The new urban agenda and human rights cities: Interconnections between the global and the local

Abstract

As the level of governance closest to the city dwellers, local authorities have been called to play a protagonist role as implementers of global standards on human rights and sustainable development. The New Urban Agenda, a political declaration signed by all UN Member States, sets a human rights-based approach to policy-making and service delivery as a path towards inclusive and sustainable urban development. Remarkably, the document acknowledges that local authorities are responsible for protecting, respecting, fulfilling, and promoting the human rights of the inhabitants. However, gaps between the aspiring language of international commitments and their concrete impact on the ground have limited its potential to transform people’s lives. Nevertheless, all over the world human rights cities have pro-actively set the implementation of human rights as a core task in the municipality. By establishing practical links and synergies between human rights cities and the NUA, this paper suggests ways of filling implementation gaps, drawing a promising scenario for the realisation of both global and local agendas.

1. Introduction

‘In the making of human rights, it is the local that translates into global languages the reality of their aspiration for a just world’,

Upendra Baxi. ¹

Bringing human rights home starts with local action. It is on the ground where the impact of human rights realisation or their violation is felt. From this angle, Papisca has described local authorities as primary sources of protection of people’s needs as they are closer to the demands emerging from the grassroots than any other public actor. ² Consequently, city governments can be seen as having a duty to deliver ‘where nation states have failed’. ³

Cities bear the primary responsibility for delivering services which are intrinsically connected to human rights issues. As rule-makers, service providers, employers, and public and private contractors, local authorities share obligations and accountability for human rights compliance. ⁴ This vision has been acknowledged by the United Nations Human Rights Council Advisory Committee, which stressed that local authorities ‘are obliged to comply, within their local competences, with their duties stemming from the international human rights obligations of the State’. ⁵

In October 2016, heads of States and multiple actors from subnational and local governments, communities, civil society, academia, and the private sector gathered in Quito, Ecuador, for the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III). There they agreed upon an action-oriented declaration aimed to make us rethink the way we build, manage, and live in cities, as a guide for sustainable urban development. The New Urban Agenda (NUA) ⁶ is the first UN declaration which attributes direct responsibility to local authorities for protecting, fulfilling, respecting, and promoting human rights in all fields of local competence. As a means to localise the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the NUA leverages the role of cities and human settlements as drivers of inclusive and sustainable development.

With 175 paragraphs, the declaration proposes a new urban paradigm to better address city planning, financing, development, governance and management, placing inclusion at the centre of policy-making and service delivery as a means to achieve sustainable development in cities and human settlements in urban, peri-urban and rural areas. The set of political commitments included in the NUA aims at ending poverty and hunger, reducing inequalities, promoting inclusive economic growth, achieving gender equality, improving human health and well-being, fostering resilience, and protecting the environment.

The UN urban framework – that is the NUA and the 2030 Agenda combined –reflects a global trend that is highlighted in particular in SDG 11 (‘Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable’). By 2030, 60% of the world’s population will be living in urban areas. ⁷ Important elements of the international agenda, including issues such as economic progress, spatial planning, climate change and poverty eradication, therefore need to be addressed in cities. However, matching the diplomatic and aspiring language of international documents with the reality on the ground remains a great challenge. As local policy making is ‘rarely perceived as human rights implementation, neither by authorities, nor by the public’, ⁸ human rights remain distant as a frame of reference or analysis in most policies and often do not yet impact on the daily lives of city dwellers.

All over the world, self-declared human rights cities have tried to fill these gaps in implementation of international standards by becoming living laboratories for bringing human rights home. Setting human rights realisation as a core task in the municipality, these cities have connected decision-making and service provision to a non-discriminatory and cross-cutting practice, which prioritises the well-being of city dwellers and the promotion of their rights.

By finding practical links between important global strides and the central role that cities can play in ensuring that human rights are enjoyed by people around the world, this article analyses what human rights cities and the UN urban framework can learn from each other and how their interaction can design a promising scenario for the concretisation of both local and global agendas. By identifying these connections, this article aims to contribute to the broader debate on how to translate the UN urban framework into operational practice impacting people’s lives on the ground.

The article starts with an analysis of the human rights-based approach of the NUA and how different stakeholders at the international, regional, national, and local levels have interpreted the UN urban framework and provided tools for its implementation in cities. Then, departing from an explanation of different concepts and initiatives undertaken by human rights cities, this article indicates how their practices can contribute to the implementation and protection of human rights and foster more inclusive and cohesive policies at the local level. At the end, a few broader insights on means to establish better coordination between the local, regional and global levels, and on top-down and bottom-up approaches for making human rights operational are presented.

2. The new urban agenda: Human rights content, global and local interpretations and implementation prospects

The NUA acknowledges that sustainable development is not only a global but also a local issue and suggests a holistic and cross-cutting approach to the challenges of urbanisation, with human rights at the centre of the efforts. It implies that local authorities need to ensure policies and services that are inclusive and free from all forms of discrimination.

In the following sections, this article explores the human rights approach of the declaration and how different actors at the local, regional and international levels have interpreted its content. Means of implementation of the NUA’s framework are also analysed.

2.1. The human rights approach of the new urban agenda

During the revision process of the zero draft of the NUA, UN Special Rapporteurs made efforts to place human rights at the core of the agenda. ⁹ The problem-solving aspect of the NUA is anchored in the human rights-based approach (HRBA), which in general terms entails that ‘plans, policies and processes of development are anchored in a system of rights and corresponding obligations established by international law’, empowering people to participate in policy-making and demand duty-bearers to fulfil their duties. ¹⁰ Within this framework, participation, accountability, non-discrimination, equity, and consistency with international human rights standards are pivotal for delivering services that make sure no one is left behind.

