|  | FIG PUBLICATION NO. 44 Improving Slum Conditions through Innovative 
	FinancingFIG/UN-HABITAT SeminarStockholm, Sweden, 16–17 June 2008
 
		
			| 
			 © Klas Björkhagen
 | 
			 © Klas Björkhagen
 |  
 
 ContentsForeword List of Acronyms Seminar Information and Proceedings Key Web Sites Acknowledgements Introduction About the Seminar Organisers DAY 1– LAND USE MANAGEMENT AND PROPERTY 
RIGHTS Opening Ceremony  Mr. Svante Astermo, Chair, Local Organising Committee
 Professor Stig Enemark, President of FIG
 Mr. Andreas Carlgren, Minister for the Environment, 
Sweden
 Keynote Address Excerpts from Keynote Address
 Mrs. Anna Tibaijuka, Under Secretary General and Executive Director, UN-HABITAT
 Sustainable Urban Development and the 
Millennium Development GoalsEnvironment and Climate: The Role and Importance of 
Property and Land Administration Institutions in Society
 – Mr. Andreas Carlgren, Minister for the Environment, Sweden
 Legal Empowerment in a Globalizing World
 – Mr. Ashraf Ghani, Institute for State Effectiveness and Chair of the Working 
Group on Property Rights of Legal Empowerment
 Partnership between FIG and the UN Agencies in Support 
of the Millennium Development Goals
 – Mr. Stig Enemark, President, FIG
 Land Administration and Property Rights – How 
to Achieve the Basic and Fundamental Structure?  Land Policies across Geography and Time: An 
Overview of Land Policy Issues Based on Lincoln Institute’s Experience in Latin 
America
 – Lincoln Institute of Land Policy
 Analytic Conclusions Regarding Countries in Transition: 
Spatial Information Management toward Legalizing Informal Urban Development
 – Ms. Chryssy Potsiou, Chair of FIG Commission 3, UN-ECE/Working Party on 
Land Administration
 Development of Land Administration and Links to the 
Financial Markets
 – Ms. Dorothy Agote, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Lands, Kenya
 Social and Economic Impacts of Land Titling Programmes in 
Urban and Peri-Urban Areas: International Experience and Case Studies of Senegal 
and South Africa
 – Geoffrey Payne, Geoffrey Payne and Associates, U.K.
 Women’s Access to Land and Finance
 – Ms. Ayanthi Gurushinge, Country Coordinator, Slum Upgrading Facility, Sri 
Lanka
 Dialogues: Land Use Management and 
Property Rights – Outlining the Roadmap  Group 1 – Southern and Eastern Africa
 Group 2 – Asia and the Pacific
 Group 3 – West Africa
 Group 4 – Central and Eastern Europe
 DAY 2 – JUST AND SUSTAINABLE SHELTER FINANCE 
SYSTEMS Land Administration and Finance SystemsExpanding the Outreach of Housing Finance for the 
Urban Poor – A Matter of Cooperation Combined with Sufficient and Appropriate 
Due Diligence
 – Mr. Michael Mutter, Senior Advisor, Slum Upgrading Facility, UN-HABITAT
 Channelling the Global Financial Flows for Adequate 
and Affordable Housing
 – Ms. Renu Karnard, President, International Union for Housing Finance
 Land Finance through Land Governance – Expanding the 
Discussion of Land Policy during Food Crisis, Climate Change and Rapid 
Urbanization
 – Mr. Malcolm Childress, Senior Land Administration Specialist, The World Bank
 Housing Finance for All – Swedish Engagement in Land 
Administration and Housing Finance
 – Mr. Dan Ericsson, State Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Sweden
 Putting Innovative Systems for Functioning 
Finance into PracticeInnovative Structures for Financing Slum Housing 
and Infrastructure
 – Mr. P. R. Anil Kumar, Head (Microfinance), Emerging Markets, Barclays Bank 
PLC
 Local Finance Facilities: What They Are, Why They Are 
Important, and How They Work
 – Ms. Ruth McLeod, Emerging Markets Group Dialogues
 DialoguesDialogue 1: Land management practices and tools and 
links to efficient finance
 Dialogue 2: Revisiting planning: Cutting the costs, 
involving the rights of the poor and enabling adequate finance
 Dialogue 3: Linking the financial sources
 Dialogue 4: Expanding the outreach of housing finance 
for the urban poor
 Special Component on Land and 
Gender 
  Wrap Up and the Way Forward Orders for printed copies 
 This publication is a summary report of the seminar “Improving Slum 
	Conditions through Innovative Financing”, which was jointly organized by 
	the International Federation of Surveyors, FIG and the United Nations Human 
	Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT) and took place in Stockholm, Sweden on 
	16–17 June 2008. This two-day seminar, which was dedicated to adequate and 
	affordable housing for all, was an integrated part of the FIG Working Week. The seminar focused on the essential elements of a just and sustainable 
provision of adequate shelter, from the twin perspectives of land and finance. 
It brought together leading actors from the public, private and non-governmental 
sectors working on land and housing finance issues. Within this framework, the 
seminar focused on the main issues of access to land, security of tenure and 
access to finance. Without security of tenure, the poor are at daily risk of 
eviction and, in the longer term, are reluctant to invest in long-term shelter 
improvements. Without access to affordable finance, poor people are caught in a 
vicious cycle in which affordable housing is inadequate, but adequate housing is 
unaffordable. Surveyors and land professionals play a key role in linking functioning 
markets for housing and finance. Therefore FIG is keen to co-operate with 
UN-HABITAT in this area as part of the long-term co-operation between the two 
organizations. The FIG/UN-HABITAT seminar brought together some of the leading 
innovators in the areas of land and finance. The seminar was structured as a 
practitioners’ dialogue – communication across professional and institutional 
perspectives. A total of eight Dialogues were held. Amongst the core issues 
discussed were various forms of individual and collective rights, women’s equal 
access to land and finance, spatial planning, security of tenure and innovative 
financial instruments. Proceedings of the seminar are available at
www.fig.net/pub/fig2008 and a 
dedicated web site for the project at 
www.justnsustshelter.org. This report provides a summary of the presentations that were given to 
catalyse the Dialogues, the key issues that emerged in the Dialogues themselves, 
and the conclusions reached and directions for the way forward that were put 
forth at the seminar’s closing. The result of the seminar aims to provide a valuable contribution to the IV 
World Urban Forum, to be held in Nanjing, China in November 2008. The 
publication is a joint effort of FIG and UN-HABITAT and is published in the FIG 
Report series. 
	
		| Stig Enemark FIG President
 
 | Anna K. Tibaijuka Under Secretary General
 Executive Director UN-HABITAT
 |  
 List of Acronyms
	
		| BRICS | Brazil, India and China |  
		| FAO | The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations |  
		| FIG | International Federation of Surveyors |  
		| GLTN | Global Land Tool Network |  
		| LFSUS | Lanka Financial Services for Underserved Settlements |  
		| MDGs | Millennium Development Goals |  
		| MFI | Microfinance institution |  
		| NGO | Non-governmental organization |  
		| SPARC | Society for the Promotion of Area Resource Centres |  
		| STDM | Social Tenure Domain Model |  
		| SUF | Slum Upgrading Facility (within UN-HABITAT) |  
		| UN-HABITAT | United Nations Human Settlements Programme |  
 Seminar Information and Proceedings
 
 
 Mr. Michael Mutter, UN-HABITAT making his keynote presentation at the second 
plenary session of the FIG/UN-HABITAT seminar. © FIG
 The seminar “Improving Slum Conditions through Innovative Financing” 
was organised jointly by FIG and UN-HABITAT. It was made possible by the 
generous support from Swedish authorities: Lantmäteriet (the National Mapping, 
Cadastre and Land Registration Authority of Sweden), the Swedish Government (the 
Ministry of the Environment and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs), Swedesurvey 
and Statens Bostadskreditnämnd BKN (National Housing Credit Guarantee Board). We would like to express our thanks to all speakers and participants who 
attended the dialogues and contributed to this report. Our special thanks go to 
Ms. Ann Jennervik, who was in charge of organising the seminar together 
with Mr. Bengt Kjellson and Mr. Lars Magnusson. We also thank Mr.
Brett Shapiro who has been the editor of this report together with Mr. 
Szilard Fricska from UN-HABITAT and Professor Stig Enemark from FIG. 
 As an integrated part of the International Federation of Surveyor’s (FIG) 
	Working Week, a two-day seminar was dedicated to adequate and affordable 
	housing for all. The seminar, “Improving Slum Conditions through 
	Innovative Financing” was jointly organized by FIG and UN-HABITAT and 
	took place in Stockholm, Sweden on 16–17 June 2008. The meeting brought together leading actors from the public, private and 
non-governmental sectors working on land and housing finance issues. The seminar 
focused on the essential elements of a just and sustainable provision of 
adequate shelter, from the twin perspectives of land and finance. The role of 
land and finance provision can be conceptualized as the challenge of linking the 
various components of “the Land Administration Chain”: mapping; planning; 
property and land rights; cadastral services; valuation; financial services (see 
figure below). 
 Linking the Land Administration Chain.
 
Within this framework, the seminar focused on the main issues of access to land, 
security of tenure and access to finance. Without security of tenure, the poor 
are at daily risk of eviction and, in the longer term, are reluctant to invest 
in long-term shelter improvements. Without access to affordable finance, poor 
people are caught in a vicious cycle in which affordable housing is inadequate, 
but adequate housing is unaffordable. 
The theoretical solution to this dilemma is a well-functioning land and housing 
market; however, experts around the world recognize that these same markets are 
often dysfunctional, and arguably represent the most consistent bottleneck 
undermining long-term city development. Market access is built on transparency, 
low transaction costs and good access to reliable property information as well 
as property financing. Facilitating efficient land markets and effective 
land-use management is therefore critical to sustainable urbanization. 
Surveyors play a key role in linking functioning markets for housing and 
finance. Support to this aim is being provided, but despite 30 years of efforts, 
political commitments and reiterated priority to the issue, little has been 
achieved. Building up the key institutions that can manage the public systems 
providing key public goods is at best a slow process. The vested interests of a 
wide variety of stakeholders conspire to maintain the status quo. 
There are signs of progress, however, and the FIG/UN-HABITAT seminar brought 
together some of the leading innovators in the areas of land and finance. The 
seminar was structured as a practitioners’ dialogue – communication across 
professional and institutional perspectives. A total of eight Dialogues were 
held. Each set of Dialogues was prepared through sharing inputs at the 
interactive website 
www.justnsustshelter.org and through the introductory presentations at the 
Plenary and Presentation sessions. Amongst the core issues discussed were 
various forms of individual and collective rights, women’s equal access to land 
and finance, spatial planning, security of tenure and innovative financial 
instruments. 
The seminar aims to provide a valuable contribution to the next World Urban 
Forum, to be held in Nanjing, China in November 2008. 
This report provides a summary of the presentations that were given to catalyze 
the Dialogues, the key issues that emerged in the Dialogues themselves, and the 
conclusions reached and directions for the way forward that were put forth at 
the seminar’s closing. 
 
