2023

REINVENTINGFRAMEWORKSFOR URBAN
GOVERNANCE
AND
PLANNING

White Paper.

DisclaimerT

he views, opinions, positions and recommendations expressed in this White Paper are solely those of the authors, task
force members and contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U20 or any of its chairs, conveners, andpartners. Many of the references in this White Paper will direct the reader to sites operated by third parties. Neither
the institutions nor the authors of this White Paper have reviewed all of the information on these sites or the accuracy orreliability of any information, data, opinions, advice or statements on these sites.
The White Paper should be referenced as follows:
Urban 20 (2023) White Paper on “Reinventing Frameworks for Urban Governance and Planning”, India

Reinventing
Frameworks
for Urban
Governance andPlanning
White Paper

Table of Contents

01
02

Challenges of emerging urbanisation
patterns
Adopting ‘Strategic’ planningapproaches for addressing emerging
urban challenges

03
04
05
06

Enabling metropolitan governance
Facilitating urban regeneration ofexisting urban areas
Conclusion
Bibliography

Contributors
U20 ADVISORS
Hitesh Vaidya
Director, National Institute of Urban Affairs (NIUA), India

Nilesh Prakash Rajadhyaksha
Programme Director - Urban Strategy Unit, NIUA, India
Head - U20 Technical Secretariat

Kanak Tiwari
Programme Director - Urban Strategy Unit, NIUA, India
Head - U20 Technical Secretariat

TASK FORCE MEMBERS
Sarika Chakravarty (Convener)
Team Lead, UrbanShift Country Project, NIUA, India

Rejeet Mathews
Director, Integrated Urban Development, World Resources Institute (WRI), India

Dr. N SridharanDirector (Retd.), School of Planning and Architecture (SPA) Bhopal, Vijayawada and Addl. Director (Retd.), SPA New Delhi, India

Dr. Sanjukkta Bhaduri
Professor and HOD of Urban Planning, SPA, New Delhi, India

Parul AgarwalaCountry Programme Manager-India, United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat), India

Dr. Teresa Kerber
Project Director “Sustainable Urban Development - Smart Cities II” (SUDSC II), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit(GIZ) GmbH, India

Yogita LokhandeTechnical Expert, GIZ GmbH, India
6 Urban 20 2023 White Paper

Laura Valdés Cano
Head of Policy Secretariat General, World Association of the Major Metropolises, Spain

Oscar Chamat
Research and Policy Officer, Metropolis, Spain

Dr. Gaurav Bhatiani
Director, Energy and Environment, RTI International, India

Dr. Saswat Bandhopadhyay
Prof., Urban Infrastructure Planning, Faculty of Planning, CEPT University, Ahmedabad., India

Pashim Tewari
Technical Director, All India Institute of Local Self-Government (AIILSG), India

Anusha Fatima
Head of Business Development and Urban Planner, AIILSG, India

Eric Hyubrechts
Manager of International Affairs, Directorate General, L’Institut Paris Region, France

RESEARCH TEAM
Shinjini Saha
Project Officer (Transport), UrbanShift Country Project, NIUA, India

Sarayu Madhiyazhagan
Project Officer (Nature-based Solutions), UrbanShift Country Project, NIUA, India

Varsha Singh
Knowledge Management and Communications Specialist, UrbanShift Country Project, NIUA, India

Pawan Sharma
Project Coordinator - PMU, UrbanShift Country Project, NIUA, India

Sugandh Verma
Young Fellow, UrbanShift Country Project, NIUA, India

Anusha Mishra
Senior Associate, NIUA, India

Nimisha Jha
Team Lead, U20 Unit, NIUA, India

DESIGN TEAM
Kaveri Bahure
Research Associate, Climate Centre for Cities, NIUA, India

Kapil Kumar
Associate, Urban Strategy Unit, NIUA, India

Reinventing Frameworks for Urban Governance and Planning 7

Abbreviations
CENA
FAR
GDP
GIS
LAMATA
NCR
NCT
SDI
SPV
TOD
TSGP

Capacity Enhancement Needs Assessment
Floor Area Ratio
Gross Domestic Product
Geographic Information System
Lagos Metropolitan Area Transport Authority
National Capital Region
National Capital Territory
Spatial Data Infrastructure
Special Purpose Vehicle
Transit-Oriented Development
Trans-Saharan Gas Pipeline