Grounded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and informed by the Declaration on the Right to Development, the final version of the NUA calls for people-centred policies and services, which promote inclusion in its spatial, social, economic, political, civic and cultural dimensions (as in Paragraph 15c). The NUA urges local institutions to promote pluralism and peaceful coexistence in multicultural societies by strengthening social cohesion, intercultural dialogue and tolerance (as in Paragraph 40). In a clear reference to Article 2 of the UDHR, the document stresses that discrimination, and all forms of violence deriving from it, ought to be eliminated. ¹¹ Promoting respect for diversity is described as a key element for the humanisation of cities (as in Paragraph 26). These provisions are in line with Article 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which contains a general clause on equality, and with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD).

The NUA calls for the establishment of collaboration to ensure access of inhabitants to social infrastructure and services − such as adequate education, housing and health − and in particular for disadvantaged and marginalized groups (as in Paragraph 34). Thus, the NUA endorses the right of equal access to public service (as in Paragraph 14a). The right to adequate and affordable housing is presented as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living (as in Article 25 UDHR), with emphasis on the social and ecological functions of land (as in Paragraph 13a). Regarding the right to work (as in Article 23 UDHR), the NUA views decent employment as critical for access to economic opportunities (as in Paragraph 14b). In a reference to the right to participate in cultural life (as in Article 27 UDHR), the NUA defines social and cultural development as instruments of empowerment and ways of changing consumption and production patterns (as in Paragraph 10). Sustainable economic growth can leverage innovation and resource efficiency (as in Paragraph 13d).

For the first time in an UN agreement, the NUA acknowledges the right to the city. Conceptualised by the French Marxist philosopher and sociologist Henri Lefebvre, the right to the city (Le Droit à la Ville) is defined as a right to urban life, ¹² entailing the mutual process of shaping oneself and the city. It consists of a collective right of the inhabitants, particularly the most vulnerable, to equitable usufruct and democratic management of cities. Embraced by social movements in Latin America in the 1980s, the right to the city was finally codified in the World Charter for the Right to the City, in 2004. The charter defines the right to the city as the right to ‘equitable usufruct of cities within the principles of sustainability, democracy, equity, and social justice’. ¹³ The social function of urban property, ownership of the urban territory, and democratic management of the city through participatory elaboration and definition of public policies are cornerstone principles. Chueca has observed that the right to the city not only embraces internationally recognised human rights but could be considered as an ‘emergent human right’ as such which gives voice to marginalised groups. ¹⁴ Core standards of the right to the city underline some commitments that are also set forth in the NUA, for example, the protection and fulfilment of human rights at the local level without discrimination of any kind (as in Paragraphs 12, 20 and 28), social and ecological functions of land (as in Paragraph 13a) and absence of spatial segregation (as in Paragraphs 25, 27 and 95-97). ¹⁵ However, the NUA does not assert the right to the city as a universal right. Rather, it notes the efforts made by national and local governments to include the concept in legislation and political declarations (as in Paragraph 11).

2.2. Interpreting the NUA at global and local level

The NUA calls for a global partnership for development that upholds coordination between all levels of governance, with participatory decision-making and civic engagement, thus engendering a sense of belonging and ownership among inhabitants. It also makes a specific call for enhanced coherence within the UN system to generate evidence-based and practical guidance for the implementation of the declaration, as well as the urban dimension of the SDGs (as in Paragraph 128).

UNESCO, UNDP and UN-Habitat, three UN entities that played a leading role in the elaboration of the NUA, have interpreted its content according to their core competences. Different approaches to implementation of the NUA have been put forward by these entities as well as by other relevant stakeholders.

2.2.1. UNESCO’s initiative for inclusive cities

For the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the commitment of local authorities to non-discriminatory service provision is decisive for the implementation of the NUA and the SDGs under an HRBA. For this reason, UNESCO has revamped the strategy of its International Coalition of Inclusive and Sustainable Cities (ICCAR), an over 500-member platform organised around seven regional and national networks across the world to foster advocacy, awareness raising and the sharing of experiences among member cities. ¹⁶ The respective Ten-Point Plans of Action of each of the currently seven regional and national coalitions that have been formed under the umbrella of ICCAR create commitments among its members for the promotion of equality and non-discrimination in the areas of education, housing, employment and cultural activities. The platform aims to foster the sharing of knowledge and of good practices among its members and, for this purpose, offers tools, instruments and guidelines.

Nevertheless, the lack of enforcement for the implementation of the commitments can lead to lack of accountability, thus exposing long-term policies to budgetary restrictions and political changes. In this respect, multi-level governance efforts are required to ensure implementation. Reconciling the interface with national governments and the city level remains a challenge for UNESCO. Formal initiatives allowing Member States to work officially with UNESCO on matters of human rights at the local level need to be further strengthened. If formally supported by Member States, UNESCO’s work with cities would potentially have a larger impact on the ground. An important endeavour is the consolidation of all UNESCO city level networks (ICCAR, World Heritage Cities, Creative Cities, Global Learning Cities Network and Alliance for Megacities) as one urban platform. The UNESCO Cities for 2030 initiative emerged from intersectoral collaboration for Habitat III and is yet to be established.