About the Seminar Organisers
International Federation of Surveyors (FIG)
The International Federation of Surveyors, FIG, is an international, 
non-government organisation (NGO) whose purpose is to support international 
collaboration for the progress of surveying in all fields and applications. FIG 
aims to mobilize the next generation of land professionals to continue to 
develop innovative solutions to address global inequality in access to land and 
security of tenure. FIG’s annual “Working Week” took place in Stockholm, Sweden 
and was the biggest Working Week ever held, with 950 participants from 90 
nations attending the event and exhibition. In addition to the plenary sessions, 
there were over 70 technical sessions, with almost 350 presentations and 
technical tours. A strong attraction was the two-day joint FIG/UN-HABITAT 
seminar on “Improving Slum Conditions through Innovative Financing,” which was 
an integral part of the entire Working Week. FIG is strongly committed to the 
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and to supporting the work of the Global 
Land Tool Network (GLTN), whose aim is to contribute to poverty alleviation and 
the MDGs through land reform, improved land management and security of tenure. 
United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT)
UN-HABITAT is the United Nations agency for human settlements. It is mandated by 
the UN General Assembly to promote socially and environmentally sustainable 
towns and cities with the goal of providing adequate shelter for all. Within 
this mandate, the Slum Upgrading Facility (SUF) provides global assistance for 
the design and implementation of locally produced ‘bankable housing projects’ so 
that groups of low income residents and their local authorities can attract 
domestic commercial finance as a significant part of the funding of their 
sustainable neighbourhood slum upgrading and low-income housing projects on a 
community-led repayment scheme basis. With respect to land issues, UN-HABITAT 
also hosts the Secretariat for the GLTN. GLTN partners have identified 18 key 
land tools to deal with poverty and land issues at the country level across all 
regions. One of GLTN’s work areas is the nexus between intermediate forms of 
tenure and access to housing finance for the poor. 
 Day 1 – Land Use Management and Property 
	RightsThe theme during the first day was Land Use Management and Property 
Rights. Land Administration is a term used to describe all the processes 
connected to a functioning property system. This includes land management, 
planning and monitoring land use, the creation and keeping of cadastre, the 
establishment, recording and protection of different kinds of property rights 
and the securing of mortgage rights in order to make capital available to 
property owners or leaseholders. Land administration systems look different in 
different countries and regions and are evolving in different ways. This is due 
to the political circumstances, cultural and legal traditions and economic 
conditions that exist in each particular setting. 
 The Opening Ceremony featured the symbolic tying of a ribbon, representing 
the continuity between the current and future generation of land professionals. 
Speakers at the opening ceremony included the following: Mr. Svante Astermo, Chair, Local Organising 
CommitteeMr. Astermo welcomed all of the participants, mentioning that the 950 
participants from 90 countries represented an all-time high for the FIG Working 
Week. He was particularly pleased to see the presence of so many students, given 
that they are the key to “integrating generations” – creating the bridge between 
countries, cultures and ages. Mr. Enemark reiterated FIG’s support of the concept of integrating 
generations, acknowledging the many students and young surveyors present who 
represent the future. He also mentioned a full-page article that appeared in one 
of the major Swedish daily newspapers in which surveyors were called upon to 
address the problems of the slums, and stated that FIG is becoming a major 
partner in achieving sustainable development. At the same time, there is a need 
to better understand the very key role that the profession plays in sustainable 
development at the national and local levels. The work of surveyors forms a kind 
of backbone to society and is a key component to the achievement of the MDGs. 
The global development agenda is about eradication of poverty in all its forms. 
Property is not only an economic asset, he stressed, but secure property rights 
also provide a sense of identity and belonging that goes far beyond economics, 
and underpins democracy and human freedom. Land surveys have a key role to play 
in developing pro-poor systems. Professor Enemark then introduced the concept of 
land governance, which is the governmental side of managing physical space for 
power, wealth and human well-being. The key challenges of the new millennium are 
related to climate change, urban growth, environmental degradation, natural 
disasters and food shortages. All of these challenges relate to the governance 
and management of land. Thus, land governance and management are going to be 
important subjects for surveyors, issues which will require new models to 
predict and address changes, and land administration systems that can manage the 
core functions of land value, land use and land development. Mr. Andreas Carlgren, Minister for the 
Environment, SwedenMr. Carlgren emphasized that land professionals “have such an important key 
role to play, to combat environmental threats, to combat poverty and slums and 
to support the development of this globe and its cities.” He then tied two 
ribbons together as a symbol of integrating generations. 
 Kibera, Nairobi. © Stig Enemark
 
 Excerpts from Keynote Address– Mrs. Anna Tibaijuka, Under Secretary General and Executive Director, 
UN-HABITAT
	
		| 
		 © FIG
 | “FIG and UN-HABITAT have a shared history that goes back over two 
		decades. I am pleased to see that this meeting is taking place when the 
		Swedish Association of Chartered Surveyors is celebrating its 100th 
		anniversary. I am also pleased to be in Stockholm because UN-HABITAT has 
		a history here dating back to 1972 when the concept of sustainable 
		development was born… The theme of the seminar, Integrating 
		Generations, highlights the need to attract new generation of young 
		surveyors and new capacities to address to new priorities… |  I would like to present two critical issues that we see shaping the 
	global debate on development. They are sustainable urbanization and climate 
	change, and they are interlinked. I would also like to reflect on the role 
	that surveyors and land specialists can play… We are becoming more urban, and this will not change. People move because 
	they expect to have a better life. It is the expectation that pushes them, 
	and the prospect keeps them there. The challenge is to guide the 
	urbanization process. Ninety-five percent is taking place in cities least 
	equipped to deal with it, in African and in Asia. We are witnessing 
	urbanization of poverty. Today there are an estimated 1 billion slum 
	dwellers, and this could double by 2030. A report published by UN-HABITAT in 
	2006–2007 confirms that slum dwellers are more likely to have less education 
	and fewer employment opportunities, and suffer malnutrition more than any 
	other segment of the population. Living in cities does not translate into a 
	better life. How is the international community responding? UN-HABITAT 
	conducted an exercise in 2005 to determine the resources required. Our 
	estimate showed that US$ 300 billion would be required over a 15-year period 
	if we wanted to put the slum challenge behind us. While these exercises are 
	nothing new, the uniqueness of this exercise was in its recognition that the 
	urban poor, when properly enabled and empowered, are able to mobilize 85 
	percent of the resources required… …We know that an aid-based approach is not enough. We need to think outside 
the box, we need to think in terms of changing the rules of the game that 
prevent the majority of the urban population in developing countries from 
growing out of poverty. …Let me outline some of the challenges of slum dwellers 
from the land perspective. Only 20 percent of land parcels in the world are 
registered, while most poor people live under customary or informal tenure 
systems. Only 2 percent of land is registered in women’s name, and women are 
frequently at risk of losing their land rights upon the death of their spouses. 
Land titling rarely meets the needs of thepoor due to the costs of adjudication, 
high technical standards, expensive registration and transfer fees, and literacy 
requirements. Planning and zoning standards are similarly inappropriate and 
unaffordable. In short, the very legal system that should protect and empower 
the poor more often fails them. This is one of the most important findings of 
the Commission for the Legal Empowerment of the Poor and I would encourage you 
all to read the Commission’s report [see
http://www.undp.org/legalempowerment/]… As in the world of land, slum dwellers are often systematically excluded from 
the so-called ‘formal’ system of housing finance, in particular, mortgage 
finance… Banks are constrained by the very systems of credit risk analysis they use: 
financial, legal and technical. Their financial analysis is biased towards 
people with bank accounts, formal sector jobs and a proven credit history. In 
their legal analysis, financial institutions look for legally recognized 
evidence of ownership and the possibility of repossessing the asset through the 
courts in case of default. And, from their technical analysis, they will look 
for proof of a building permit and conformance to zoning regulations. From all 
three risk analysis perspectives, the poor fail the test of the formal credit 
markets… Micro-finance institutions do better for the poor. They will provide small 
loans. They will not demand land as collateral. However, the loans they give are 
not housing loans. They are housing loans disguised as consumption or as 
business loans. This may be a stop-gap measure, but it struggles to meet the 
full demand for housing loans… There are signs of hope in the area of housing finance. In particular, group 
savings and cooperatives represent promising solutions. Savings schemes are 
established amongst groups of slums dwellers – mainly by women – who wish to 
improve their living conditions through a specific project. They establish 
themselves as a legal entity, which enables them to consider taking a loan. The 
size of the loan will be determined by their ability to repay. This becomes the 
basis for designing a bankable project. Financial institutions become interested 
because the loan size is large and the transaction costs are low. From this 
model, and others that are out there, it is clear that the poor can provide 
their own housing solutions… But housing finance is only one piece in a much larger challenge of 
sustainable urbanization. Reforms are required on a number of fronts, including: 
land market regulation, shifting to more strategic urban planning, adopting 
pro-poor building regulations, improving land-based tax collection to create 
municipal revenue, making budgeting more participatory and accountable, and 
creating the foundations for sustainable investments in infrastructure and 
service delivery… What is the role of surveyors and land professionals in the creation of a 
sustainable urbanization paradigm? I would like to highlight six critical areas: 
	Better information for better decision making and planningDisaster risk reduction toolsNew land administration tools appropriate for developing countriesStrengthened capacity in land valuation and land value captureA new generation of surveying and volunteerism, to strengthen the 
	capacity ofland professionals in the South
Good land governance; that is, the process of managing competing 
	interests inland in a way that promotes sustainable urbanization.
 In this regard, I would like to highlight the important role being played by 
the GLTN, and its partners in promoting innovative solutions to realize secure 
land rights for all. FIG and UN-HABITAT have worked closely together under the 
GLTN umbrella to make this seminar a reality… I hope this meeting will help set a new agenda for sustainable development 
and climate change. 
 Colombo, Sri Lanka. © Ayanthi Gurushinge
 
 Sustainable Urban Development and 
	the Millennium Development GoalsEnvironment and Climate: The Role and Importance 
of Property and Land Administration Institutions in Society– Mr. Andreas Carlgren, Minister for the Environment, Sweden
	
		| 
		 © FIG
 | Mr. Carlgren stated that one half of the earth’s systems are in the 
		process of being destroyed and that there are serious risks and 
		consequences for combating poverty and access to clean water, the 
		effects of which can be seen in droughts, floods and outbreaks of 
		environmentally related diseases. He recounted a meeting of 
		environmental ministers from 30 countries from around the world that 
		took place in the north of Sweden. The participants were standing close 
		to the largest river in the north of Sweden and were drinking from its 
		water and talking about the destruction of rain forests in Brazil and 
		the risk of flooding of hundreds of islands. As they stood there, they 
		experienced the connections and the distances shrinking. The 
		participants felt that the world is closely connected, both in terms of 
		threats and hopes. |  Mr. Carlgren urged everyone to commit themselves to combat climate change and 
to strive towards a global agreement next year in Copenhagen in 2009, the year 
in which Sweden will hold the presidency of the European Union. He affirmed that 
Sweden is prepared to reach a global agreement and knows that the world will 
undergo an enormous shift towards sustainable development – simply because it 
must. Mr. Carlgren then spoke about the scale of urbanization taking place in 
developing countries, with 18 million people moving from the country to cities 
each year in China alone. Each day the global urban population grows by 180,000. 
A major part of all construction will take place in the large developing 
countries. How these cities are built will have an enormous impact on the 
environment and quality of life, but also on the long-term possibilities for 
tacking climate change. Eighty percent of greenhouse gas emissions originate 
from urban areas. But it is possible to change urban development and have 
flourishing economies at the same time. If planned and managed correctly, cities 
hold possible solutions for many of these problems. For example through 
infrastructure, energy and transport solutions, sustainable urban development 
cannot only boost the economy and quality of life, but also be part of a global 
zero-carbon-producing planet. Mr. Carlgren described how in Sweden 40 percent of energy supplied is from 
renewable sources, and will increase to almost 50 percent soon. Sweden has also 
reduced its carbon emissions in absolute terms by 9 percent since 1990, and 
without creating problems for the economy. In fact, the economy has increase by 
44 percent. Therefore, emissions and economic growth can be delinked. He 
mentioned different measures and technologies that have been important, 
including economic instruments such as carbon tax, district heating and cooling 
systems, and expansion of wind power. He emphasized that this conference is extremely important in order to 
exchange experiences and new solutions. The availability and dissemination of 
knowledge and information are vital for combating climate change and adapting 
society. Satellite imagery data bases and other reliable cartographical data are 
essential, as well as action programmes to analyse the risks of natural 
disasters. Guaranteed rights of ownership are also essential for sustainable 
development. Legal Empowerment in a Globalizing World– Mr. Ashraf Ghani, Institute for State Effectiveness and Chair of the 
Working Group on Property Rights of Legal Empowerment
	
		| 
		 © FIG
 | Mr. Ghani began by stating that one third of the world’s poor – one 
		billion people – live without any legal protection of their assets, and 
		that poverty is a result of the failure of public policies and markets. 
		In fact, in many countries the laws, institutions and policies are a 
		barrier to prosperity. He highlighted the recently launched report of 
		the Commission for the Legal Empowerment of the Poor, “Making the Law 
		Work for Everyone.” Legal empowerment, he stated, is the process through 
		which the poor become protected and are enabled to use the law to 
		advance their rights and interests. He then described the Commission’s 
		four-pillar approach to empowering the poor: access to justice and the 
		rule of law; property rights; labour rights; and business rights. The 
		four key building blocks are interdependent, and when one or more of 
		them is missing, dysfunctionality results. He then highlighted four 
		types of dysfunctionalities: misalignment of social practices and legal 
		provision; misuse of rules governing property; lack of access to 
		information and justice; and misuse of eminent domain. |  To arrive at solutions, he emphasized that it was not enough to rely on 
aid-based approaches.Rather, it is critical to look at globalization and 
inclusion. Globalization is of human making but not of human design. Most of the 
world feels dislocated by the process of globalization. There are five 
challenges for harnessing globalization: 
	Build functioning state and markets in the 40–60 states that are the 
	weak links of the international system.Tailor strategies and partnerships to the BRICS (countries like Brazil, 
	India and China) and other emerging countries.Bring corporations into a global development compact.Rethink relations between regional and international security as well as 
	political organizations.Invest in national, regional and international leadership and 
	management. Governance needs to re-framed, he stated, as network governance. The task is 
to bring states, markets, corporations, civil society and international 
organizations together. In the next 25 years, US$ 42–44 trillion will be 
invested in global infrastructure. These investments make global economic 
integration possible, but could also have severe negative consequences. Getting 
the design right is critical. Creating liveable cities is critical for the 
agenda of inclusive globalization. But creativity and imagination need 
collaboration among many actors. Information, knowledge and wisdom need to be 
brought together in harmony. Mr. Ghani concluded by quoting a Native American saying: “We do not 
inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.” 
 Hyderabad, India. © Stig Enemark
 Partnership between FIG and the UN Agencies in 
Support of the Millennium Development Goals– Mr. Stig Enemark, President, FIG
	