01/
Challenges of emerging
urbanisation patterns

Urbanisation has seen unprecedented growth in thepast few decades. While only 30% of the world’s
population lived in urban areas in 1950, today thisfigure has already surpassed 56% with almost 4.4 billion
people residing in urban areas. This trend is projected tocontinue, and by 2050, the urban population is expected tomore than double, with nearly 7 out of 10 individuals living incities. Cities are driving economic value creation, generating
more than 80% of global Gross Domestic Product (GDP)(The World Bank, 2023). Cities are also significant in termsof their environmental footprint, occupying just 3% of land,
but accounting for 60 to 80% of energy consumption and
75% of carbon emissions (United Nations, 2020). These facts
necessitate the need to ensure sustainable and inclusive
urban growth.
Urban population growth is resulting in two broad spatial
trajectories: (i) densification within exiting city boundaries,and (ii) urbanisation beyond existing city boundaries.


Densification within existing urban boundaries
is due to a combination of natural growth andmigration. If not anticipated through appropriate policy
frameworks, much of this growth tends to be absorbed
by cities in an organic, unplanned manner. Cities indeveloping economies, in particular, are vulnerable tothe downside of such unplanned increases in urban
densities – resulting in an increase in risks associatedwith morphological factors (emergence of slums/
unplanned settlements, difficulty in assigning land forplanned developments, etc.), socio-economic factors(defending the rights of existing communities topreserve affordable housing or local workplaces, etc.),
and environmental factors (failure in protecting green
spaces in dense areas, reduced urban resilience, etc.)that impact at different scales (Teller, 2021).



Spatial expansion beyond the administrative
jurisdiction of cities is dictated by economic factors(economic clusters and linkages) and land dynamics(differential land costs between the urbanised andperipheral areas, limited availability of developable land
within cities, etc.). Cities are fast becoming part of larger
10 Urban 20 2023 White Paper

regional ecosystems with strong economic and resource
interdependencies. New spatial patterns of urban
growth such as economic corridors (Greater Mekong
Sub-region, Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor, Asian
Highway, Grand Paris Expressway, etc.), mega-regions(National Capital Region of Delhi, Greater London,
Tokyo, etc.), and conurbations (Paris – Amsterdam– Brussels – Munich, Seoul – Busan, London – Leeds –Manchester, etc.) are emerging as a result of theseinterdependencies.
Globally the rate of urban land expansion surpasses
population growth by a significant margin – 1.2 million
square kilometre of new urban built-up area is expected
to be added to the world by 2030, with the consumptionof urban land outpacing population growth by up to 50%(The World Bank, 2023). This expansion often comesat the expense of prime agricultural land, ecosystemservices, and biodiversity. Apart from increased impacts
on access to opportunities, productivity and qualityof life, such unplanned spatial expansions result incompromised climate and disaster risk resilience. As
cities expand peripherally, local agencies often struggle
to provide essential services like water, sanitation,and electricity. Consequently, citizens tend to rely on
informal service providers who may charge significantly
higher costs, or may have to go without these services
altogether. Research indicates that as cities sprawl
outward and population densities decline, the costsof delivering public services increase. The associatedinvestments required for new infrastructure and thesocial costs of their deficiency only continue to risewith increased urban expansions. Additionally, urban
sprawl leads to more congestion, pollution, and longer
commutes. Besides, urban expansions can result in
shifting of economic activities to the outskirts or to
nearby smaller towns due to availability of land atlower cost, business advantage due to agglomerationof economies, better connectivity, etc. This may
result in blighted city cores with poor quality services,degradation in housing, businesses and public areas, andundermine the potential of existing cities to contribute toeconomic prosperity.

Economic geography in
Delhi National Capital
RegionA study of the Delhi National Capital Region’s (NCR) Economic Geography revealed
that the Core National Capital Territory (NCT) has decentralised without the expectedmovement to a knowledge-based, high-wage economy, and informality persists despite
higher infrastructure provision levels. Rapid urbanisation, peripheralisation of jobs, andmigration tripled the region’s per capita income and increased consumption levels.
Declining poverty rates coexisted with increasing unemployment rates. This revealed
that place-specific, dynamic, and targeted economic and infrastructure development
strategies must be prioritised, including revitalisation of Core NCT (Mathews, 2023).