City members of the European Coalition of Cities against Racism (ECCAR), one of the seven ICCAR regional and national coalitions, are guided by a Toolkit for Equality ¹⁷ which provides concrete guidance on the fulfillment of the Ten-Point Plan of Action within their municipal plans. The self-evaluation tool included in the toolkit contains twelve policy models for combating discrimination and fostering participation, drawing upon experiences shared by city governments, including the establishment of anti-discrimination offices and migrant councils, and monitoring mechanisms against racism. City administrations can also test their policies against 150 indicators to assess their effectiveness in terms of equal treatment, equal opportunities and inclusion. The toolkit could be a useful instrument for translating the NUA and SDGs into practice. The focal target on a non-discriminatory approach to policies and service provision meets the societal approach of the NUA.

2.2.2. UNDP’s strategic plan for local authorities

In 2016, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) launched the Sustainable Urbanization Strategy, ¹⁸ a package of integrated development planning services to support local authorities in the implementation of the SDGs and the NUA. It comprehends collaboration with governments, businesses and communities to address exclusionary policies that create spatial and social segregations and consequently have an impact on human rights. The main targeted areas are mobility systems, renewable energy, equitable social service provision, inclusive local economic growth, disaster-and risk-resilient systems and post-conflict recovery.

UNDP acknowledges that, whereas poverty has become extremely urbanized and its determinants increasingly influenced by urban conditions, vulnerability to climate change and disaster risks have been shaped by socioeconomic variants. Stressing that cities facing poverty, exclusion, and vulnerability cannot sustain a development trajectory unless they are inclusive, UNDP establishes clear ties between inclusion and sustainable development, thus highlighting their interdependence.

Whereas addressing poverty, provision of services, inclusive governance, resilience and recovery, and clean energy, UNDP’s 2016 Strategy lacks guidance on the practical instruments and specific expertise that local authorities need to develop to implement policies. The ‘how to’ component is further developed in the UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021. ¹⁹

2.2.3. UN habitat’s action framework for implementing the NUA

To explain the synergies between the 2030 Agenda and the NUA, the United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat) elaborated the Action Framework for Implementation of the New Urban Agenda (AFINUA). ²⁰ The Framework outlines 35 measures for the implementation of the urban dimension of the SDGs. Mechanisms to regulate the management of the public space, the design of urban plans, as well as financial sustainability and means of local implementation need to be developed ‘where they do not exist’ or need to be adapted ‘where they do align with the principles of the NUA’. ²¹

For UN-Habitat, bottom-up and top-down approaches may converge to deliver a more comprehensive application of inclusive sustainable development. This also requires support from national governments to enable city governments to access varied sources of funding.

UN-Habitat’s Action Framework makes a relevant contribution by detailing measures that are necessary for implementing the NUA and by connecting them to relevant SDG indicators. However, the Framework lacks clarity on how authorities at different levels should implement it practically. Monitoring mechanisms, accountability measures, and specific toolkits on policy-making and service delivery are not referred to in the document.

2.2.4. Other stakeholders

Other stakeholders have also interpreted and provided practical guidance on the implementation of the NUA. A growing landscape of official and informal city networks, movements and partnerships have addressed the implementation of human rights at the local level in light of the UN urban framework (for example, United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG), ²² the network of major European Cities EUROCITIES with its toolbox on anti-discrimination policies, ²³ and the Strasbourg Club which is a network of cities working on the place of citizens in local public policies ²⁴ ). Some of these actors focus on specific groups such as Rainbow Cities, the network of international cities concerned with LGBTI policies, ²⁵ or the Intercultural Cities programme of the Council of Europe which focuses on migrant and minority integration ²⁶ ).

At the European level, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe, the European Committee of the Regions, and the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) also play an important role in producing knowledge on legal obligations and awareness-raising on human rights issues. A key delivery mechanism for the implementation of the NUA is the Urban Agenda for the EU. ²⁷ The agenda aims at strengthening the urban dimension of EU policies, focusing on better regulation, funding and knowledge. It is an instrument of multi-level cooperation between Member States, cities, the European Commission and other stakeholders. The agenda prioritises twelve themes of urban development (such as inclusion of migrants and refugees, energy transition, and urban mobility). Each issue is dealt with by so-called partnerships composed by stakeholders at all levels. Each partnership drafts action plans that are submitted for public input before the elaboration of the final action plans.

By bringing various stakeholders together and promoting the exchange of experiences, these initiatives provide up to date and relevant frameworks that may assist local authorities in making commitments a reality. However, lack of enforcement can have a negative impact on accountability at the local level. Although relevant, these policies, instruments and mechanisms risk remaining good intentions with sparse implementation results.

2.3. Final considerations on the prospects for implementing the NUA

The NUA builds upon the 2030 Agenda and localises the broad issues covered by the SDGs. It goes beyond the stand-alone urban SDG 11 which calls for ‘detailing strategic actions necessary for ensuring that cities and human settlements, as the location of many development efforts’ support the implementation of the SDGs. ²⁸ Although the NUA does not address each SDG directly, it provides a broader set of means of implementation, covering topics such as national urban policies, spatial planning, local finance, and legislation. By identifying connections between different fields of local competence and addressing them holistically, the NUA links the SDGs to the broad human rights framework, fills gaps and establishes complementarities. All SDGs are interdependent and relevant to the local level. The realisation of human rights is an enabler for the enjoyment of the SDGs, as it crosses the interdependency of issues addressed by the 2030 Agenda.