		| 
		 © FIG
 | Mr. Enemark spoke first about the land management paradigm, which 
		includes all activities associated with the management of land and 
		natural resources that are required to fulfil political objectives and 
		achieve sustainable development. These include the land policy 
		framework, land administration functions, land information 
		infrastructures and the country context, all of which feed into the land 
		administration system and its impact on sustainable development. Land 
		administration systems are the basis for conceptualizing rights, 
		responsibilities and restrictions – the “three Rs” – related to 
		property. |   A good property system is one in which people can participate in the land 
market, make transactions and have access to registration. The infrastructure 
supporting transactions must be simple, quick, affordable and free of 
corruption. Moreover, the system must provide safety for housing and business, 
as well as for capital formation. Land governance and management is a core area 
for surveyors and will require: 
	High level geodesy models to predict changeModern surveying and mapping toolsSpatial data infrastructures to support decision making on the 
	environmentSecure tenure systemsSustainable systems for land valuation, land use management and land 
	developmentSystems for transparency and good governance. Mr. Enemark went on to speak about partnership, which is the eighth MDG and 
can serve as the link that drives development. He emphasized FIG’s close 
collaboration with UN-HABITAT, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the 
United Nations (FAO), GTLN and the World Bank.  He concluded his presentation by emphasizing the role of FIG in terms of 
professional, institutional and global development. 
 Land Administration and Property Rights – 
	How to Achieve the Basic and Fundamental Structure?The afternoon started with introductory presentations on land administration 
and property rights all over the world. The presentations covered lessons 
learned from various regions: Latin America, European countries in transition to 
an open and common market, and Sub-Saharan Africa. Special emphasis was put on 
the importance of women’s equal access to land and finance. 
 Bukit Duri, Jakarta, Indonesia. © Suzi Mutter
 Land Policies across Geography and Time: An 
Overview of Land Policy Issues Based on Lincoln Institute’s Experience in Latin 
America– Lincoln Institute of Land PolicyThe presentation was given by Ann Jennervik, Senior Expert Sustainable 
Development, ee&sd, and was based on the first chapter of the Lincoln Institute 
book entitled Urban Perspectives, an overview of critical land policy issues 
based on the Institute’s experiences in Latin America. Ms. Jennervik summarized 
five major points that came out of the study: 
	Constraints on policy implementation. Most countries in Latin 
	America share poor performance when it comes to recovery of publicly 
	generated land value increments, the delivery of urban infrastructure and 
	services, the provision of housing alternatives for the urban poor, and 
	appropriate land taxation. In addition, there is a strong legacy of powerful 
	landowning interests that influence land policies to their own benefit.
Unavailable or untapped resources. Urban land is still viewed as 
	an asset rather than as a taxable base to generate needed resources for the 
	broader community. Management of existing resources is often characterized 
	by a lack of operational capacity or unscrupulous behavior on the part of 
	authorities. Despite the aim to mobilize publicly created land value 
	increments, the overall balance still leans toward compensation given to 
	private landowners.
Lack of information or capacity to use it. Often information 
	exists, but not the capacity to find, organize and interpret it. Moreover, 
	public officials are often unable or unwilling to assimilate and translate 
	information into operational results.
Lack of dialogue between urban planners and public finance officials. 
	Planners tend to be concerned with the quality of the constructed 
	environment, while fiscal officials are seeking to maximize public revenues. 
	This is reflected in planners often overlooking how projects should be 
	financed and how urban forms affect the tax base, or the impacts of tax 
	collection practices on land uses.
Discontinuity in programme implementation. Even the most popular 
	or successful programmes can be disrupted, derailed and ultimately 
	terminated by political and administrative discontinuities. Expectations 
	about the permanence of the rules of the game is a major component affecting 
	how the private sector acts. Ms. Jennervik concluded by emphasizing the clear evidence that sharing 
experiences and lessons learned advances progress. This information should be 
used to qualify a broader range of stakeholders capable of not only implementing 
better land policies, but also demanding policy responses from public agencies. 
Land policy should transcend party politics and promote political plurality and 
diversity. Analytic Conclusions Regarding Countries in 
Transition: Spatial Information Management toward Legalizing Informal Urban 
Development– Ms. Chryssy Potsiou, Chair of FIG Commission 3, UN-ECE/Working Party on 
Land AdministrationMs. Potsiou opened her presentation by stating that rapid population 
increases often lead to unplanned or informal development. Fifty percent of the 
world’s population lives in the cities, and one out of three city residents 
lives in inadequate housing. The world’s slum population is expected to reach 
1.4 billion by 2020. It is a human right that people are free to choose where 
they live. However, it is a matter of good governance to achieve sustainable 
urban growth.  She went on to describe land policy and the four major land administration 
functions – land tenure, land value, land use and land development – 
highlighting the lack of an integrated approach. In many countries there is a 
tendency to separate land tenure rights from land use rights. In addition, 
planning and land use control are not linked with land values and the operation 
of the land market. This may be compounded by poor management procedures that 
fail to deliver required services. Informal, unplanned, illegal, unauthorized or 
random urban development is a major issue in many countries. There is no clear 
common definition of what constitutes an informal settlement. The most important 
factors for characterizing an area as such are land tenure, quality and size of 
construction, access to services and land-use zoning. She gave examples of 
informal settlements from Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, Georgia, Greece, Italy, 
Croatia, Turkey, etc. and listed many reasons for their establishment, 
including: historic, political, social and economic conditions leading to 
urbanization; population fluxes as a result of armed conflicts and natural 
disasters; lack of spatial information and planning; unrealistic zoning 
regulations; marginalization, poverty and lack of financing mechanisms for 
affordable housing; inconsistent and complex legislation; excessive bureaucracy 
regarding land development and building permits; and local estate taxes. She 
concluded her presentation by describing four conditions to reduce the 
phenomenon: 
	Registration of property rights of both formal and informal construction 
	is important for proper decision making.Land-use planning is the task of government at appropriate levels. 
	Citizen participation should be part of the planning process.Coordination among land-related agencies should be strengthened, and the 
	private sector should play a role.Municipalities should be independent from government in terms of 
	funding. Real property taxes should be collected and reinvested locally, 
	while citizens should recognize their responsibility to contribute to the 
	cost of land improvement and the provision of services. 
 Informal settlements in Tirana, Albania. © Doris Aldoni
 Development of Land Administration and Links to 
the Financial Markets– Ms. Dorothy Agote, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Lands, KenyaMs. Agote began by recalling the thousands of Kenyans who were displaced by 
recent post-election violence. She stated that the main cause of their 
displacement, and of the violence, was land. This emphasizes the importance of 
governance issues with respect to land. In Kenya, the development agenda has 
always avoided a serious engagement with land issues. Slums are a major social 
and economic concern in Kenya, and a major limiting factor in development. The 
majority of people in slums are unable to meet their basic requirements. And 60 
percent of them are absolutely poor. The influx of youth has compounded the slum 
situation. Urban areas are experiencing increased demand for decent housing. A 
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper was prepared that included slum upgrading 
programmes. Beneficiaries should be involved in the design and implementation of 
such programmes, as they can provide data and detailed insights into their 
problems. Slum dwellers live outside the rule of law and basic legal protection, and 
the government is now seeking to promote tenure security issues through a number 
of initiatives, including the land policy formulation process, the adoption of 
eviction guidelines, land control boards, and land dispute tribunals – all 
geared to helping slum dwellers have a basic level of legal protection. Ms. Agote went on to speak about land administration and links to financial 
markets, and how in Kenya the lack of security of tenure weakens the link. This 
is a major challenge and impacts on other ways of using land as collateral. The 
design of land administration is crucial. Too often a centralized land 
administration system is complex, thus compounding the problem of access to 
financial markets. And Kenya is a clear example of that problem: systems are old 
and do not respond to current needs. The Kenya draft land policy recognizes 
this, and the principles for guidelines have been recommended in the draft 
policy. In addition, there is a need for gender equality, a lack of which often 
blocks women’s access to financial markets. Women are not considered fit to 
inherit and hold property. One key is the formulation of the national land 
policy, ensuring that it is harmonized, has simple and cost-effective land laws, 
and takes into consideration customary and common resource land. 
 Conditions in Kibera, Nairobi – home to 800,000 slum dwellers, 40% of the 
population and the workforce that keeps the city economy going and competitive – 
has almost no sanitation, hence an environment of flying toilets, blocked 
gulleys and broken culverts – appalling conditions. © Michael Mutter
 Social and Economic Impacts of Land Titling Programmes 
in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas: International Experience and Case Studies of 
Senegal and South Africa– Geoffrey Payne, Geoffrey Payne and Associates, U.K.Mr. Payne described a research project that was undertaken in 2006 and 2007 
to understand the impacts of land titling programmes in Senegal and South 
Africa. A major research issue was whether titling stimulates investment in 
housing and property development. One important finding from the study is that 
the perception of security is often more important than the titles themselves, 
and the promise of titles is more important than their actual delivery. In 
addition, titling is not the only means of encouraging investment in housing and 
land. Other factors include finances, the location of the settlements, the 
provision of services and other upgrading measures, and the regulatory 
framework. In many cases, titling has not increased revenues and in some cases it has 
reduced them. In addition, charges are based on land prices and are restricted 
by the ability to pay, or can result in forced distress sales. The charges set 
according to affordability levels may cost more to collect than is justified. 
They may also discourage households from completing the tenure formalization 
process. In this regard, action needs to be taken to facilitate transparent land 
and housing markets that enjoy social legitimacy. Mr. Payne offered a number of general conclusions: 
	Titling programmes undertaken primarily for economic reasons (e.g. to 
	secure investment) have failed to realize social objectives (securing land 
	rights of the the poor).Titling programmes undertaken for primarily social reasons also appear 
	to be of limited value, sometimes contributing to gentrification in urban 
	areas.Programmes undertaken on a small scale contribute to land market 
	distortion. On the other hand, programmes undertaken on a large scale may 
	over-burden land administration agencies.Top-down, or outside-in, programmes do not work.Social legitimacy is vital, as is building on what works in an 
	incremental way. Mr. Payne concluded by describing a number of policy implications: assess the 
number and quality of land records required and the capacity of the 
administrative system; introduce/expand innovative finance mechanisms to provide 
credit to the poor; review/relax the regulatory framework for managing urban 
land and housing markets; introduce/expand multi-stakeholder partnerships; 
encourage a range of tenure options so all groups have a choice; and avoid 
“quick fixes”. 
 Women’s Savings Group exchange meeting – East Africa meets West
 and South Africa. © Michael Mutter
 Women’s Access to Land and Finance– Ms. Ayanthi Gurushinge, Country Coordinator, Slum Upgrading Facility, Sri 
LankaMs. Gurushinge began by explaining that women’s land rights are extremely 
important, since women’s secure access to land can lead to improved family 
welfare and women’s empowerment. There are four main barriers to women’s rights 
to land and finance: cultural or legal impediments to acquiring land through 
markets, inheritance or transfer; barriers created by intra-household customs 
and practices related to marriage; discriminatory policies at the central or 
local government level; and poorly drafted laws and regulations governing land 
and property rights. She described the three types of land laws in Sri Lanka and 
the fact that the laws are not applied consistently or coherently. In Sri Lanka, 
the “head of household” concept is more of an administrative term than a legal 
one, and the household head is presumed to be the male. This had a major impact 
on women during the tsunami: in many cases, even if women had owned property 
before the tsunami, all houses were given to the “head of household,” which 
excluded them.  Ms. Gurushinge described the Lanka Financial Services for Underserved 
Settlements (LFSUS), a not-for profit company that mobilizes resources for 
country-wide slum upgrading activities through public-private partnership, 
promotes the viability of lending to low-income groups, and provides guarantees 
to banks to encourage lending for settlement upgrading. The LFSUS has been 
established with the support of SUF, which seeks to develop bankable projects 
that promote affordable housing for low-income households, the upgrading of 
slums, and the provision of urban infrastructures in cities of the developing 
world. She highlighted that housing finance needs to be community-based and 
simple (minimal paper work, minimal collateral requirements, flexibility in 
repayment, incremental housing financing, etc.). She then presented a list of 
strategies to develop women’s access to finance: 
	Create housing finance systems that are demand-driven.Do not restrict finance mechanisms to housing alone.Consider using subsidies as tools to facilitate access to finance.Include community savings as part of housing finance.Maintain flexibility in loan size and purpose.Involve people in every stage of planning a housing finance strategy.Minimize rules and procedures and maximize flexibility.Explore innovative, community-based ways to provide loan security. 
 In Sri Lanka, the “head of the household” concept is more an administrative term 
than a legal term and is commonly understood to be the man. © Ayanthi Gurushinge
 