A third manifestation is in the form of emergence of new
cities/ towns. This is largely driven by natural growth ofrural settlements, primarily in the vicinity of larger cities andgrowth centres and as such this phenomenon is at leastin a large part covered under the second spatial trajectory
mentioned above.
To keep pace with the challenges of urban growth, theplanning and governance systems of cities must evolve into
proactive rather than reactive frameworks. Responding to
the dynamics of urban change, will require frameworks thatare ‘enabling’ and ‘agile’, providing opportunities for citizens,private sector, and others to innovate and participate more
actively in the development process. Working at multiple
scales will be critical. On the one hand, evolving planningand governance mechanisms at the macro level (megaregions/ metropolitan regions, conurbations, economic
corridors, peri-urban sprawl, etc.) must ensure efficient
multilateral governance and synchronised coordination
amongst multiple spatial/ political jurisdictions to enable
integrated planning with optimal use of resources andshared advantages. On the other, it will be equally important

to develop spatial, legal and financial frameworks required
for facilitating local planning and urban regeneration foraddressing issues of degraded built environments, disasterrisks, and lack of proper housing and services within existing
cities themselves. These have to be tackled by developing
feasible models for implementing and financing the renewalof different areas in the city, creating opportunities forplugging in practices of placemaking, sustainable mobility,
circular economy, green buildings, disaster preparedness,
etc.
This White Paper on ‘Reinventing Frameworks for Urban
Governance and Planning’ discusses the possible strategies/
tools for meeting emerging urban challenges under threebroad heads:
A. Adopting Strategic planning frameworks at multiple
scales (section 2)
B. Creating innovative frameworks for planning andgovernance of multi-jurisdictional urban patterns(section 3)
C. Facilitating urban regeneration of existing areas(section 4)

Reinventing Frameworks for Urban Governance and Planning 11

02/Adopting ‘Strategic’ planningapproaches for addressing
emerging urban challenges

L

ong-term planning frameworks (typically 10 to 20
years) are often criticised for not being dynamicor enabling enough to accommodate changing
contexts and needs, thereby rendering them irrelevant
to emerging economic trends and demands of urban
areas. Inflexible land regulations and density restrictions
can result in segregated land use patterns, preventing
the formation of agglomeration economies, encouraging
automobile dependence, and resulting in urban sprawl
and gentrification. Inflexible regulations may also result inunauthorised development since private developers may
ignore or flout regulations to make their projects financially
profitable. Besides, peri-urban areas, where the fastest
urban growth is taking place, remain unaddressed in thecurrent urban policy system. There is a need to shift thefocus of urban planning frameworks from being restrictive
and regulatory in nature to being more enabling andstrategic.

2.1 Strategic approach to urban
planning
In contrast to more traditional approaches to urban andregional planning, in particular, those embedded withina land-use regulation tradition, strategic planning is an
integrated or holistic approach to spatial developmentwith a strong focus on coordinating the spatial impactsof sectoral policies and institutional capacity building
across sectors and stakeholders (Walsh, 2012). The
strategic approach to urban planning sets developmental
priorities, determines the direction of desired development,
addresses dynamic needs through development ofstrategies, develops action plans with the engagementof all stakeholders, and secures financial outlays for the
implementation of selected priority projects, which will havethe most impact on long-term objectives. This approachhelps the city to respond to ever changing contexts andcan provide significant opportunities to move away fromgovernment-controlled systems to more flexible open
market systems.

12 Urban 20 2023 White Paper

Urban strategic planning entails a methodological shift
and is not a substitute for the statutory spatial planning
process and spatial plans prepared by governments at
various levels. For spatial plans to become strategic, they
will need to go beyond regulation of land to incorporate
strategies for aspects such as socio-economic development,
environmental protection, ecological considerations, poverty
alleviation in urban areas, the welfare of marginalisedcommunities including individuals with disabilities, and thepromotion of cultural, educational, and aesthetic aspects
in the planning process. To address these aspects, theexisting planning process should integrate inputs frommultiple disciplines and also work at multiple scales such as
regional, city, and local levels. It is essential to move towards
a framework approach for development rather than rely on
the current prescriptive mode of planning.
To facilitate urban strategic planning, the role of the
public sector should change from a provider to that ofan enabler/ facilitator. This will require comprehensive
re-engineering of capacities and roles of planning
functionaries, as well as a shift from a top-driven approach
to one that enables innovation and engagement of
stakeholders on the ground. Importantly, the focus will haveto shift from over prescription and input specifications to
key long-term objectives and outcomes. Planning agencies
will also have to develop mechanisms for coordination withother relevant departments to ensure that spatial plansconverge with other sector-specific plans and priorities ofvarious agencies to achieve integration across aspects suchas land management, building regulations, core network
infrastructure, protection of ecosystem services, social
schemes, etc. Failure to do so may lead to uncoordinateddevelopment, duplication of work, ineffective usage ofresources and delay in planning and implementation.