The NUA is precise and specific on various urban issues, but it lacks details on how the local level should set up social, legal, and institutional structures that guarantee that commitments will actually be fulfilled. Rather, the NUA focuses strongly on strengthening the role of local authorities to act in general, with the support of national states.

Nonetheless, the general framework of the NUA opens room for interpretation on how its commitments relate to the SDGs and how better synergies between the NUA and the 2030 Agenda can be established. Despite apparent pitfalls, stakeholders can work to overcome these gaps and develop a more detailed and comprehensive action plan for making the NUA concrete at the local level. To succeed in this endeavour, the human rights-based approach needs to be embedded early on in the development of such policies and mechanisms.

Around the world, so-called human rights cities have interpreted existing international human rights norms in the light of the local needs, and applied the HRBA as a tool of local governance. In the next section of this article, the characteristics and achievements of these practices are explored in order to shed light on how these practices could contribute to the implementation of the UN urban framework. Ideas will be shared on how human rights cities could benefit from the guidance provided by the NUA and the SDGs. These result in a promising scenario for the concretisation of global urban agendas.

3. Human rights cities: Concrete action

Oomen has defined a human rights city ‘as an urban entity or local government that explicitly bases its policies, or some of them, on human rights as laid down in international treaties, and, in doing so, distinguishes itself from other local authorities’. ²⁹ From Rosario in Argentina, to the slum of Korogocho in Kenya; from New York City to Vienna, some cities have engaged with human rights and defined the scope of their commitments both as a social construction and practice. ³⁰

Self-declared human rights cities try to develop new methods to generate human rights solutions and infuse these into their daily work of governance and service provision. ³¹ Three pillars are behind the human rights city concept: societal development, a culture of human rights, and urban justice. Societal development refers to the interaction between the individual and other members of the society in a spirit of solidarity for the achievement of the common good. ³² For this purpose, a culture of human rights needs to be embedded in the urban space so citizens know their rights and the rights of others, and participate in rule-making demanding good governance. In a broader perspective, the establishment of alliances between urban actors and international organisations for the realisation of international norms at the city level paves the way for global urban justice. ³³

Drivers and concepts for the implementation of human rights at the local level differ. There is no single framework. Rather there is a variety of pragmatic approaches. The practices of human rights cities vary in accordance with: the approach applied (rights-based or advocacy-based), the instruments used and commitments taken (charters, local declarations, action plans), and the driving force(s) (civil society-initiated or government-driven). In terms of organisational setting, at least three models can be identified. First, there are cities which participate in intergovernmental initiatives (the horizontally-organised networking model) such as Seoul and Barcelona which are signatories of the Global Charter-Agenda for Human Rights in the City and the European Charter for the Safeguarding of Human Rights, respectively). Second there are local governments which cooperate with other levels of governance (the vertically-organised multi-level governance model) such as Boston. Third there are cities which decide to localise human rights by their own initiative (the stand-alone model) such as York. ³⁴

Based on the local human rights needs, each city has to develop its own identity. ³⁵ A clear and official commitment of local authorities, a budget and public policies that reflect the human rights commitment, and the engagement and participation of civil society actors in public policing are basic elements which shall be in place. Monitoring and reporting human rights mechanisms, local human rights institutions, and participation in a larger network of cities that prioritise human rights as a tool of governance are also important characteristics of a human rights city.

To make a difference on the ground, human rights cities need to go beyond minimum respect for human rights norms, delivering aspirations into action. Making human rights in the city concrete is not a static project. Rather, it is the result of tensions and of a continuing and permanent process of negotiation of rights within the municipality. Making human rights the talk of the town has potential to foster social justice at the local level. ³⁶ Local practices also reveal that certain events or situations should not happen in a city which works towards the achievement of a culture of human rights. As Starl has observed:

“A formal commitment makes the difference to other municipalities which probably comply with human rights standards, but do not declare human rights policy-making as a core task.” ³⁷

In practice, human rights cities apply a human rights-based approach to planning, implementation and evaluation, and have specific structures and institutions for monitoring, accountability and promotion of human rights. These cities also ‘build upon one of the key demands of the right to the city movement: participation of all stakeholders in urban matters’. ³⁸

3.1. Practical examples

The international non-governmental organisation People’s Movement for Human Rights Learning (PDHRE) was the first to coin the term ‘human rights city’ in 1997 when Rosario in Argentina was declared the first human rights city in the world. ³⁹ Over 100 representatives from local NGOs signed a declaration committing their actions to international human rights standards. Among the main initiatives implemented were human rights training for the police and training seminars on human rights for girls. In 2016, the city established a Municipal Human Rights Advisory Council (MHRAC) which holds monthly meetings, and a Human Rights Office within the municipality. ⁴⁰

The PDHRE kept up efforts to engage other cities with human rights learning and civil society empowerment, which helped to establish human rights cities in countries such as Kenya, Brazil, India and Canada. In Europe, following PDHRE’s methodology, ⁴¹ Graz became the first European human rights city by passing its human rights declaration in 2001. ⁴² In the document, politicians committed to take measures to institutionalise human rights in all areas of public life and to exchange this experience internationally as part of a larger network of human rights cities.

Evidently, the practice of human rights cities is not universal and there is no uniform formula to be applied by every city everywhere. Institutionalisation of human rights practices, monitoring and reporting mechanisms, human rights budgeting, and multi-level governance and international cooperation are tools in place in some human rights cities with recent or long-term practice records, as is detailed below. As further examples will demonstrate, these instruments are key to ensure the sustained implementation of human rights at the local level. They require active participation of civil society, the main driver of social change, and especially of organisations representing disadvantaged groups and addressing their specific needs.