 Dialogues: Land Use Management and 
Property Rights – Outlining the RoadmapFour parallel regional “Dialogues to outline the Roadmap to Functioning 
Land Use Management for All” were held, focusing on an exchange of 
experiences from different parts of the world. The objective was to address 
issues specific to each region, as well as commonalities, success stories and 
failures, in order to gain a better understanding of how land administration 
systems can be improved and property rights established. Key issues suggested 
for the dialogue were: factors influencing informal settlements; diversity of 
patterns of informal settlement development; and diverse policy solutions, 
including a gender perspective. The key to improved housing conditions is open 
and transparent markets, but equally important are the steps laid out to create 
these markets. In short: how systems can be made inclusive for all. The following sections provide a summary of the main discussions points of 
each regional dialogue, as well as the key issues that emerged. Group 1 – Southern and Eastern AfricaParticipants in this dialogue were from Botswana, Canada, Ethiopia, Kenya, 
the Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, Rwanda, South Africa, the United Kingdom and 
Zambia. They drew from their own experiences of implementing upgrading 
programmes in the region to discuss what they perceived as the main issues that 
arise when trying to apply conventional approaches to slum upgrading. A number 
of unintended consequences and reservations were described in the areas of slum 
upgrading, granting title to property and implementing micro-finance projects. 
Based on their experiences and knowledge of their own contexts, the dialogue 
participants expressed concerns that upgrading, titling and availability of 
finance would: 
	appear to legitimize land invasions or illegal occupation;prompt residents to sell their property (or houses provided through a 
	project) and move to other slums;benefit men more than women, owing to the way tenure and ownership were 
	structured, as well as the way participation in such projects took place;leave the underlying causes of poverty unchanged, especially if 
	individual property rights were granted without support for accessing or 
	creating employment;benefit individuals at the cost of the collective or the community;create new landlord/tenant structures, by allocating property to an 
	individual on plots originally occupied by more than one family;benefit existing landlords and displace tenants, since improved service 
	quality could prompt the owner to raise rents;generally disrupt complex and sensitive social networks that exist in 
	informal land arrangements but which are often destroyed through formalized 
	processes;lead to unaffordable rates and other high costs associated with 
	ownership;be less efficient for governments than simply building rental housing 
	managed by municipalities, compared to housing which is individually owned;in the case of micro-finance for housing, be used for consumption 
	spending rather than for home improvement; andlead to people becoming more indebted through loans and then forcing 
	them to sell their property at below-market value. Given these concerns, it was recommended overall that slum upgrading and the 
granting of title should not be conducted in isolation from other broader 
processes of development, and particular attention should be paid to conditions 
of macro-economic growth and participatory democracy. More specifically: 
	Urban infrastructure investment which drives slum upgrading needs to be 
	undertaken within a policy framework of sustainable urbanization and a 
	broader city strategy.Upgrading of informal settlements should not be undertaken on a 
	settlement-by-settlement basis, but within a broader area-based framework.Surveying and registration need to be linked to broader settlement 
	development and upgrading processes.After understanding the macro and local contexts, the granting of title 
	must be designed to benefit people equitably, especially considering the 
	needs of the most vulnerable, and share rights between women and men, young 
	and old, landlords and tenants, and one generation and the next.Ownership should be one option, and rental and other tenure arrangements 
	such as group rights should be made available as viable alternatives to 
	allow people to make rational trade-offs depending on their situation.Titling should be coupled with education around the accompanying 
	limitations and obligations.The objective of surveying and titling (or the establishment of other 
	forms of tenure) should be to create predictability and to build trust 
	between people (e.g. between neighbours, between residents and local 
	authorities, between residents and politicians).Creating trust between property owners (or people with other types of 
	secure tenure) and lending institutions may be a much later development when 
	property becomes collateral for loan finance, but it is not a sound initial 
	motivation for establishing individual title.Property rights should be enforceable if they are to be meaningful. High 
	incidences of dispossession of land would indicate that the prevailing 
	system of property rights is inappropriate. A number of conclusions for the way forward were put forth in the dialogue: 
	Work towards pro-active land use management and planning.Build upwards to achieve the density required for the number of people 
	that need to be accommodated in the limited space available.Explore new methodologies for access to finance.Work towards decentralizing land registration processes and establishing 
	local commissions to regulate the process with transparency.Consider upgrading informal settlements within a broader planned urban 
	renewal context.Link slum upgrading with rural land use improvement for better incomes.Devise simpler titling systems for housing.Promote a shift towards a group/cooperative approach to housing 
	development.Capture experiences and disseminate knowledge directly to communities. 
 Old Fadama, Accra, Ghana. © Suzi Mutter
 Group 2 – Asia and the PacificThe Asia dialogue included participants with experience from Cambodia, China, 
India, Indonesia, Sri Lanka and the Pacific Islands. There was an initial brief 
discussion regarding the advantages and disadvantages of land titling, recalling 
the recent debate initiated by Hernando De Soto’s book, “The Mystery of 
Capital”. A discussion followed on the legal and institutional pre-requisites for 
effective land use management and on whether governments are willing to make a 
shift from ‘donorship’ to ‘ownership’. The participant from Cambodia proposed a 
number of pre-requisites, including: 
	capacity, which is the most important factor, and the need for a new 
	generation of staff;appropriate institutional arrangements (in the case of Cambodia, a 
	council was set up for developing the land policy, and 17 ministries are 
	members, reflecting the fact that land is a cross-cutting issue);openness to the private sector;viewing land reform from a financial perspective, including land 
	valuation;realistic targets for titling;dispute resolution mechanisms that are pro-poor, straightforward and not 
	costly. The participant from Cambodia also mentioned that with the quality of titles 
produced in the country, the security of transactions is very high, and banks 
will provide up to 50 percent of the value of the land as a loan. At the same 
time, one of the impacts of land titling is that land value increases were 
significantly higher and the poor were selling it at a much lower price, with 
the result that the rich were capturing the majority of the land value increase 
due to titling. Discussions also revolved around titling vis-à-vis customary and legal 
frameworks, with some proposing that the former be assimilated into the latter, 
and others proposing that titling begin from customary law and build from there. 
The question also arose as to how to make certificates more valid, since in many 
areas they are not accepted by banks as collateral, thus preventing poor people 
from having access to financial services. It was felt that it is critical to 
demonstrate that the poor have the ability to repay and to save, in order for 
banks to have a better understanding of their capacity. The need was also 
expressed to have systems that can marry access to finance to ever-improving 
certificates. How can certificates be made stronger? The group discussed the need to have incremental approaches to land and 
finance access in order to minimize market distortions and put less strain on 
the administrative system. In this regard, as a group, people are better 
positioned to withstand livelihood shocks and access credit, and certificates 
gain in value as individuals create a positive credit history over time. 
Building trust was considered paramount. As people achieve a certain level of 
income, they gain more confidence in the formal system, and informal systems are 
gradually pared down. The complexities in the Pacific region were also discussed, in particular the 
situation of people who are not landless but are not in high-land-value areas. 
They move to urban areas, cannot get land and end up in informal settlements. In 
China, on the other hand, many people give up their land rights and gain rights 
to an apartment, not to a land parcel. One particular problem in China is access 
to credit. The financial system is not fully developed, and the government and 
banks are trying to learn from other countries in order to perfect legislation 
and the mortgage system, with a view to avoiding consequences similar to the 
sub-prime experience in the United States. The role of private financing was also discussed, especially since land is 
becoming increasingly scarce. There is a need to reserve a certain percentage of 
privately developed land for low-income people; people who had been moved out 
should have first rights of access, and private developers need to provide 
infrastructure such as schools and clinics.  A number of overall conclusions were put forth during the dialogue: 
	Developments are best served by an incremental approach, with collective 
	loans carefully administered at first, and then moving to individual loans 
	over time.Massive land titling doesn’t work; certificates work better, evolving to 
	more mature property rights over time.People prioritize legal certainty of land rights for the following 
	reasons: (i) security of tenure/ reduced risk of eviction; (ii) the ability 
	to pass on their asset to their children; and (iii) ability to access 
	credit. People need to be able to access credit without having to risk their 
	land asset.Small loans need to be able to evolve into larger loans and then into 
	some form of mortgage. Communities can increase their power through savings 
	schemes or by using traditional institutions. 
 How to assist local community savings groups such as Riverside slums in
 Jakarta, Indonesia where residents want to organize their own plan for
 upgrading, seeking private sector capital for their new apartments constructed
 to be above the flood danger level. © Michael Mutter
 A number of issues emerged from this Dialogue session, which included several 
participants each from Ghana and Nigeria, as well as others familiar with the 
West African context. Some of the key issues discussed were as follows: 
	Collaborative approach. Are institutions of surveyors working in 
	isolation, or are they bringing anyone else (e.g. service providers) on 
	board? A collaborative approach is essential.
Capacity building. There was a strong call for more capacity 
	building, recognizing the shortage of schools to train in developing 
	countries, and the need for capacity before talking about any large-scale 
	titling.
Diversity of contexts. Nigeria, with 60 states and 25 tribes, 
	offered an example of the diversity that exists within a country and the 
	importance of not generalizing solutions. The reasons for slum formation and 
	development differ, and careful research is required to understand different 
	contexts. Examples illustrated that slums and informality may exist for 
	reasons other than – or in addition to – poverty. For example, lack of 
	transportation can lead wealthier groups to choose to build informally close 
	to work, even if they own land in rural areas.
Advantages and disadvantages of titling. Intense debate took 
	place on the possible advantages of a land title, triggered by Geoffrey 
	Payne’s presentation. Some thought that land titling must be conducive to 
	accessing finance, even though it is clear that a poor person in possession 
	of a land title will not automatically gain access to credit. Communities 
	need to save and have some form of land relationship that helps them develop 
	incrementally in an affordable way. Examples from Ghana and Nigeria included 
	the use of para-legal titles that the financial company would accept to 
	secure the loan. It was also suggested that one of the negative outcomes of 
	titling is that it creates a “black and white” scenario – going directly 
	from informal to titling can obscure the full picture. Assessments and 
	gender analysis are needed at the outset to ensure that vulnerable areas and 
	groups are not excluded.
Taxation. Taxation of property has the benefit of making money 
	available to improve the environment for the general public. Some kind of 
	register is needed in order to establish a taxation system, but this does 
	not need to be land titling. At the same time, in many developing countries 
	taxation is on the poor, and the wealthiest property owners are not taxed – 
	this is clearly linked with corruption and weak land governance. It was agreed that land titling should not be an aim in itself. If there is 
no rule of law to support the rights attached to these titles, they are 
virtually useless. Good land governance is therefore critical. It was also emphasized that slum upgrading requires a holistic approach; 
facilities and services such as sewage, water and security should not be 
addressed individually. In addition, contemporary forms of collective tenure 
need to be explored, and more research is needed to build knowledge on its 
evolution and impacts. The dialogue concluded with a focus on the role of local government. How can 
FIG work more closely with local governments, including associations of local 
government? If local governments do not have the capacity to work with slums, 
ultimately nothing will happen. FIG also needs to work more with planners. In 
all cases, solutions need to be found locally, and local governments need to 
have the will and capacity, and access to information. 
 Slum Upgrading Facility in Ghana. © Michael Mutter
 Group 4 – Central and Eastern EuropeThe Central and Eastern Europe dialogue included participants from Croatia, 
Germany, Greece, Iraq, Israel, Norway, Russia, Turkey, the Ukraine, the United 
Kingdom and the United States. More than 50 million people in at least 15 European countries are affected by 
poor land administration and cadastre systems, with a lack of clarity and 
transparency in land tenure and property rights. Lack of clear planning regimes 
or a lack of enforcement of existing plans leads to massive illegal construction 
in urban areas. The dialogue focused on a number of factors influencing informal 
settlements. A wealth of country experiences and examples were given. In Serbia, one 
million illegal buildings have been constructed over the last 20 years, and the 
issue is how to bring them into the formal system and register them without 
accompanying high fees. In Russia, the speed of building construction is very 
high, with adverse environmental consequences since planning regulations are not 
designed for dense urban construction. In addition, in suburban cities there is 
illegal construction on agricultural land. A participant from Iraq noted that 
the country is still suffering from poor land management and unclear property 
rights. Updating of cadastral maps is extremely slow, and the information is 
outdated, with British maps from 1920 being used.  The issue of enforcement of regulations was intensely debated, with some 
participants insisting that the destruction of illegal structures is the best 
solution; others felt that such a measure was far too severe. Corruption was 
widely acknowledged as a major impediment to enforcement and a factor that was 
exacerbated by land management procedures that were not transparent. The following key issues emerged during the dialogue: 
	Informal construction has two principal and different motivations: 
	construction by poor people for basic shelter; and construction for 
	upgrading private real estate and for profit, usually in areas where real 
	estate values are high.The term legalization may not be the best term when applied to 
	addressing informal settlements. Decentralized or environmental upgrading 
	may be more appropriate to use when talking about acknowledging, in some 
	way, the existence of “informal” construction or settlements.Legalization is not a panacea. It needs to be to be complemented with 
	environmental improvements and upgrading of settlements, all of which is 
	time-consuming and costly.Land use and planning systems must be developed at the municipal/ local 
	level, with the participation of individuals and communities. In addition, 
	taxation is an indispensable tool that should be used to collect revenue to 
	be reinvested locally so that people see the immediate and local benefit. 
	Consideration should be given to needs of the taxpayers and not simply to 
	those of the legal owners.Public land administration needs to be equipped with modern tools such 
	as spatial data infrastructures, cadastre and e-governance in order to be 
	able to quickly and effectively address emerging demands arising from 
	urbanization. Moreover, it needs to be simplified to prevent undue delays 
	that would in itself promote illegal construction. People are willing to 
	respect laws if they are efficient and respond to their priorities. Post-conflict areas require particular attention, as land tenure 
	security in these areas is particularly threatened, and often in the absence 
	of public records or responsibility.Documentation and recording of property should include legal as well as 
	illegal dimensions.Land use changes may not comply with safety regulations, and attention 
	needs to be paid to these changes.Stable land policies will encourage investment in the maintenance and 
	upgrading of newly privatized land or property in countries in transition.Demolition of buildings is never a popular intervention. Only buildings 
	which are clear environmental hazards should be demolished.Corruption can be minimized through developing policy and regulations 
	that are clear, unambiguous and transparent.Land administration systems need to consider preventive remedies. In 
	addition over-regulation can be a barrier to affordable housing. 
 Across Albania, ALUZNI is in the process of legalizing 681 informal zones, 
(23,000 ha). ALUIZNI has recorded some 350,000 requests for legalization, out of 
which some 80,000 are multi-dwellings apartments and shops. © Doris Aldoni
 