In order to lend ‘strategic-ness’ to the process of urban
planning, there is a need for urban planning to movefrom being a ‘robust product’ to a ‘robust process’ (Toutain& Gopiprasad, 2006). It is necessary to understand thatplanning is not merely an end of a process but a process byitself, which continues even after the plan is published. A
robust feedback loop should be established that facilitatescollation of data points, feedback from various stakeholders
and analysis of impacts of various strategies/ policies that
can inform the plan framework and keep it updated. Plans
prepared at different levels could adopt a system of rolling
plans by which they are evaluated and updated on aninterim basis to stay relevant. Strategic plans prepared overshorter time horizons can also provide a mechanism forprioritising critical projects and interventions that will most

Strategic urban
development plans

The strategic plans of London (2023-2027 Strategic Plan City of London), Paris(2021-2025 Strategy Plan PARIS21), Auckland, Johannesburg, Sao Paulo, Singapore,
New York, and Barcelona are all examples of ways in which cities are trying to plot their
future. The London Plan outlines the groundwork for the forthcoming two decades ofurban development in the city to construct a metropolis which can entice individuals toreside in and invest in, despite a fiercely competitive global environment, and provide
financial well-being to all.

2.2 Key aspects to consider in Strategic
Planningimpact long-term priorities. Comprehensive and regular
data collection and spatial mapping (using tools such as
Geographic Information System (GIS) technology) to stayabreast of the changes on ground is also a key requirement
for ensuring proper implementation, monitoring, andcourse correction. Karnataka, one of the states in India,
has used GIS for planning its capital city - Bengaluru.
This technology-driven system enables continuous andincremental updating of on-ground information, going
beyond the traditional approach of mapping solely during
the plan preparation phase. This provides a common
reference platform for various types of plans, facilitatescross-sectoral analysis and supports the monitoring,evaluation, and management of plan implementation andservices.

Integration of Land use with Economic Strategy,
Transport & Infrastructure Planning: Departments/
agencies dealing with different sectors/ services tend
to operate in silos, often setting their own independent
priorities and developing uncoordinated projections oflikely future demand (e.g. electricity demand may be
projected without reference to the expected changes
in built environment and real estate proposed byspatial plans). To maximise the chances of achieving
the goals set by different departments, it is essential toestablish a strong convergence between their strategies.
Consequently, these strategies for different sectors
should be developed with reference to spatial planningand work towards common timelines and objectives.
This has enormous convergence benefits, e.g. linking
economic strategies with transport investments (Metro
Rail, Bus systems, etc.) and development regulations
can have a direct impact on urban and economic
development. Coordinating plan preparation andnotification timelines across departments may be apossible method for ensuring coordination.

Linking spatial plans and investment plans: Investment
plans and spatial plans are typically prepared bydifferent agencies with little or no interaction with
one another. As a result, spatial plans are ill informed
about the possible development funds available in its
jurisdiction and the investment plans find it difficult to
identify key areas for investments to ensure maximum
outputs. A detailed capital investment plan focusing
on priority projects and interventions for the short andmedium terms (covering multiple sectors) should be
prepared to support strategic plans, including potential
funding sources from public and private sources.



Ensuring flexibility in policies, rules and regulations:
To ensure that the planning agencies have enoughflexibility in their operation, planning legislations
and policies should be formulated such that they
do not become over-prescriptive or regulatory but
remain ‘enabling’ and ‘strategic’ while covering thebroad strategies and themes of the proposed plan.
This ensures that plans remain ‘agile’ and capableof appropriately addressing the dynamic challengesof urbanisation effectively. Supporting rules andregulations should also be drafted on similar principles
of flexibility while upholding minimum public outcomes.
This allows local innovation, response to market
demands and adaptation to local circumstances without
the need for cumbersome legislative amendments.

Reinventing Frameworks for Urban Governance and Planning 13Making plans, processes, and data accessible: It is
critical that planning documents are structured andpresented in a simplified manner to ensure that the
proposals for the city are understood by all stakeholders.
Strategy documents that engage and communicate wellwith stakeholders will be more likely to receive support
for on ground implementation. Equally important is tocreate a complementary set of easy to understand,transparent and efficient processes that support planoutreach and implementation. Making monitoring andimplementation data accessible to stakeholders throughappropriate dissemination frameworks can further
improve transparency, trust and create a meaningful
feedback loop that can enhance planning outcomes.