3.1.1. Institutionalizing human rights

Whether government-driven or civil society-initiated, the establishment of human rights institutions is pivotal to ensure that the human rights agenda will be not ignored by local authorities. These bodies have the crucial role of formalising human rights implementation as a core task within the city administration, as well as securing that the human rights perspective is embedded in policy-making.

In general, human rights advisory bodies or councils make recommendations to the municipality and assume monitoring tasks (for example, in Graz), whereas human rights offices are part of the city administration. Vienna, which declared itself a human rights city in 2014, established the Human Rights Office as a municipal department charged with promoting human rights in specific fields and for specific groups in vulnerable situations, as well as with coordinating human rights as a cross-cutting topic in all areas relevant to the Vienna City Administration. The Human Rights Office is also responsible for promoting round table meetings with relevant stakeholders, developing targeted measures to attend the needs of socially marginalised people, and fostering a culture of human rights among the population, the police, and the judiciary. ⁴³

In Graz, the human rights city initiative is pushed forward in close cooperation with civil society. The Municipal Human Rights Council (MHRC) is an advisory body formed by 30 representatives from academia, the media, NGOs, religious groups, political parties, and women’s, children’s and disabled people’s organisations. It provides advice to the municipality and publishes an annual human rights report. The council is permanent and independent, proposes members, and sets its own agenda. ⁴⁴ The establishment of the MHRC allowed the initial top-down policy expressed in the political human rights declaration to be complemented by a bottom-up approach towards a cooperative implementation model. The document asserts that local authorities will guide their actions by international human rights principles and will inform inhabitants, in particular young people, about ‘the established codes of human rights and about the rights and obligations derived therefrom’. Moreover, it acknowledges ‘human rights must not remain an abstract concept but must be translated into reality in the daily behaviour of human beings’. ⁴⁵

In 2001, when Graz became a self-declared human rights city, the municipality already had a Peace Office, established in 1991, and a Migrant’s Office, created in 1998. However, these efforts were not seen as human rights work. ⁴⁶ With the progressive consolidation of the human rights label, existing initiatives were brought under the human rights scope. In 2006, an Interreligious Dialogue was established, as well as a Women’s Ombudsman in 2009, and an Anti-Discrimination Office in 2012. A major milestone was the accession of Graz to ECCAR in 2006, with the adoption of the Ten-Point Plan of Action. ⁴⁷

Judicial and extra-judicial review mechanisms have the role of ensuring accountability at the local level, although these are not necessarily considered as human rights mechanisms. Anti-discrimination offices are tasked to operate as an ombudsman (complaint mechanism) and to offer free legal aid to victims of discrimination. The Anti-Discrimination Office of Styria, based in Graz, offers support and information for victims regarding cases within the scope of the European Convention on Human Rights and the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights. In the province of Barcelona (Spain), extrajudicial conflict resolution mechanisms such as mediation offices and local ombudspersons are run by NGOs. The Seoul Human Rights Ombudsperson Office is charged with advising and investigating violations of human rights related to the administrative performance of the Seoul municipality (through complaints). The office issued its first recommendation in 2013 on tackling discrimination against workers with minor convictions. ⁴⁸ The Human Rights Ordinance of Seoul ⁴⁹ adopted in 2012 is the main document for protecting the rights of citizens, along with ordinances on the rights of persons with disabilities and on the rights of children and youth. The Human Rights Ordinance obliges the Mayor of Seoul ‘to establish and implement a human rights policy plan every five years for the realization of a human rights city’, with specific programmes, projects and secured funding. ⁵⁰

Human rights cities can also engender legal action with active participation of the civil society. In 2001, the Municipal Council of Graz engaged local civil society and academia against a security law which provided for a general ban on begging in public spaces in the State of Styria. Protests were called, and by assuming the role of beggars academics and students tried to convey understanding for the difficult position of beggars. They begged on the streets to sensitise the public about the consequences of the prohibition. The case was brought before the Austrian Constitutional Court, which decided in December 2012 that the general ban was unconstitutional. The mobilisation resulted in a comprehensive strategy to address poverty ‘instead of fighting the poor’. ⁵¹

Zurich (Switzerland) does not carry the human rights city label, but has good practices in human rights accountability. The city applies the Swiss Anti-Racism legislation, which is in force since 1995 and forbids specific and severe forms of racism in the public space as in Article 261. The legislation has led to about 600 prosecutions in the country. Zurich’s constitution foresees a human rights ombudsman office with wide-ranging competencies, such as the investigation and prosecution of human rights violations by public authorities including the police. ⁵²

A useful parameter to measure the effectiveness of human rights institutions is the difference and positive change made on the ground, is to assess how active they are, who decides what has to be done and, most importantly, to what extent these institutions can engage with reporting and monitoring tools and get heard by the municipality. The inclusion of members of political parties in such bodies is positive for generating ownership and a sense of co-responsibility with the human rights city project among the local authorities. Therefore, human rights mainstreaming initiatives within city departments targeting public officers are of crucial importance to the overall initiative of a human rights city. Eventually, human rights institutions established within a municipality may be told by local authorities what they should or should not do, resulting in these institutions not being sufficiently active and critical. As stressed by Van den Berg, ‘if the partnership between local government and civil society threatens civil society’s independence, it runs the risk of becoming an instrument of local policy’. ⁵³

The bureaucratization of the human rights practice in the city is also a risk. Steering group meetings should not become debate clubs with mere rhetoric. Where human rights issues are discussed, concrete steps to achieve results and to promote change need to be undertaken. Human rights offices, councils and advisory bodies need strong leadership and critical management. In this light, the inclusion of members of political parties in human rights advisory bodies usually is positive to generate ownership and a sense of co-responsibility of local authorities with the human rights city project.