 Day 2 – Just and Sustainable Shelter 
	Finance SystemsDay 2 began with plenary presentations that outlined how financial 
services are expanding to reach the urban poor. Four parallel “Dialogues 
addressing various links of the land administration chain” were held, again 
focusing on an exchange of experience, but this time from different professional 
perspectives. The objective was to enable a cross-cutting development of the 
links between individual links in the chain. Participants chose between four 
sessions: Practices and Tools; Reinventing Planning; Linking Financial Sources; 
and Access to Finance. A wealth of real-world experience was shared from around 
30 countries.  This section summarizes the key points made in the Plenary speeches and in 
the Dialogues. 
 Land Administration and Finance SystemsExpanding the Outreach of Housing Finance for the 
Urban Poor – A Matter of Cooperation Combined with Sufficient and Appropriate 
Due Diligence– Mr. Michael Mutter, Senior Advisor, Slum Upgrading Facility, UN-HABITAT
	
		| 
		 © FIG
 | Mr. Mutter opened his presentation with the question: “Why should we 
		be discussing finance for the urban poor in 2008 when the rest of the 
		world is suffering a major credit crunch resulting from massive 
		miss-selling of loans to the poor in North America?” The most 
		asked-for element in upgrading demanded by slum dwellers is access to 
		formal credit for loans for them to construct their own houses. As 
		things stand, poor people cannot afford credit since for them it is 
		exorbitant. This is because existing housing finance systems are not 
		geared to their needs. As a result, they fall prey to exploitation by 
		loan sharks at the informal end of the market, and to the high interest 
		rates of the formal market, both of which are linked to the perceived 
		high degree of risk for the lender. |  Mr. Mutter elaborated on the ‘slums investment deficit’ – the 
contrast between what poor people can do and put up with in an environment where 
they are not formally accommodated or sometimes even acknowledged, even though 
they provide the city with its base resources, namely, the labour and 
entrepreneurial skills that support the city economy. Currently, the ‘slums 
investment deficit’ is lop-sided. The slum dwellers are the investors in the 
urban economy and the ‘authorities’ do not keep up with them. The slum dwellers 
have incredible resources, and the slums have tremendous unrealizedvalue. To be productive they need investment. He then provided some examples of 
community-led housing finance schemes in Namibia, Pakistan, the Philippines, 
South Africa and Thailand.
 Mr. Mutter emphasized the growing understanding that the key to 
up-scaling the provision of water, sanitation, housing and neighbourhood 
development in developing countries is more successful and sustainable where 
innovative financing mechanisms are used that involve commercial project loans 
coupled with direct repayment elements by the householders themselves on a group 
basis. He described the three basics for slum upgrading and prevention which are 
core to investment decision-making: 
	
	Land availability and land security – meaning that once 
	occupied, the occupants will not be forcibly evicted. In this respect the 
	FIG’s role in working towards formal recognition of land security in 
	multiple forms specifically designed around the capabilities of the urban 
	poor can be seen as part of the due diligence required for finance.
	Responsibility of municipalities to ensure basic affordable 
	services – road access, drainage, sanitation and water supplies, etc. – this 
	may require credit facilities against the revenue generation of the entire 
	city asset base. Water and sanitation can be seen as an entry-point for 
	municipal action in slums. Understanding costs is crucial, especially 
	keeping the cost of construction in check. For example, the cost of a bag of 
	cement rises daily. But do we need to use so much cement? There are other 
	construction methods and this information needs to be brought to the local 
	level.
	Access to formal and affordable lines of credit specifically 
	for the slum dwellers’ own projects – such access is dependent upon the land 
	and services issues being agreed with local authorities as a basis for 
	community groups approaching the commercial banks for their involvement. 
	Savings schemes and cooperative structures help banks understand the 
	containment of risk to which they will be exposed. SUF has found that such processes can be best achieved through 
the establishment of local finance facilities that can offer credit enhancements 
or guarantees to act as a stimulus for the application of loan products from 
local financial institutions – the commercial banks. In this case the community 
savings can be increased by acting as a local guarantee arrangement for 
household groups or cooperatives to take loans on a collective basis. These 
Local Finance Facilities provide the technical assistance that can package the 
slum dwellers’ own upgrading multiple projects with the business plans for the 
repayment mechanisms and other finance agreements that can be understood clearly 
by the slum dwellers (the ‘clients’) and by the credit committees of the 
commercial banks. In addition, credit enhancements can be offered by the Local 
Finance Facilities to provide the necessary comfort for the commercial banks to 
close the deals with the slum dwellers. This process is called ‘Finance Plus’, 
in which the multi-stakeholder board is a problem-solving group able to help the 
slum dwellers’ projects gain competitive formal credit through their detailed 
‘due diligence’ of the projects. Mr. Mutter concluded by explaining the difference in approach – 
housing upgrading schemes are based on the plans of community groups (as opposed 
to individuals accessing bank loans), which creates greater ‘due diligence’ of 
the process leading towards the formal credit facilities. This is where a sound 
methodology leading towards a Project Business Plan process comes in – and 
results in a clearer picture of sustainable financing. This is working in 
practice, and is the model needs to be developed and expanded.  
	
		| 
		 © Michael Mutter
 | Kenyan example Point of contact for the community is essential 
		as part of a new approach to city planning, able to deal with the 
		problems associated with degraded residential occupancy at the urban 
		margin, then able to deal with: 
			Project Financial Packaging through development of a Special 
			Purpose Vehicle (SPV) Development Company or Housing Association, 
			engaging with domestic capital markets and commercial retail 
			lenders. This has attracted Rockefeller Foundations for funding. |  
		| 
		 This women’s savings group is linked with the Women’s savings Bank 
		Federation and slum Dwellers International. they thus have a track 
		record of full and timely repayments, well able to attract commercial 
		bank loans for development. © Michael Mutter
 | Sri Lanka example Financial packaging for three large-scale 
		slum upgrading initiatives with the Colombo and Moratuwa City Councils, 
		Slum Dwellers International and commercial banks: 
			Development of a nationally based Local Finance Facility as a 
			multi-stakeholder not-for-profit company able to package slum 
			dwellers’ projects and seek commercial loans with the help of local 
			credit enhancements.Expansion of low-income housing products.Technical assistance and advisory services to other municipal 
			slum upgrading projects. |  
		| 
		 The waterway threads through this Jakarta community. It is intensively 
		used. Families live, wash and trade from their pontoons, which is also 
		used as the community toilet facility. © Michael Mutter
 | Indonesian example Flood-prone housing areas in Jakarta 
		requiring technical advisory services to community cooperatives and 
		commercial banks: 
			Financial packaging for city-wide slum upgrading of Province of 
			Yogyakarta.Development of a Local Finance Facility for the City of Solo, 
			the former Surakarta capital of Indonesia. |    
	
		| DO | DON’T |  
		| Ensure that financing for slum upgrading is recognised as a priority 
		within national development planning and as a key investment element 
		contributing to economic growth. This emphasis should be reflected in a 
		slum upgrading budget line within national and local authority budgets. | Don’t rely on one off poverty-focused upgrading projects. |  
		| Encourage local and international banks and micro finance institutions 
		to become active participants in financing upgrading as part of their 
		core business. | Don’t rely solely on housing or government finance institutions. |  
		| Ensure that guarantees are available to encourage banks to lend to slum 
		upgrading projects. | Don’t provide guarantees that support interventions based on political 
		patronage. |  
		| Build investment in slum upgrading on a firm foundation of community 
		based savings and loan systems and local authority commitments to 
		provide in kind and monetary allocations on an annual basis. | Don’t assume that community involvement is best restricted to cost 
		recovery and loan repayment and that local government has no 
		responsibility for planning investment in upgrading. |  
		| Recognize that financing for slum upgrading requires a mix of short, 
		medium and long-term loans, integrating finance for building, 
		infrastructure and livelihoods. | Don’t assume that one financial product fits all. |  
		| Provide mechanisms to blend municipal finance, cross subsidies and 
		beneficiary contributions to ensure financial viability of upgrading 
		projects and home improvement programmes. | Don’t rely on government subsidies or on full cost recovery from slum 
		dwellers |  
		| Develop a process for sharing risk analysis and planning for risk 
		mitigation and management with all the key stakeholders | Don’t expect residents of slums to be the only risk takers in developing 
		new approaches to upgrading. |  
		| Plan projects on a mixed-use basis with revenue generating elements such 
		as saleable residential units and rentable commercial space in order to 
		maximize financial viability. | Don’t assume that lending for slum upgrading will necessarily be 
		asset-based. Where banks do lend for this purpose lending is more than 
		likely to be revenue based. |  
		| Ensure that subsidies are effectively targeted so that the benefits 
		reach those for whom they are intended and build on the basis of long 
		term engagement. | Don’t assume that all the problems of a slum can be addressed quickly 
		within the framework of a single project. |  
		| Recognize that not everyone who lives in a slum is poor. Where an area 
		upgrading strategy is to be implemented provision needs to be made for a 
		range of income groups with steps taken to ensure that the poorest are 
		not excluded. | Don’t insist that interventions should only benefit low-income families. |  
		| Recognize that home ownership is not the solution to everyone’s 
		problems. Provision for the development of affordable rental property is 
		an important component of financing slum upgrading. | Don’t restrict interventions to developments based on clear land title 
		and private ownership of property. |  
		| Make the real cost of finance very clear so that people clearly 
		understand the commitments they are making to loan repayment. | Don’t hide the real cost behind misleading promotional messages. |  
		| Where appropriate establish local upgrading finance facilities so that 
		funding is locally available. | Don’t assume that existing finance institutions will have the capacity 
		to deliver the full range of financial services required. |  
		| Explore options to use land allocation, readjustment and sharing methods 
		to release finance for upgrading. | Don’t place unnecessary restrictions on land use Financing slum 
		upgrading. |  Financing slum upgrading. Channelling the Global Financial Flows for 
Adequate and Affordable Housing– Ms. Renu Karnard, President, International Union for Housing Finance
	
		| 
		 © FIG
 | Ms. Karnard elaborated on how the global financial flows could be 
		linked to serve the purpose of adequate and affordable housing for all – 
		based on experiences from India. She began by describing the role of housing in India, which is a 
		critical component of the economy since it is the second largest 
		employment generator after agriculture. In fact, she added, the sector 
		has grown 30 percent per year over the last five years. At the same time 
		the total investment for meeting housing requirements until 2012 is 
		estimated at US$ 90 billion, which represents an enormous challenge. 
		Therefore, it is all the more imperative to seek innovative housing 
		finance solutions from the private sector. Currently, the acute housing 
		shortage has translated into 23 percent of the population living in 
		slums or squatter settlements. Moreover, only 36 percent of urban 
		households have sanitation facilities. |  The main players in housing finance are banks and housing finance 
companies, which cater to the upper- and middle-income segments of the 
population. However, affordability has improved over the last decade: in 1995 it 
took 22 times one’s annual income to buy a house in a typical suburb of Mumbai; 
today the ratio is five times. The decrease can be attributed primarily to 
rising disposable incomes. Nevertheless, housing remains unaffordable for a vast 
population. The key reason is the distortion in land prices. The price of land 
accounts for almost half the cost of a house. Land is a state subject, and like 
any other emerging country, India faces a host of legal and regulatory 
constraints that prevent land from entering the market. Other constraints 
include lack of clear land titles and lack of a rental market. To encourage low-cost housing, there could be a stipulation that 
all new housing projects have a fixed percentage allotted for low-income 
housing, with tax relief incentives for developers. To encourage financiers to 
lend for low-cost housing, there is a need for clear land titles, the 
introduction of mortgage insurance and better credit data. One of the most 
comprehensive policy measures by the government is the National Housing Policy, 
which is focusing on economically weaker segments of the population. The policy 
encourages in situ slum housing over resettlement, where possible. The 
government has recognized that free housing schemes do not reach the intended 
beneficiaries, and that low-income households tend to build gradually (often one 
room at a time), thus requiring the need for timely credit. Ms. Karnard concluded by stating that, despite the hurdles, there 
is a growing commitment on the part of the government to realize its goal of 
“Affordable Housing for All” and to partner with the private sector in order to 
ensure that every citizen of India has a place to call home. 
 Community groups in Bangladesh, based on daily savings schemes, now formed into 
Community Development Committees (CDCs) to contract and supervise all upgrading 
work; attractive to local banks who want to contribute to repayable investments 
and housing credit schemes via a CDC Trust Fund under local direction. © Michael 
Mutter
 Land Finance through Land Governance – Expanding 
the Discussion of Land Policy during Food Crisis, Climate Change and Rapid 
Urbanization– Mr. Malcolm Childress, Senior Land Administration Specialist, The World 
Bank
	