14 Urban 20 2023 White Paper

Continuous monitoring and evaluation process: Urban
development is a dynamic and complex process, andas such the importance of monitoring and evaluation ofplan implementation and its impacts on ground cannot
be undermined. Robust and continuous monitoringmechanisms (featuring regular collection of data
points, analysis and provision of critical inputs for plan
modification) can ensure that planning frameworks
remain relevant and cognizant of changing urban needs
and circumstances. Periodic evaluation also helps inassessing the impact of proposed strategies, and indrawing lessons for the future.

03/
Enabling metropolitan
governance - Creating
frameworks for planningand governance ofmulti-jurisdictional urban
patterns

M

etropolitan regions (made up of multiple
administrative and political jurisdictions) arebecoming an increasingly important planning anddevelopment scale (Andersson M. , 2015). Metropolitan
regions play a vital role as the economic powerhouse inmany countries. The productivity of these metropolitan
regions is increasingly becoming a key determinantof national economic growth. It is noteworthy that the
600 largest cities worldwide contribute approximately
60 percent of the global Gross Domestic Product (GDP)(Richard Dobbs, 2011). However, many of these do nothave any comprehensive mechanisms for coordinatedplanning and governance. Designated metropolitan areas
are also struggling with issues of fragmentation, inequity,
unintended sprawl, and dysfunctional governance systems.
Comprehensive strategies will be required to facilitate
coordinated development, infrastructure planning andservice delivery, dynamic economic growth, resolutionof environmental issues, poverty alleviation, equity
promotion, and resource-sharing. Such efforts go beyond
the responsibilities of individual local governments andnecessitate overarching arrangements at the metropolitan
level. Other forms of multi-jurisdictional urbanisationsuch as conurbations, corridors, etc. are also emerging as
discussed in Section 1, that require better coordination
mechanisms to ensure better quality of life, environmentally
responsible growth and higher economic productivity.
Inter-jurisdictional coordination and collaboration can resultin pooling of resources and potential cost savings, in addition
to boosting economic productivity. By integrating territorialplanning across different scales and coordinating various
services, efficiency gains can be achieved, particularly
through economies of scale. It is, for example, fairly
common to establish a Metropolitan Transport Authority
since the infrastructure investments and service network
tend to cross one or more jurisdictional boundaries. The
Lagos Metropolitan Area Transport Authority (LAMATA)
is one such example of a Transport Authority, with othermetropolitan-level coordination functions carried out by theregional government (Lagos State, Nigeria). The Authority
has the overall responsibility for transport planning, policies,
investments and coordination in the Lagos metropolitan
area. The law grants LAMATA powers to levy and collect user
charges for its services and other tariffs, fees and road taxes
as authorised by the governor of the state.
International experience shows a great diversity ofmetropolitan governance models, particularly acrossEurope and North America (Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development, 2006) (Slack, 2007). In East
Asia, China, Japan and South Korea have consolidated
metropolitan governments for their larger cities (Yang,2009). Large cities in South Asia have also experimented
with metropolitan governance approaches, for instancethe Development Authority model adopted in Mumbai
and Dhaka, or the Planning Board model followed in Delhi.
Although there are many big cities in Latin America, themetropolitan government frameworks in São Paulo, Mexico
City, Buenos Aires, and Rio de Janeiro, for instance, are still inthe early stages of development. More than 50 recognised
metropolitan areas have emerged, both in Mexico and Brazil,

Reinventing Frameworks for Urban Governance and Planning 15

because of the numerous smaller metropolitan areas thatare a result of the unclear description in national legislation.
Nevertheless, interesting models are emerging from theexperiments in these countries. The Metropolitan Districtof Quito in Equador has set up an elected metropolitan
council with a wide range of functions, led by an elected
metropolitan mayor. A similar system has been adopted
in Caracas, Venezuela. Sub-Saharan Africa is rapidly
urbanising, but most cities lack effective institutions
to govern at the metropolitan scale. South Africa is an
exception, having established eight large municipalities

Comprehensive
framework’s by Cape
Town Municipality

The Municipal Demarcation Board of South Africa consolidated a number of local
governments to convert Cape Town in to a large, amalgamated municipality in 1998
(Andersson M. , 2015). The amalgamated Cape Town Municipality encompassed all areasthat constituted the functional economic area and regional labour market to redress
inequalities, promote strategic land use planning, coordinate infrastructure investments,
and develop a comprehensive framework for economic and social development.