3.1.2. Monitoring mechanisms

The 2030 Agenda calls ‘for a data revolution for sustainable development which upholds human rights’, ⁵⁴ with particular attention to disadvantaged groups. Regular monitoring of the performance of NGOs and local public institutions is crucial. The Platform of Human Rights of Salzburg (Austria) has published a human rights report (Salzburger Menschenrechtebericht) ⁵⁵ since 2003 and attracted the attention of the local media to the human rights perspective on issues such as poverty, migration, and cultural rights. The network of over thirty NGOs makes recommendations to the municipality and submits sensitive issues to the Round Table for Human Rights, formed by experts. ⁵⁶

Graz employs two different monitoring instruments, namely the annual human rights report and election campaign monitoring. The annual human rights report collects facts, deficiencies, good practices and recommendations from over 250 respondents, including authorities, civil society, and academia. The working group of the MHRC, assisted by ETC, contacts all departments of the city administration to verify what they did to address the most sensitive problems, based on the recommendations made in the previous reports. The annual report is structured along the articles of the UDHR and gives a comprehensive picture of the state of human rights in the city. The reporting mechanism is an important instrument to keep up the negotiation of the human rights agenda within the city departments. It makes an impact on the ‘human rights literacy of the city officials, as well as on the human rights awareness within the population’. ⁵⁷

The establishment of a monitoring mechanism of municipal electoral campaigns to tackle discrimination and xenophobia was a great achievement in Graz as well. The municipal council collects campaigning material, analyses it against human rights standards and publishes a report on all political discourses of the campaigning parties. In case of violations of human rights, the city’s statute provides sanctions against the party under concern. Part of the material collected during the monitoring process was used as evidence by a court in a case against a politician from the far-right Freedom’s Party (FPÖ) in 2008. The local political commitment triggered a legal precedent for Austria, ⁵⁸ and a relevant example of the application of the international, national, regional and local legal framework from below.

In York, which declared itself the first human rights city of the United Kingdom in 2017, the York Human Rights City Network, which is a steering group gathering academia, trustees and NGOs, carried out a six-year preparatory process to foster a positive discourse about human rights. The specificity of the York process is the strong involvement of civil society. The York Human Rights City Declaration, ⁵⁹ signed in April 2017, was not exclusively political, as was the case in Graz, but extended to a bottom-up commitment of faith groups, NGOs, academics and charities committed to strengthening human rights in York through the human rights city approach. The human rights city steering group established the York Human Rights City Project, a long-term plan to foster a more locally informed and less polarised discussion about human rights.

The network conducted a survey with local residents to identify priority areas of municipal human rights intervention. The five areas identified were: the right to education, decent standard of living, housing, health and social care, and equality and non-discrimination, all touching upon economic and social rights. These areas are analysed through benchmarks and indicators in the York Human Rights Indicator Report, ⁶⁰ published annually. The second edition, published in 2017, adds a gender pay gap indicator to measure equality and non-discrimination. ⁶¹

As a host for the United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) and signatory of the European Charter for the Safeguarding of Human Rights, Barcelona has long-term experience with human rights implementation since the establishment of an Office for Non-Discrimination in 1995. The Observatory of Human Rights is responsible for monitoring the situation of human rights in the city. Since 2016, the municipality implements the three-year-term Barcelona City of Rights Programme, with a significant municipal budget. The plan comprehends a review of municipal regulations according to human rights standards, as well as the application of methodological guides on the application of the HRBA to planning and implementation. ⁶²

Some human rights cities use SDG indicators and targets to measure progress on human rights. In 2017, the city of Utrecht started to apply operational targets of the SDGs to evaluate the impact of local human rights policies, such as Goal 11/Target 1 (on access for all to adequate, safe, and affordable housing and basic services, and to upgrade slums) and Goal 11/Target 3 (on participatory, integrated, and sustainable human settlement planning and management). ⁶³

Human rights impact assessments are also useful tools for monitoring whether local policies are aligned with international human rights principles. Such assessments entail that projects and initiatives designed by the municipality are assessed by independent human rights advisory bodies at the local level in order to prevent the adoption of legislation, policy and/or activities which do not comply with human rights principles and will have a negative impact on disadvantaged groups.

An international human rights monitoring mechanism that reaches out to the local level is still missing. The Advisory Committee of the UN Human Rights Council recommends national governments to include the local perspective in the UPR mechanism. ⁶⁴ However, the committee admitted in its report that it is still necessary to provide more practical guidance on monitoring mechanisms to national and local authorities. Local human rights reports could be a useful tool for regional and national governments to grasp a more comprehensive picture of the human rights situation in a specific country.

3.1.3. Human rights budgeting

Financing human rights in the city can assume two aspects:

a human rights budget, comprehending an amount of money available for human rights policies and activities; or

human rights budgeting, meaning that the whole budget of the city is assessed and evaluated under the human rights angle.

Globally, a wide range of strategies on mainstreaming human rights in budgets are in place, such as ‘gender sensitive budgets’, ‘equality budgets’ or the ‘ethic budget system’, but this article will not elaborate on that. Instead it will concentrate on what is in place in human rights cities and on what is provided by the UN urban framework.