		| 
		 © FIG
 | Mr. Childress began by noting that land finance for the poor is 
		highly exclusionary and cannot be disentangled from the discussion of 
		land governance in a changing global context that creates new threats 
		and new opportunities for poor groups. The 2008 World Bank World 
		Development Report, “Agriculture for Development”, he added, documents 
		in detail the fact that the ‘bottom billion’ of low-asset peri-urban and 
		rural groups face the most acute challenges. This group cannot achieve 
		meaningful participation in existing land markets and cannot access 
		housing finance. The changing price contexts in energy, food and carbon 
		make these challenges more acute, but may also offer new opportunities 
		for ‘win-win’ solutions as multiple sectors recognize the costliness of 
		land governance failures. |  In the previous era of (artificially) cheap energy, the location 
of cities or of fixed natural resources was not considered important. In today’s 
context of rising land, commodity and energy prices, location is increasingly 
important. This in turn creates tremendous competition between different 
interests in land. In this environment, the quality of land governance becomes 
critical, determining who has access to what land for what purpose. The 
decisions made on these issues will affect, in turn, the distribution of gains 
from growth. At the same time, he added, new opportunities are emerging. 
Skyrocketing land prices in developing country cities, for example, create new 
opportunities to capture land values to benefit the poor (for example, through 
land sharing). Another example is the establishment of markets for avoiding 
deforestation, conserving land and resources and establishing new types of 
global commons (carbon, atmosphere, oceans, intellectual property, communication 
bandwidth, financial space, etc.). Some of these have significant potential to 
benefit the poor, particularly in forest and peri-urban areas. The challenges and opportunities are clear, he added, but getting 
traction for poor groups to improve social and environmental outcomes is 
difficult. It requires effective land governance at multiple scales – local, 
regional, national and international. Land issues are present and critical at 
each scale of governance, from parcels, to neighbourhoods, to municipalities, 
districts, countries and regions. But we lack the tools and institutions to 
successfully manage even small spaces and interactions. New tools combining land 
administration and information technology offer tremendous promise for land 
governance, but the social and political agreements needed are much more 
complicated and often seem out of reach. To make progress in effectively 
managing the global commons, he stated, the land governance agenda must engage 
with the actors, interests and structures concerned with the exercise and 
regulation of power at different scales (including elite, popular and excluded 
groups at each scale). Governance specialists and land specialists need to talk. New paradigms for looking at land governance in the 21st century 
may hold promise for creating ‘win-win’ scenarios for territorial health in 
which different social groups find profitable and mutually agreeable ways to 
share space. One such option is the revaluing of resources through the pricing 
and taxation of land in a fully carbon-linked, water-scarce, global economy. 
Food productivity and local system resiliency and local environmental services 
create new opportunities for income streams for the poor and new sets of 
possible agreements around urban, forest and agricultural land. The concept of Legal Empowerment of the Poor (on which a 
high-level Commission) recently concluded its report), may find its strongest 
expression in land governance through a focus on inclusive policy development 
and the ‘continuum of rights’ and interests in land. This puts a renewed focus 
on the inclusion of public lands, communal rights and land management in 
relation to land policies and land finance. It also calls for thickening the 
institutional context through greater inclusion of the full range of social 
actors and the increased recognition of the importance of land by both 
environmental and finance constituencies alike. He concluded by emphasizing that many of the price/cost 
parameters under which land finance and land governance have worked in previous 
years has changed. Land governance at multiple scales is not the concern of just 
one specific technical practice, but rather of multiple social interest groups. 
In this way, land value and land financing can be made to work for all, in 
particular the poor. Housing Finance for All – Swedish Engagement in Land 
Administration and Housing Finance– Mr. Dan Ericsson, State Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Sweden
	
		| 
		 © FIG
 | Mr. Ericsson explained the Swedish engagement in land 
		administration and housing finance. He started out by pointing at 
		historical evidence that the major injustices in the world can be 
		changed. “Compassion and anger can be driving forces for those of 
		us who are eager to push towards justice and equality. Don’t 
		underestimate emotions in this respect. Dr Martin Luther King didn’t 
		when he told millions about his dreams. Those dreams may not have been 
		fulfilled but there has been progress – quite a bit of progress. It is 
		worth working towards goals that seem unreachable at the time – like 
		housing finance for all. If we put our hearts and our minds to it, we 
		too can go far towards our goal. And it will be worth it!” |  Cities in developing countries show that the paradox that 
progress creates poverty rings true. Poor people are forced to live in 
overcrowded conditions due to rising constraints on their access to land. The 
functioning of the urban land market is arguably the most consistent bottleneck 
undermining long-term city development. To change this, the Swedish State Secretary requested existing 
actors in the global financial markets to play their parts in a comprehensive 
legal, political, social and economic framework for urban land markets. These 
actors need to recognize the market at the bottom of the population pyramid – 
which consists of close to four billion people. The comprehensive framework, he 
explained, is built on the assumption that ownership of property, alone or with 
others, should be a human right. A fully functioning property system should be 
composed of four blocks: a system of rules that defines the bundle of rights and 
obligations between people and assets reflecting the diversity of property 
systems around the world; a system of governance; a functioning market for the 
exchange of assets; and an instrument of social policy. When such a system fully 
functions, it becomes a tool for the inclusion of the poor in the formal 
economy, and a mechanism for upward social mobility. But even when a single 
component is dysfunctional, the poor are deprived or discriminated against. The initiative of this Seminar was taken by the two responsible 
agencies for land and housing in Sweden – the National Mapping, Cadastre and 
Land Registration Authority of Sweden and the National Housing Credit Guarantee 
Board. From a policy based on the need for integration, these two institutions 
have for many decades developed a way to combat poor living conditions. He concluded his speech with a reaffirmation of Sweden’s 
commitment to this issue. “Sweden has experience in this field, which we are 
ready to share with others. We will support responsible actors, linking the land 
administration chain and bringing a shared understanding of the way forward. Let 
this be known – we are here not just to attend another seminar. FIG has chosen 
the Dialogue formula in order to learn from experience and share both successes 
and failures. We are here to listen and to learn. We will help bridge the gap 
between functioning land markets and functioning financial markets. This work 
must continue so that we can come closer to fulfilling the dream I mentioned – 
the dream that we all share.” 
 Putting Innovative Systems for Functioning 
Finance into PracticeInnovative Structures for Financing Slum Housing 
and Infrastructure– Mr. P. R. Anil Kumar, Head (Microfinance), Emerging Markets, Barclays Bank 
PLCMr. Kumar first introduced some innovations to make banking 
easier, including credit cards and home and personal loans. However, these 
innovations are not widely used in slum areas because there is often no proof of 
identity and no proof of address for loans. Furthermore, banks and housing 
finance companies perceive such innovations as too risky, since the transactions 
carry high operating costs with low value and require longer-term exposure. 
Microfinance institutions are wary because of the difficult of creating groups 
for repayment assurance as well as the issue of the long-term context. He then went on to describe a number of successful examples, 
including the Society for the Promotion of Area Resource Centres (SPARC) housing 
model in Mumbai, India, in which the perquisites include urban land that is 
available for rehabilitation, and a good “transferable development rights” 
market (i.e. the right to construct more for a given land area). The 
stakeholders include NGOs, land owners, inhabitants of the land, the government 
and banks. He also spoke about the SPARC sanitation model, in which 300 toilet 
blocks are being constructed through an escrow mechanism with the municipality, 
and with operating costs funded by the community. Another example he gave was the Johannesburg Housing Company in 
South Africa, which is a rental housing model that seeks to refurbish relatively 
older buildings and lease them to clients. The loan component comprises about 60 
percent of the project cost, and the equity component comes as a grant. Both the 
loan and building maintenance are paid for from rental receivables, and rent 
collections have a track record of almost 100 percent. The final example Mr. Kumar presented was the Kudumbashree 
community housing model from Kerala State, India, in which government machinery 
is used to create community organizations and build capacity, thus reducing 
costs and risks. The bank then lends based on its credit assessment, and the 
government facilitates the bank’s linkages with the community. Individual loans 
can be taken for up to US$2,500. To date, more than 15 banks have participated 
in the model, with over 100,000 houses financed and with very high repayment 
rates. Mr. Kumar concluded his presentation by emphasizing that any 
workable solution will need to incorporate a combination of both free market and 
subsidy solutions. He also indicated a number of key enablers: bridge funds; 
partial guarantees; sensible use of grants as revolving funds/bridge funds; and 
using subsidies and government participation in capacity building. 
 In Sri Lanka slum dwellers, as above, have been able to build their own new 
houses, with technical and financial assistance. © Michael Mutter
 Local Finance Facilities: What They Are, Why They Are 
Important, and How They Work– Ms. Ruth McLeod, Emerging Markets GroupMs. McLeod began by describing the “Finance Plus” Facility, which 
brings together key players involved in city and national slum upgrading 
strategies to address the challenges of financing slum upgrading. The Facility 
functions include providing a means to blend different funding to maximize 
affordability, and generating data and information for planning and monitoring 
slum upgrading. The stakeholders are comprised of government authorities, 
traditional authorities, local government, civil society and market 
representatives. The Facility provides three types of assistance: 
	
	Loan guarantees to facilitate access to commercial bank loans
	Technical assistance to ensure the development of bankable 
	projects and programmes
	Catalytic grants to provide critical inputs for successful 
	project planning and implementation. Ms. McLeod explained the services offered, sources of funds and 
types of initiatives provided in the three countries in which the Facility 
operates: Ghana, Indonesia and Sri Lanka. All countries receive the full 
complement of services, which include guarantees for wholesale and project 
loans, technical assistance for project design and loan negotiations, and grants 
for initiating projects. Funding sources include SUF, and local and national 
government, although the latter is source only in Sri Lanka. Initiatives are 
either planned home improvement programmes or planned area improvement projects. Ms. McLeod concluded her presentation by briefly describing some 
of the main lessons learned through the establishment and operation of the 
Facility: 
	
	Local finance facilities generate commitment and focus on 
	city-wide slum upgrading.
	There is great potential for long-term and more complex slum 
	upgrading initiatives to be channelled through facilities using the “Finance 
	Plus” approach.
	National- and municipal-level facilities help to stimulate 
	project ideas.
	There is a long delay and high fall-out rate between project 
	concept and implementation.
	Rising interest rates are interfering with affordability 
	(particularly in Sri Lanka).
	Community savings and loan systems are a crucial element. 
 © Ruth McLeod
 
 Four parallel dialogues were held to address the various links in 
the land administration chain. The following sections provide a summary of the 
main discussions points of each Dialogue, as well as the key issues that 
emerged. Dialogue 1: Land management practices and tools and 
links to efficient financeThe dialogue was opened by two slide presentations: the Social 
Tenure Domain Model (STDM), presented by Chrit Lemmen; and the Gender Mechanism 
of the GLTN presented by Åsa Jonsson. Chrit Lemmen began his presentation by emphasizing the fact that 
land professionals generally recognize that the existing tools supporting land 
administration are not pro-poor. He went on to describe a project to develop a 
Social Tenure Domain Model (STDM) for land administration. The STDM covers land 
administration in a broad sense, including both spatial and administrative 
components. In conventional systems, it is possible to relate names/addresses of 
persons to land parcels via rights. The STDM, by contrast, relates fingerprints 
of a person to a co-ordinate point inside the land in use by that person, via a 
social tenure relation. The idea is to be able to map land rights and claims in 
a context in which there are many types of statutory, customary and informal 
land rights and claims. The STDM makes it possible to put rights into a system 
which are not registered rights, nor registerable, and are claims that need to 
be adjudicated both in terms of the “who”, the “where”, and the “what type” of 
right or claim. From a land and finance perspective, a functional STDM creates 
the possibility that a continuum of land rights can be documented, from less 
secure to more secure, and the financial markets could price that relative 
security into a new generation of loan products explicitly designed for the 
poor. A lengthy and multi-faceted discussion was held on gender, 
including the fact that many women still do not have the right to hold a title; 
that women often are not recognized as a de jure head of household even though 
many women are in fact the head; that female land ownership may be as low as 5 
percent (and less) in some countries while it is women who mainly work on 
agricultural land with little benefit from the produce; that customary laws and 
practices often discriminate against women; and that education is critical for 
women to know and apply their rights, and for them to be able to join land 
professions and decision-making bodies. It was agreed that one of the most 
important elements is to have appropriate laws and policies in place, including 
the fundamental one of allowing women to own land, and to make sure that these 
are implemented. It was concluded that to enhance gender-responsiveness, work is 
needed on many fronts at the same time. A number of country examples were highlighted related to gender 
and land management practices: 
	
	In Lao PDR, collaboration with the Lao women’s union has 
	ensured that a woman is always present in discussions on property to inform 
	households on gender dimensions. Results of women’s empowerment have 
	emerged: women with titles in their name have increased from 20 percent to 
	30 percent, with an additional 26 percent having joint titles.
	In Sumatra, Indonesia, customary practices are matrilineal, 
	which means that inheritance passes from mothers to daughters. It was noted, 
	however, that multiple systems are in place, at times in parallel, which 
	need to be fully understood.
	In Ghana, both husband and wife are registered. – In Malawi, 
	everyone has the right to own land.
	In Rwanda, the issue of gender was continually raised during 
	the process of establishing the constitution and land policy. As a result, 
	land-related institutions have a more balanced gender representation. 
	In Kenya, although rules specify that local institutions and 
	land control boards should have 30 percent representation by women, the 
	rules are not enforced. Similarly, although the land policy specifies that 
	there should be legislated land dispute tribunals, these rarely support 
	women. Thus, when a man dies, the property often passes on to his relatives 
	rather than to his wife. Discussions also centred on the significance of effectively 
collecting municipal fees. Examples were cited from Ghana, where local 
municipalities only have the capacity to collect 20 percent of the total fees. 
It was noted that if they could collect 90 percent they would be financially 
self-sufficient. It was suggested that rather than looking at other means of 
innovative financing, it might be more appropriate to explore means of improving 
collection. A number of country examples were again provided. 
	
