Shuaib Lwasa

Department of Geography

Makerere University

Lwasa_s@asrts.mak.ac.ug

UGEC 2010 16th October 2010

Introduction

Understanding Institutions

Mechanics of institutions

Character of cities, actors and spheres of decision making

Innovation for sustainability

Conclusion

© 2007 David Sasaki

Urbanisation

Institutions are more than organizations and structure

Rules of engagement' determining the nature of relations, authority and power in decision making

Decision making spheres interwoven and diverse

Decisions for sustainable urban development; Action and or lack of such impacts urban systems

and people

Within a hierarchy and operating in many spaces

Decisions framed largely by legal instruments

Upstream and downstream relations

Traditional top-down but increasing evidence of “botto-up”

Constraint

Constraint

Noise

Noise

Scale

Macro-

Meso-

Micro-

Example

Household

Municipality

City council

Actors and spheres of decision making

Neighborhood

Municipality

Urban corridors

City

Valparaiso Chile: UGEC ViewPoints 4 October 2010

5 Municipal councils

1 city council

18 Ministries

3 Public transport operators

Two million dwellers

7 waste management companies

100 large industries

10 real estate operators 2 energy

companies

1 water supply company100s of

contractorsCivil society organizations

ResearchersLeadership in

knowledge generation

Elected Officials (national and

local)Wield power to guide decisions

City management

officialsStrategic and

routine guidance?

CommunitiesReceivers? Served? Adhere?

Private sector,

industrialistsInternational organizations

Formal and informal

Informality of the formal and formality of the informal

Decisions and planning policy; official, unofficial and official-unofficial

Slow policy response on sustainable development

Policy &Policy &SolutionSolution

CrisisCrisis

ManagementManagementAction as a FixAction as a Fix

AssessmentAssessmentor Pseudo? or Pseudo?

Report StoredReport StoredOn shelf On shelf

NextNextCrisisCrisis

Forgetting

• Innovation “change and or development of alternate systems enabling creativity based on local adaptation needs”

• Mainstreaming incentives

• Identifying leverage points; e.g. from projects to programs

• Redefining community role in decision making• Expansion of decision sphere? Side by side formal and

informal operations?

• Bridging the gaps between institutions: UNUF

Champions, tradeoffs and co-benefits

Multi-actor knowledge platforms and knowledge bases

Debunking the formal and informal rules

Redefining and pursuing common interests

Innovatively closing ‘capacity gaps’

Institutional adaptation

Caveats

Urban inclusiveness

Mainstreaming systems for maintenance and replacement

Responding to dynamics of demand and need

Understanding rules of engagement is important

The multi-actors and rules drive urban development programs to widely differing directions

Institutional innovation will have to involve creating spaces for the majority in decision making

Internal weaknesses of legally established institutions must innovate and attend to outcomes

Thank you