In Graz, the municipal council has requested funding to support human rights projects, in particular on human rights education/learning. However, the municipality has never accepted the proposal. Benedek has argued that human rights institutions ‘should advise the city on support to be given to various initiatives on human rights learning’. ⁶⁵ For this purpose, a local human rights fund should be promoted. Barcelona took steps forward in this regard and secured EUR 1 million to finance actions to ‘protect, respect and guarantee human rights’ in the period between 2016 and 2019. ⁶⁶

In Gothenburg (Sweden), the city budget has included human rights as a framework for urban policies since 2013. It allowed for increasing human rights education activities for civil servants. Setting a clear human rights agenda also helped to secure future funds for implementation of human rights in urban policy. Although it is not a self-declared human rights city, Gothenburg has a comprehensive human rights structure in place. ⁶⁷

The Action Framework for the Implementation of the NUA (AFINUA) recommends the development of inclusive municipal finance with specific mechanisms to address inequalities and exclusion. Central governments should enable access to credit for local authorities based on the human rights approach; foster inclusive local economic development through job creation, entrepreneurship and microfinance; adapt financing models to enlarge affordable housing options; and improve equitable and progressive tax policy and revenue generation. ⁶⁸

UNDP endorses the position that municipal authorities need to be supported to access funding from different local, national and international sources to fund urban development interventions. Civil society has to get involved in urbanisation financing issues as well, to ensure that public funds are dedicated to improving life quality in an equitable manner. Human rights assessments on budgetary issues should also be adopted to evaluate whether budget policies are compatible with human rights obligations. This role could be played by the human rights office in a municipality or be initiated by a human rights advisory body. In Rosario, neighbourhood assemblies gather every year to evaluate each section of the municipal budget and provide advice for the municipality. ⁶⁹

3.1.4. Multi-level governance and international cooperation

From the above it is clear that the implementation of the UN urban framework requires multi-level efforts to better coordinate local, regional, national and international efforts. Combining top-down and bottom-up approaches and setting joint commitments with a clear division of responsibilities is decisive for implementation. For example, Graz introduced a Municipal Action Plan for the implementation of the UN Convention for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which was ratified by the Federal State in 2008. The implementation of the plan has been seriously pursued by the local authorities and monitored by the local council of persons with disabilities in cooperation with the municipal human rights council. ⁷⁰

At the European level, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) elaborated a toolkit aimed at avoiding duplication of interventions and establishing concerted action to address people’s fundamental rights on areas such as housing, health, education, rule of law, and employment. The five steps detailed in the Joined-up Governance Toolkit ⁷¹ are:

understanding fundamental rights;

coordination and leadership;

planning, monitoring and evaluation; and,

participation and civil society, and communicating fundamental rights.

These can be an asset for the practice of human rights cities and inform the elaboration of local plans within the municipalities for the implementation of the NUA.

Regarding human rights cities, joint cooperation is still missing. There is no institution which could guarantee that prior demands are fulfilled before a city declares itself a human rights city. In an attempt to fill (part of) this gap, the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (SALAR), in partnership with the Raoul Wallenberg Institute, has initiated a nation-wide systematised approach for the establishment of human rights cities. SALAR has identified six general points to be addressed when cities implement human rights:

building a local community where everyone takes an active responsibility;

ensuring that politicians, officials, citizens and civil society have knowledge about human rights;

incorporating human rights in official policies, procedures and actions;

making visible the dilemmas and potential conflicts that emerge when rights are to be realised;

ensuring that human rights are respected, protected and fulfilled when signing contracts and other legal documents; and,

developing manageable mechanisms for regular reporting and communication of the results. ⁷²

Lund achieved a political decision and signed a letter of intent, taking steps to become the first human rights city in Sweden. ⁷³

Aimed at integrating human rights into leadership and governance processes, SALAR’s policy platform ⁷⁴ is a starting point and guidance for local authorities or regions which intend to prioritise human rights in their work. The online platform offers a tool bar with different kinds of projects which can be integrated in governing processes, linking urban planning, democracy, and human rights. The Swedish model is unique in having triggered at the national level an initiative to push municipalities to become human rights cities on a voluntary basis, allowing them to establish their own framework based on the guidelines provided by the platform.

4. The new urban agenda and human rights cities: scope for mutual learning

This Section connects the human rights city practices with the framework provided by SDGs and the NUA to identify what they can learn from each other and how the interaction between both approaches fosters synergies and reinforces the connection and interdependence between the global and the local levels.

A human rights-based approach to policy-making and service delivery at the local level is the connection between the existing practices of human rights cities and the means to achieve the political commitments set forth in the UN urban framework. On the one hand, tools in place in human rights cities, such as human rights institutions and participatory reporting and monitoring mechanisms, offer an adequate structure for the realisation of inclusive and sustainable urban development. On the other hand, the NUA provides essential guidance on holistic and cross-cutting policies and services, connecting these local practices to the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs.

Inclusion is at the core of both the human rights city practices and the UN urban framework. Both are therefore interconnected in their objectives. The NUA teaches that the human rights perspective has to gain central relevance in urban governance and be at the core of every urban policy. Similarly, the establishment of a culture of human rights at the local level, which is the ultimate objective of human rights cities, is essential to ensure inclusionary urban governance. ⁷⁵

Acting according to the guidance of the NUA and SDGs, human rights cities can be a promising model for the implementation of the UN urban framework. Whether or not a city adopts the human rights label is not decisive for fostering implementation. What counts is a strong local commitment to the human rights agenda, connecting the cross-cutting issues related to human rights and sustainable development in the urban space, and fostering cohesion, tying up different initiatives in the city.

