast

al a

reas

in

area

s su

bjec

t to

land

slid

es, b

uilt

and

man

aged

thr

ough

par

tner

ship

s w

ith lo

cal b

usin

ess,

co

mm

unity

and

gov

ernm

ent.

En

sure

com

mun

ity c

entr

e or

hal

l and

oth

er k

ey c

omm

unal

infr

astr

uctu

re s

uch

as lo

cal m

ar-

ket

infr

astr

uctu

re, w

ater

poi

nts

and

shar

ed t

oile

ts a

re g

iven

prio

rity

to r

obus

t st

ruct

ures

tha

t ar

e lo

cate

d in

a s

afe/

dry

part

of

the

neig

hbou

rhoo

d to

dou

ble

up a

s a

poss

ible

she

lter/

safe

ty

poin

t. C

onsi

der

sola

r lig

htin

g fo

r th

ese

com

mun

ity f

acili

ties.

Prom

ote

the

incr

emen

tal p

roce

ss o

f pu

ttin

g el

ectr

icity

cab

les

unde

rgro

und.

Und

erta

ke p

artic

ipat

ory

proc

esse

s to

und

er-

stan

d cl

imat

e im

pact

on

affe

cted

com

mun

ities

, to

lear

n ab

out

loca

l bu

ildin

g te

chni

ques

and

en

viro

nmen

tally

frie

ndly

av

aila

ble

mat

eria

ls a

s w

ell a

s to

fee

dbac

k in

form

any

re-

loca

tion

stra

tegy

.A

naly

ze lo

cal r

isk

miti

gatio

n st

rate

gies

, co

nstr

uctio

n m

ater

ials

an

d de

sign

fea

ture

s (f

or

both

hou

sing

and

oth

er

urba

n de

sign

).

Ado

pt a

ppro

pria

te

and

agre

ed c

limat

e re

silie

nce

targ

ets

in t

he

city

-wid

e sl

um u

pgra

d-in

g st

rate

gy.



BibliographyAndersen, J., Jenkins, P., & Nielsen, M. (2015). Who plans

the African city? A case study of Maputo: part 1 - the

structural context. International Development Planning Review, 37(3).

Calster, G. (2009). Neighborhood Social Mix: Theory, Evidence,

and Implications for Policy and Planning. Haifa.

Conference, I. L. (2015). Recommendation 204.

Recommendation concerning the transition from

the informal to the formal economy, adopted bythe

conference at its one hundred and fourth session, Geneva,

12 june 2015. Geneva.

Diacon, D. (1997). Slum Networking. An Innovative Approach to Urban Development. Leicestershire: Building and Social

Housing Foundation.

Martin, R. (2014). Best practice? Bare bones planning in

the Democratic Republic of the Congo. International Development Planning Review, 37(2).

Roy, A. (2005). Urban Informality. Toward an Epistemology of

Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 71(2).

UN-Habitat. (2003). Handbook on best practicies, security of tenure and access to land. Implementation of the habitat agenda. Nairobi: UN-Habitat.

UN-Habitat. (2004). Pro-poor land management. Integrating slums into city planning approaches. Nairobi: UN-Habitat.

UN-Habitat. (2008). Secure Land Rights for All. Nairobi: UN-

Habitat.

UN-Habitat. (2009). Global report on human settlements 2009. Planning Sustainable Cities: Policy Directions. Nairobi: UN-Habitat.

UN-Habitat. (2011). Quick guides for policy makers: housing the poor in African cities. Nairobi: UN-Habitat.

UN-Habitat. (2012). Urban Patterns for a green economy. Leveraging density. Nairobi: UN-Habitat.

UN-Habitat. (2013). State of the world’s cities 2012/2013 Prosperity of cities. New York: Routeledge.

UN-Habitat. (2013). Urban Planning for City Leaders. Nairobi:

UN-Habitat.

UN-Habitat. (2014). Streets as public spaces and drivers of urban prosperity. Nairobi: UN-Habitat.

UN-Habitat. (2014). Streets as Tools for Urban Transformation in Slums. Nairobi: UN-Habitat.

UN-Habitat. (2015). A new strategy of Sustainable Neighbourhood Planning: Five principles. Nairobi: UN-

HABITAT.

UN-Habitat. (2015). A Practical Guide to Designing, Planning, and Executing Citywide Slum Upgrading Programmes. Nairobi: UN-Habitat.

UN-Habitat. (2015). Build Green. Charter for Sustainable Building Neighbourhood Design and Urban Mobility in Tropical Countries.

UN-HABITAT, G. a. (n.d.). Global Land Tool Network. Retrieved from http://www.gltn.net/index.php/

component/jdownloads/finish/3-gltn-documents/2211-

participatory-and-inclusive-land-readjustment-a-brief-eng-

2015?Itemid=544

Watson, V. (2009). Seeing from the South: Refocusing Urban

Planning on the Globe’s Central Urban Issues. Urban Studies, 46(11).



Favela Paraisopolis 5 Streetscene Sao Paulo, Brazil. © World Bank

United Nations Human Settlements ProgrammeP.O.Box 30030, Nairobi 00100, Kenya;Tel: +254-20-7623120; Fax: +254-20-76234266/7 (central office)[email protected]

Ms. Kerstin Sommer, Slum Upgrading Unit Leader, Housing and Slum Upgrading BranchEmail: [email protected] [email protected] Tel: + 254 20 762 5519www.unhabitat.org/urban-initiatives/initiatives-programmes/participatory-slum-upgradingwww.unhabitat.org/psup and www.mypsup.org

www.unhabitat.org

participatory slum upgrading psup programme...informality and slums and other informal settlements....

Documents