	In Kisumu, Kenya it was estimated that only 20 percent of the 
	revenue is collected. The advantages of enumeration were flagged, where land 
	data are collected in cooperation with NGOs using forms to record land users 
	linked to satellite images to collect spatial data.
	In Ghana, only 22.5 percent of the revenue is currently being 
	collected. It was reiterated that land revenue collection needs to be 
	decentralized. The need for a cadastre was also mentioned, and steps were 
	shared on how a land information database can be set up at the municipal 
	level, which can be monitored by the municipal assembly. This led to discussion on what type of information is required 
for tax collection. It was noted that in informal settlements it is not possible 
to conduct surveys in the same way as they are conducted in formal areas. 
Scaled-down options for collecting information need to be explored, with simpler 
and quicker methods. In this context, the important question arose as to who 
owns the problem of lack of information – is it the community, local governments 
or land owners? In addition, back-up systems must be in place for such 
information. A point was made that there is too much focus on upgrading rather 
than on preparing for urbanization. In this regard, revenues can be used to 
avoid new informal settlements in the future by proper and longer-term planning. The dialogue ended with an emphasis on the need for political 
will and technical expertise. 
 © FIG
 Dialogue 2: Revisiting planning: Cutting the costs, 
involving the rights of the poor and enabling adequate financeThe chair of this Dialogue, Mr. Geoffrey Payne, began by posing 
the question, “How do we persuade those who do not work in cities that they are 
the engines of social and economic development?”. He gave an example of Mumbai, 
which holds 1.5 percent of India’s population but contributes 30 percent of all 
central government revenues. These revenues form the basis for rural development 
programmes, so healthy, dynamic cities are vital to rural development, yet 
policy makers do not seem to accept this. There are a range of conferences and 
publications that have generated the approaches needed to create successful 
cities. However, these approaches are not being adopted and implemented at the 
scale and speed needed. One reason discussed was that politicians, senior administrators 
and the commercial elite are benefiting sufficiently from the status quo and 
therefore ignore the information that is available. Therefore, a major issue is 
how to re-invent planning to mediate between public and market interests, and 
how to de-link land interests (of politicians/elite) from planning. An example 
was given of South Africa, where attempts are being made to transform segregated 
cities. However, high land values in good locations consistently exclude the 
poor and force the authorities to develop low-income housing in peripheral 
locations far from job locations. State planning and coordination were also discussed. An example 
was given of Lusaka, Zambia, where legislation exists but is not enforced. 
Informal settlements were upgraded but the infrastructure is not maintained. In 
this regard, it was highlighted that the best planning is done by the slum 
dwellers themselves. Mobilizing them is not difficult, and if the service needs 
are articulated by the people who live there, it becomes their project – they 
get what they want, and resources are used to the maximum. By involving the 
community in “bottom-up” planning, less information is needed for planning by 
professionals, as the local people know their area. In addition, stakeholder 
participation leads to local conflicts being resolved within the community. 
Local distribution of money to communities helps realize their locally defined 
goals.  It was also pointed out that megacities need information for a 
broad overview of their challenges, and that planning needs to be long term, for 
example ten years. The link between detailed planning and large area planning is 
missing. The dialogue also focused on decentralization and people “hiding” 
from taxation. Development broadens the base for property tax, and this tax 
raises funds for decentralized functions. Information is needed for collecting 
tax, appropriate systems are required for the redistribution of resources. 
Taxation should also capture some of the value that is created by society. In 
other words, if the local authority provides new roads or services, this 
increases property values and should therefore generate more revenues. However, 
as residents of informal settlements are usually poor, it is not fair that they 
should have to develop through their own financing (e.g. micro-financing). There 
should be systems for re-distributing wealth. The poor are willing to pay taxes 
if they see benefits. An example was given of Lusaka, where there are campaigns 
for taxation. The public is informed, and community members understand the need 
for taxation.  Efficient taxation and efficient distribution are important. If 
the wealthy are taxed too high, they leave the area. Therefore, there is a limit 
as to how far redistribution can go. In Ghana, for example, slum upgrading led 
to increased property tax revenue. Taxation is democratically determined, but 
politics and policies do not drive development – the market does. In this 
regard, transferable development rights is a good example of how governments can 
guide the market rather than fight the market. Infrastructure can be financed by 
selling land rights “above” the infrastructure. For instance, shopping areas and 
offices built over railway stations generated sufficient revenues to finance 
major infrastructure works in Mumbai and Navi (New) Mumbai. To help the poor within market economies, an example was given of 
London, U.K., where a rule was implemented whereby any commercially based 
residential development should include low income housing for 50 percent of the 
development. In London, this is feasible, since institutional capacity is in 
place for enforcing the rules. However, such enforcement capacity is not 
universal. Another example was given in South Africa, where 100,000 houses per 
year have been built. The problem in many developing countries, and even more 
developed ones like South Africa, is that governments generally lack an 
understanding of where and how much they can influence market-based decisions. 
Policy makers also overlook the fact that the poor build incrementally and not 
all at once. Two types of planning are needed: development to meet the needs 
of existing settlements and populations and development to address the needs of 
future populations. For existing settlements, planning/upgrading is incremental. 
As upgrading may be the first contact people have with officials, confidence 
must be built between communities and the public sector. It is also important to 
accept that starting incremental developments requires follow-up and that poor 
people usually cannot provide input into the upgrading other than their labour. Information is indispensable for community-based planning. An 
example was given of Hyderabad, India, where information kiosks or E-Centres are 
making information available to the community through Internet points that are 
serviced by young government employees. Forms for all sorts of needs (passport 
applications, driving licenses, building permits, etc.) can be printed and 
processed in the same way that a courier service offers. Information on what is 
being planned by the authorities is freely available, thus helping bridge the 
information divide. The concept of “m-government” (mobile) should also be 
promoted. Through mobile telephones, government officials can improve 
information exchange by disseminating information, warnings, etc. quickly and 
easily. 
 Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) project in India has shown that slums can 
be
 comprehensively improved, slum dwellers will contribute. © I. P. Gautam
 Dialogue 3: Linking the financial sourcesParticipants from ten countries engaged in this dialogue, 
including representatives of the banking, public and academic sectors. A short presentation was given on the World Bank Global 
Partnership on Output Based Aid and its work in connection with mortgage-backed 
securitization and subsidy schemes. Efficient subsidies should govern the 
sustainability of the market, with onetime subsidies for the connection, and 
additional subsidies for access to services for the use of them. The 
presentation also posed the question, “How do we link the various financial 
sources and how do we link local sources with the global financial market?” The role of the state versus the market was singled out as a key 
issue. The group was then divided into two, one focusing on “private” concerns 
such as savings schemes, housing loans, remittances, microfinance institutions 
(MFIs) and microcredit, and the other on “public” concerns such as tax policies 
and other core issues. A number of country experiences were described. For example, Hong 
Kong had slums 15 years ago, but not any longer. The problem was said to be 
solved, not simply “relocated”. The solution was the building of a more compact 
city, with high-rises, and in a public-private partnership. Government provided 
land and the private sector provided housing. Government also reclaimed a lot of 
land that had been trespassed. Initially the flats were rented, but since the 
1980s some have been available for purchase. Prices have risen dramatically in 
this period. In Ethiopia, the government uses two approaches: setting the 
rules for private participation and providing condominium houses, which has been 
a good experience. Abolishing slums has been concerned with changing the 
horizontal city into a vertical city. Vertical cities save land and generate 
revenues. Property rights are very important. As for the development of slums in Africa, the basic problem is 
corruption. Greed and need are both root causes. The government’s role should be 
to provide incentives for housing cooperatives and create an enabling 
environment for low-interest bank rates. In addition, it still remains unclear 
whether MFIs in much of Africa will invest in long-term loans – loans for a car, 
yes; for a house, no. In Indonesia, the government usually has a planning monopoly. For 
informal settlements, it is very difficult for poor people to come together and 
invest in their infrastructure. The government needs to conduct the initial work 
to improve roads, water, sanitation, etc. In this way, the value of the houses 
increases, and it then becomes possible to gain access to credit from the 
commercial banks. However, this is very much dependent on local conditions, and 
it is still generally impossible for local communities to mobilize enough. 
Moreover, it is difficult to envision private companies being part of the 
solution when it comes to informal settlements, where there are often extremely 
poor people living on land whose value is very low. In these situations, 
government or local subsidies are needed. The representative from Hong Kong explained that the national 
government together with local government should form artificial companies. 
Public-private partnerships should be one unit. Technical and managerial support 
should be given at the outset and then phased out. There should also be 
three-party agreements, including government, community and private operator. 
However, the question arises as to where the private actor will find its 
incentives. In addition, a functioning private sector is not possible if the 
public sector is not working. For example, in Nigeria there is no electricity, 
and therefore the banks are not going to provide loans because the risk is too 
great. MFIs are just beginning to function in Nigeria, which is an outflow from 
the banking consolidation conducted in the country in 2005. Before, there were 
too many community banks, but currently there is a maximum of 25 banks. There 
are no mortgage institutions or subsidies, and therefore loans are given at 
prime lending rates. Only people who are working or self-employed have the 
necessary assets to borrow. In addition, it is taken for granted that borrowers 
will have a good title documents. The dialogue concluded that the involvement of both central and 
local government is needed to minimize corruption, support infrastructure, 
security and title issues, and provide subsidies. This could provide incentives 
for the private sector to come in. All of this will need to be integrated within 
the planning process. The international community also has an important role to 
play by putting pressure on national governments when they are corrupt, 
especially when money is diverted. The international community could also 
provide the long-term financing required to address housing. Dialogue 4: Expanding the outreach of housing 
finance for the urban poorThe session included participants from Angola, Egypt, India, 
Nigeria and South Africa. It began with an exchange of country experiences. The participant 
from Nigeria explained that less than 5 percent of the population’s home 
construction is financed through mortgages and that financing is generally 
accessible only to the upper middle class, since equity must be about 25 percent 
of the cost of home construction or the purchase price. Moreover, Nigerian 
professionals have not managed to convince the three tiers of government to 
create a conducive environment for slum upgrading investment. One option would 
be to link to organizations of the urban poor and encourage business investment 
in the area (small poultry farms, fishery, farming, etc.). However, support from 
external organizations would be needed to generate the political will for the 
investment. In India ten years ago, there was only one serious mortgage 
lender, whose prerequisites included a formal job, with a salary deduction for 
the mortgage payment. This translated into two types of borrowers: the wealthy 
and people seeking to launder black money. A dramatic shift took place when 
banks became willing to take construction-related risks and slowly moved to 
broadening the market. Today a person whose monthly salary is US$ 500 can 
receive a formal loan for housing under construction. The bank assesses the 
construction risk, the customer is then appraised, and a mortgage decision is 
made. This is still asset-based lending and the key consideration is the 
security/quality of the asset. For the bank, the main concern is whether it can 
sell the asset to recover its investment in the event the person defaults. Egypt has a somewhat similar experience in that 15 years ago 
commercial loans were available but not residential loans. As commercial lenders 
became more comfortable in the market, they started to become willing to create 
new and different products, which is a promising first step. In Angola, where two thirds of the population resides in large 
cities, the construction sector is strong, including informal construction, 
which produces good-quality housing. Recently, government structures are being 
created for housing finance, and new laws are under preparation for land 
management that cover state and private land. There are some community groups, 
but no political governance structure to coordinate them. Moreover, communities 
have not yet come together to effectively lobby for their interests. There are 
strong political movements towards investment in infrastructure and 
urbanization, and for surveying and land management, as well as for transferring 
state-owned houses to private ownership. The dialogue then turned to the key factors required to create an 
enabling environment for lending for low-income housing construction. They 
include: 
	