Many official and unofficial city platforms are in place. However, a platform where cities, civil society, national governments and researchers could work together and share experiences on local human rights implementation is still missing. Could the establishment of a networking platform for human rights cities be a promising step in this regard?

Tangible successes at the local level can engender a broader reform of the classical structural systems of the international order. National and local levels do not have to compete but can complement each other. Central governments thus need to support local and regional authorities to actively embrace human rights and provide them with enough resources to guarantee equal access to basic services.

The establishment of local action plans for the implementation of the NUA, combined with monitoring mechanisms to ensure compliance, is a promising tool. In human rights cities, these plans could be linked up to the existing local human rights structure. Local actors involved should identify adaptations, complementarities, eliminate redundancies and identify cross-cutting human rights and sustainable urban development issues and formulate a framework of action. This task could be executed by human rights councils, offices and advisory bodies, in close joint-cooperation with the city administration and with the participation of the civil society. These plans should reflect local needs and be adapted accordingly to attend to the demands of the specific microcosms of the various cities, human settlements and communities.

The NUA stresses that collaboration of UN entities with local decision-makers is key for the design of inclusive urban policies. However, gaps in concrete orientation on how to practice the NUA at the local level may also restrict its application. UN entities committed to advancing the UN urban framework need to further develop capacity-building, practical guidance, and instruments of implementation, and foster interagency or inter-entity collaboration. Joining efforts between different UN actors is strategic for strengthening the role of local authorities in implementing the NUA and the SDGs.

ICCAR is UNESCO’s multi-level instrument to commit local authorities to the fight against discrimination. In its Sustainable Urban Strategy, UNDP proposes a paradigm shift from urban public administration to urban democratic and participatory governance based on a HRBA. Both approaches are complementary and should not be addressed in isolation. Both could be combined and better orchestrated in order to introduce the NUA and SDGs at the local level, thus addressing human rights and sustainable development in an integrative manner. UN entities working on urban sustainability issues need to overcome institutional restrictions to ensure coordination and consistence among their programmes, and avoid overlapping initiatives.

Several examples presented in this article show the potential of human rights cities for delivering human rights. City authorities are indispensable rights actors and their role as strategic implementers of global agendas needs to be fully recognised. City governments often transpose the national level to claim and realise rights that are not prescribed in domestic law. The city departments of San Francisco, for instance, have committed to implement the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which was not ratified by the U.S. government. The departments undertake gender analysis of internal practices to identify areas of gender discrimination. ⁷⁶

Stakeholders at all levels, notably the national government, have to provide guidance, capacity-building and the granting of local self-governance competencies. Cooperation and exchange of knowledge and practice, through city associations and networks, as well as individual partnerships of cities, also need to be supported.

5. Conclusion

In the face of contemporary scepticism and lack of awareness of the importance of human rights, reconstructing human rights from the bottom-up is key. The level of commitment of local authorities is decisive to ‘enforce or weaken’ the ability of inhabitants of the city to enjoy their fundamental rights. ⁷⁷ Interpreting and applying existing international human rights norms in the light of the local needs is, therefore, crucial to ensure implementation.

Human rights and sustainable development are part of the same agenda and have to be realised locally by fostering participation. ‘Cities can mediate the reciprocal relationship between globalization on the one hand and economic and human development on the other’ ⁷⁸ and allow human rights sensitive policies to engender inclusion. Establishing that the realisation of human rights is a core task in the municipality has positive effects on the daily life of citizens and on the work of local authorities. Human rights delivery through policy making and service provision is, therefore, an infrastructural investment in social coherence. ⁷⁹

The UN urban framework, notably through SDG 11 and the NUA, endorses the role of local governments as primary stakeholders in global governance. Fostering a people-centred approach to urbanisation, through inclusive and sustainable development, is a task to be embraced by local administrations with the support of national governments. Without concerted efforts between all levels of governance to address the challenges of urbanisation, we risk stifling the aspiring words laid down in the UN urban framework. Enabling legal, policy and institutional frameworks at the local level is decisive for the implementation of the NUA. Strong urban local bodies embedded in supportive legal and institutional frameworks would enable cities and urban local bodies to perform their assigned functions, implement the NUA and contribute to achieving SDG targets, while fostering a culture of human rights in the city.

The NUA addresses the challenges of urbanisation holistically in all its multitudes, as a path to concretise the UN global agenda. The document recognises that the local level is an essential partner of the global community for the solving of global problems, because the problems of the world concentrate in cities. The SDGs, as part of this agenda, also need to be pursued at the local level with human rights as a driver.

In these terms, the mutual learning process between human rights cities and the UN urban framework, as described in this article, provides ideas and possible solutions for addressing the challenges of urbanisation in a comprehensive way while having human rights at the centre of every decision taken either globally or locally. Strong commitment of local authorities, long-term policy implementation and structural embeddedness are crucial for human rights realisation at the local level. These are integral aspects of the practices of the human rights cities and, therefore, can be adapted and aligned to the requirements of the UN urban framework.

The synergies between the NUA and the SDGs and local initiatives for human rights implementation at the local level are a crucial step to ensure that political commitments are more than words and are accordingly translated and applied to local contexts. This interrelation needs to be further explored in theory and practice, so as to create more and more direct channels for global-local collaboration.