Enabling metropolitan governanceConsidering its inherent political nature, determining themost suitable governance structure for a region depends
on both the national and local context. Factors such as thelegal framework, local government responsibilities, specificissues and opportunities of the area, institutional capacity,and tradition need to be taken into account. When defining
such structures, a balance must be struck between (a) the
potential for economies of scale and service efficiency,
as well as addressing spill overs and regional disparities,and (b) ensuring continued access, responsiveness, andaccountability of elected local governments to citizens.
A. To fully harness the potential of metropolitan regions
and other multi-jurisdictional urban patterns, it is crucial
to ensure not only horizontal coordination at the local
level but also vertical integration of governance among
different tiers within a country, typically including local,
regional, provincial, and national levels. An interesting
insight could be obtained from examples of effective
intergovernmental/ supranational arrangements thathave resulted in attaining mutually advantageous
sustainable growth and managing assets that extend
beyond jurisdictional boundaries. The Eurotunnel andthe Asia Highway Network demonstrate the vital roleof trans-boundary urban governance in infrastructuredevelopment and regional connectivity. On similar lines, theTrans-Saharan Gas Pipeline (TSGP) exemplifies effective
collaborative governance for cross-border oil pipelines andalso to transport natural gas from Nigeria to North Africancountries like Algeria and Tunisia. Such arrangements
involve collaborative efforts among different governments
and encompass agreements that transcend boundaries
to manage shared assets like natural resources, oilpipelines, roads, railways, etc. Participating governments
also established complementary legal frameworks
16 Urban 20 2023 White Paper

through amalgamations, each essentially covering
their respective metropolitan area. Where institutionalarrangements at local levels are lacking or weak, themain coordination tends to be exercised by provincial
governments; for example, in Lagos State, Nigeria; state
governments in India; and in many states of Brazil. Countries
like India are also witnessing continuous urbanisation
along corridors that transcend provincial boundaries
and there is a need to innovate and work out hybrid
governance mechanisms and inter-provincial coordination
arrangements.

and regulatory standards to support such collaborative
initiatives. Similar collaborations can be envisaged for
projects/ initiatives that transcend provincial boundaries
within a country. National governments could play a seminalrole in arbitrating such arrangements, particularly along
nationally important infrastructure alignments such asindustrial corridors, logistics networks, etc.
B. In any multi-jurisdictional governance arrangement,
it is crucial to establish clear delineation of functions andresponsibilities among the involved parties, especially if
new authorities or a different level of local governmentis introduced. At the metropolitan level, strategic decisions
can be made regarding regional land use planning, strategic
city development planning, strategies for economic
development, tourism promotion and management, andregulation of market forces. Additionally, infrastructuredevelopment that serves the entire region, such as roads,
bridges, public transit routes, police protection, fire services,
emergency response, water supply systems, drainage andflood protection, piped sewerage systems, solid waste
disposal, and public health services, can be collaboratively
planned at the metropolitan level with the involvement of
all stakeholders. Local bodies or other sub-regional levels ofgovernment would in turn be responsible for aligning local
policies, planning strategies and last mile infrastructure orsofter initiatives such as skilling to such regional strategy
pipelines. Collaborative initiatives between multiple
constituent entities may also be considered. Various models
of investment and revenue sharing can be employed,
including agreements on tax sharing or fee harmonisation,
cost sharing or the establishment of a common budget,
coordinated revenue mobilisation, and the utilisation ofmultiple funding sources for large-scale infrastructure
projects with area-wide benefits.

Andersson proposes a conceptual division of service provision responsibilities (highlighted as ) between local, metropolitan,
and national levels of government which may be treated as a starting point.1
S. No.
1.

Name
Local Economy

Function

Metropolitan
Level

Local Bodies

CentralGovernment

PrivateSectorStrategic planning
Economic development
Tourism promotion &management
Major markets
Informal economy

2.

Land
Management

Regional land use planning
Local land use planningLand allocation
Land surveying
Titling/ provision of tenure

3.

Housing andCommunity
Facilities

Housing
Social (low income) housing
Community upgrading
Cultural facilities
Parks and recreation
facilities

4.