	Macro-economic stability. Fixed-rate loans are not 
	feasible in a situation of rising interest rates. Loans are restricted to 
	short-term incremental lending, and incremental construction. Home 
	improvement loans are possible, but not for three-story high-rises or 
	multi-year loans.
	Collateral. Mechanisms to recover their investment 
	(foreclosure, group guarantee) are perceived to be essential for banks.
	Legal framework. There need to be means of protecting 
	investments against theft or fraud.
	Financing sources. Financing sources could also 
	include affordable funds, including pension funds. The macro-economic 
	environment is improving in many developing countries and there are more 
	diverse opportunities for investment, including housing finance. In other 
	countries, inflation is rising and needs to be considered in the calculation 
	of the loan interest rates. There was a fairly common perception that mortgage markets were 
not an effective solution for the urban poor to access housing. There was a 
preference for lending to organizations of the urban poor. In addition, there is 
a widespread assumption that housing loans are consumption loans, whereas many 
housing loans are in fact small-business loans, as home-based businesses are 
established. A number of key messages emerged from the dialogue: 
	
	Macro-economic stability is critical. The annual inflation 
	rate must be 10 percent or less for mortgage finance to be viable.
	Mortgage-based lending instruments are not appropriate for 
	the urban poor living in a context of rapid urbanization, lack of land 
	title, and inability to foreclose. The most appropriate profile for 
	low-income housing loans is not asset-based lending (collateral-based); a 
	history of repayment is more critical.
	Historically, subsidies have played a significant role in 
	generating markets. These are not a best practice, but they do open up 
	markets to new sources of finance. Often an incremental approach is required 
	to build lender comfort. Commercial loans can start more quickly; loan 
	guarantee or insurance systems are other options at the early stage to get 
	the system functioning.
	An incremental approach is needed for building houses and 
	markets. A poor person cannot simply go out and arrange bank financing for 
	housing. Small steps are necessary.
	Groups or cooperative models are key to accessing finance and 
	reducing the risk perception. Groups can provide a guarantee for repayment, 
	with members of the group able to cover an individual’s instalment if one of 
	them falls short in any given month.
	Group savings and loans systems are critical. Over time these 
	systems can become larger and more sophisticated and help build financial 
	literacy. Savings are indispensable to prove creditworthiness. In this 
	regard, groups can strengthen and leverage individual savings.
	There is a need for political will to create an enabling 
	environment for private investment in slum upgrading. Governments must 
	practice restraint: borrowing less for their annual budget and helping to 
	bring inflation down.
	There may be a need to create new institutions to meet the 
	demands of the urban poor clientele, since it is difficult to convince banks 
	to move into new markets. The Committee on Development Information (of the 
	United Nations Economic Commission for Africa) is one model: group lending 
	is established; an upgrading or development project proposal is put forward 
	and never linked to the commercial financial sector, depending instead on 
	government capital.
	Secondary mortgage markets and insurance schemes may also 
	contribute to broadening access to finance for the poor. Large loans would 
	be needed, and perhaps spread over multiple countries, but there is a 
	question of capacity in domestic banks.
	Another option is a shared ownership scheme. For example, a 
	teacher pays rent on three quarters of the unit to a housing association and 
	over time can increase his or her equity share. Such a market would require 
	a strong regulatory framework. 
	
		|  |  
		| 
		 An example of upgrading project in Patan Nagaar, India, situation before 
		and after the project.
 © I. P. Gautam
 |  
 
 © FIG
 As partners in the GLTN and with financial support from Sida, 
UN-HABITAT and Lantmäteriet (the National Mapping, Cadastre and Land 
Registration Authority of Sweden) jointly coordinated a gender component during 
the two-day Dialogue. The objectives were to sensitize participants on gender 
dimensions necessary for any discussion on land; provide concrete examples from 
projects in Africa and Asia where women play a critical role in the slum 
improvement response – including innovative financing – and/or where land tools 
have been gendered; and enable practitioners to strategize on how to more widely 
share these experiences within their own countries and globally. Six participants provided insights on gender issues within 
existing land tenure systems in Africa (Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Rwanda and 
Zambia) and Asia (Indonesia, Sri Lanka). The participants each provided a 
background paper (available on 
www.justnsustshelter.org) and delivered presentations and inputs in various 
forums over the two days. An assessment of how to best integrate gender into these kinds of 
forums, and a roadmap for possible future collaboration, was discussed during a 
wrap-up meeting on 18 June. There was consensus that more needs to be done to 
ensure that gender issues are profiled throughout meetings and events of this 
kind – from the opening statements to the selection of topics in dialogues and 
working groups. It was agreed that the problems related to slums clearly have a 
gender dimension and many slum dwellers are women with special concerns. 
Concerns about such issues as prostitution and HIV/AIDS are serious development 
constraints and need to be addressed within a gender-responsive context. Social 
issues, which are root causes of poverty, also need to be addressed, otherwise 
any effort to reduce poverty will not advance. The heterogeneity of women also 
needs to be more deeply addressed, and move beyond just talking about men and 
women. A number of important country experiences were then highlighted: 
	
	The complex nature of customary laws was raised, whereby many 
	development partners and human rights agendas support these systems, yet 
	such customs also often include negative practices such as discrimination 
	against the girl child. Discussions on human rights need to be synchronized 
	and the final impact on the ground is paramount.
	In Ethiopia, customary laws still exist and women are 
	discriminated against. The court is often corrupt and favours men. The 
	institutional set-up needs to be refined.
	In Rwanda, more than 53 percent of households are headed by 
	women, and there are even children heading households. Given these 
	situations, it is critical to think about an appropriate policy based on how 
	people live in reality, which requires gender responsiveness, and to reflect 
	that reality in the Rwanda National Land Policy.
	In Kenya, one of the reasons the draft constitution was 
	rejected was women’s inheritance. Even women themselves voted against more 
	inheritance rights for women. It was reflected that Kenyans had not 
	sufficiently raised awareness of this critical gender aspect, and had left 
	it to NGOs to put it on the table, rather than senior government officials. 
	How can we counter these images and what strategy should we use? It was 
	agreed that more case studies and documentation on these kinds of 
	experiences are needed. At the close of the meeting, a number of ideas were put forward 
on future collaboration and next steps, including: 
	
	Given the success of savings and credit schemes managed by 
	women for micro-financing, it was questioned if this also can be transferred 
	to land rights, e.g. move from common titling of property to property 
	information mainly in the name of women.
	Create gender information/training campaigns as a joint 
	Lantmäteriet–Swedesurvey–UN-HABITAT initiative. These should focus on 
	advocacy and make use of existing training modules (e.g. those already 
	developed by Lantmäteriet).
	Identify and transfer local needs and expertise, being 
	careful to include NGOs with strong community-level links; and
	Encourage further research, especially on the gender and 
	HIV/AIDS nexus in Africa. The gender issue is also one of the core values and priorities of 
the Global Land Tool Network stating that every tool must be gendered, as must 
the process of tool development. See the GLTN flyer on Gendering Land Tool 
development:
www.gltn.net/images/About%20GLTN%20downloads/gltn_gender_060612.pdf. 
 Wrap Up and the Way ForwardThe wrap up of the seminar was organized to summarize the key 
points for moving forward the process of “improving slum conditions through 
innovative financing”. Three broad areas were discussed that in particular would assist 
poor people in gaining a recognized foothold in the urban development process. 
They are described in the sections that follow: Emphasizing ‘incremental’ approaches that suit the poorThe concept of doing things in stages is far more suitable for 
poor people, since it corresponds to their approach to life in general. However, 
this concept needs to be seen in a context of conforming to the formal systems 
of land, services, construction and finance within a city-wide and nation-wide 
framework for sustainable urbanization. In this context, the following 
attributes to prospective ‘pro-poor’ policies can be adopted: 
	
	‘Intermediate’ forms of land title – these can help to 
	build confidence, and serve to provide security of tenure and/or serve as 
	steps on the way to more formalized land rights, which may take time; this 
	is more a process of non-eviction, but also needs to take account of women 
	as equal land rights holders through such mechanisms as joint ownership of 
	land;
	‘Incremental’ construction – working towards a formal 
	recognition of the process of building part of a house at a time, being the 
	affordable way in which the poor build for themselves and keeping cost of 
	construction low;
	‘Incremental’ finance – working towards a formal 
	recognition of better access to formal credit for the urban poor in ways 
	that keep the process affordable by using local micro-finance loan processes 
	within cooperative-type financial intermediaries; these relate to the larger 
	formal project loans from banks for ‘bankable’ upgrading and new housing 
	projects developed by the urban poor themselves with the assistance of local 
	finance facilities and are designed to be problem-solving multi-stakeholder 
	bodies that incorporate commercial banks, government, professionals and the 
	slum dwellers organizations. Recognizing that collective approaches that suit the poor are financially 
viableInternational experience shows that cohesive groups of low-income 
residents are better able to undertake the painstaking groundwork necessary to 
design and agree on ‘bankable’ upgrading and housing projects. Savings schemes amongst the poor that are women-led can lead to 
recognizable common interest groups for housing that become the basis of more 
formal housing cooperatives able to utilize the savings as instant collateral 
against new formal credit arrangements from commercial banks, which view women’s 
savings as a sound evidence base for the affordability of their housing 
projects. In addition, collective projects put together by women’s groups are 
attractive to commercial banks since they reduce transaction costs and offer 
controls to perceived risk. Recognizing processes that make land markets work for the poorIn various countries, innovative planning instruments have been 
used that provide specific designations of land for poor people and have 
influenced the local land market in such a way that the urban poor are 
recognized and can benefit from the regulatory frameworks within a municipal 
context. These ideas need to be supported and expanded through: 
	
	Using innovative planning instruments such as transferable 
	development rights (as used in Maharastra, India) that can increase plot 
	ratios with an element of increase that can be traded by the slum dwellers, 
	and designated planning zones and plot sizes that favour only the slum 
	dwellers and urban poor;
	Using very local (e.g. Ward-level) development plans (as used 
	in Lusaka, Zambia), thus imparting decision making, ownership and crucial 
	implementation and maintenance processes;
	Making sure that ‘planning’ is for the future, not the past, 
	and thus is able to keep pace with the slum dwellers – this means planning 
	for enough new land designations for the doubling in size of 
	developing-country cities every ten years, with sufficient land for 
	low-income residents, both existing and newcomers, be they migrants or new 
	family members.
	Strengthening the quality of land governance to ensure that 
	decision-making includes the perspectives of all relevant stakeholders, and 
	that the decisions made also serve the needs of the poor. The FIG/UN-HABITAT seminar attracted new delegates to the FIG 
Working Week, broadening the discussion from land professionals to a 
multi-discipline dialogue between land professionals, architects, planners, 
economists, finance experts and social scientists. The dialogues brought 
together more than 120 leading actors from the public, private and 
non-governmental sectors working on land and housing finance issues. Intense 
discussions revealed that a lot of common understanding existed on the way 
forward. Several options were tabled for future action: 
	
	Convene consultations in select cities involving land 
	professionals, finance experts, local authorities and the urban poor to 
	identify opportunities for stronger collaboration to develop new loan 
	products that meet the needs of all actors. 
	Conduct more detailed research into the global experience and 
	good practice in providing access to housing finance for people who have 
	intermediate forms of land tenure.
	Bring experiences together in usable formats and publications 
	both for the urban poor themselves and for their advisers and advocates, 
	using Internet with local interpretation (language and technical) and local 
	guidance.
	Encourage the inclusion of these issues in the curriculum for 
	land surveyors and land-related professionals at the forefront.
	Encourage development of mentoring programmes for young 
	professionals that aim to achieve increased awareness of land issues in this 
	broader context of a huge land-based expansion of low-income urban dwellers. 
 
	Copyright © United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT) and The 
	International Federation of Surveyors (FIG) 2008.All rights reserved.
 
	United Nations Human Settlements ProgrammeP. O. Box 30030
 00100 Nairobi GPO
 KENYA
 Tel +254 20-762 3120 (Central Office)
 www.unhabitat.org
 The International Federation of Surveyors (FIG)
 Kalvebod Brygge 31–33, DK-1780 Copenhagen V
 DENMARK
 Tel. +45 38 86 10 81
 Fax +45 38 86 02 52
 E-mail: FIG@FIG.net
 www.fig.net
 
	Published in EnglishCopenhagen, Denmark
 ISBN 978-87-90907-70-9
 ISBN 978-92-1-132013-8
 HS/1034/08E
 
	Published byThe International Federation of Surveyors (FIG)
 
	DISCLAIMERThe designations employed and the presentation of material in this 
	publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the 
	part of the secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of 
	any county, territory, city or area or its authorities, or concerning the 
	delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries regarding its economic system or 
	degree of development. Excerpts may be reproduced without authorization, on 
	condition that the source is indicated. Views expressed in this publication 
	do not necessarily reflect those of the United Nations Human Settlements 
	Programme, the United Nations and its member states.
 
	Cover photos © Klas Björkhagen 
	ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSEditors: Brett Shapiro, Szilard Fricska and Stig Enemark
 Design and layout: International Federation of Surveyors, FIG
 Printer: Oriveden Kirjapaino, Finland
 
 |