Transport

Roads and bridges
Public transit (e.g., buses)
Street lighting
Street cleaning
Car parking

5.

Security

Police protection/ security
Traffic management
Fire service/ suppression &emergency/ rescue services
Ambulance services

6.

Water,
Sanitation and
Waste

Water supply system
Drainage/ flood protection
Piped sewerage system
Solid waste collection
Solid waste disposal

7.

Education,
Health, Social
care

Education
Public HealthWelfare AssistanceChild care services

1

8.

Power

Power supply (electricity)

1 Andersson, M. (2015). Unpacking Metropolitan Governance for Sustainable Development [Discussion paper].

Reinventing Frameworks for Urban Governance and Planning 17

S. No.
9.

Name
Other

Function

Metropolitan
Level

Local Bodies

CentralGovernment

PrivateSector

Libraries
Promotion of major events
Business licensing
Local agriculture

It must be noted that if the responsibility for a function isdivided between the metropolitan level and local authorities(or central government), a risk of confusion, lack of
accountability, and “finger-pointing” may arise, and hence itis critical to ensure that the detailed functional distribution isclearly understood at all levels and by citizens at large.
C. If a metropolitan agency lacks the ability to makedefinitive policies and is limited to an advisory role, its
effectiveness may be compromised. This in turn can
only be ensured if constituent local and/or provincial
governments cooperate fully. This can be encouraged
or mandated by regional or national governments
through intergovernmental systems, legal frameworks, or
specific financial incentives. International experience has
demonstrated that the effectiveness of a metropolitan-levelgovernance structure relies on the support and commitmentof all local governments involved, regardless of whether it
is formed “bottom-up” by them or “top-down” by a higher
level of governance. Allowing individual local governments,
the flexibility to participate in some or all metropolitan-level
functions, as seen in the examples of Vancouver, Canada,
and Bologna, Italy, can be an option. Furthermore, it isevident that metropolitan coordination is essential for
promoting sustainable models that encompass social,economic, and environmental aspects.
D. Another aspect to be considered while institutionalisinga new arrangement for metropolitan governanceis the complexity and the time intensive processes
involved in the passing of a Resolution, Act, etc. Interim
institutional structures such as Special Purpose Vehicles(SPVs), Committees, etc., can enhance the planningand management of urban services and infrastructure,
improving efficiency and responsiveness by bringing
decision-making closer to citizens (Fay, 1999). This approach
can temporarily address larger institutional issues byimplementing innovative solutions. Time-bound financial
and administrative support can be provided throughcentral schemes, promoting political stability and economic
development while clearly defining resource transfers
and intergovernmental responsibilities. However, suchinterim structures can hide larger institutional problems
and defer structural solutions by applying a patch work ofquick tactical fixes. It is therefore suggested that interim
structures, if constituted, should incorporate specificmilestones to be achieved and automatic sunset clauses.

18 Urban 20 2023 White Paper

E. Effective metropolitan governance is greatly influenced
by the functioning of constituent governments of aregion. Metropolitan or other forms of multi-jurisdictional
governance can be enhanced by strengthening thefunctioning of constituent governments. Empowering theconstituent local bodies with powers and responsibilities as
may be necessary to enable them to function as effective
institutions of self-government, undertake preparationof plans for economic development and social justice,and implement schemes as may be entrusted to themwill be critical. Measures to improve the financial positionof the local bodies should also be undertaken. This cansubstantially enhance the cumulative ability of regions tofunction effectively and create long term capacities forcollaboration.
F. Adopting a multi-stakeholder planning approach
can significantly enhance planning outcomes at themacro level. Acknowledging diverse perspectives for
effective decision-making and sustainable development,
involving multiple stakeholders through collaborative
governance processes is important. Such engagements
facilitate holistic and coordinated response to complex
urban challenges, enhance community ownership, foster
multi-level governance, and allow local communities toshape development strategies. Engaging community
stakeholders in planning requires a comprehensive
approach, including orientation meetings, consultations,disclosures, and workshops at each stage of the planning
process. To enhance participatory planning, Social
Engagement Advisors, behavioural nudges, local language,
creative communication, and traditional community-levelinstitutions (e.g. the Dorbar system in Meghalaya, India) canbe utilised. However, participatory planning at the macroscale (regional/ city scale) may not yield similar outcomesas at the level of local areas, as the community is notable to associate with the issue at hand. For meaningful
participatory planning at the macro scale, consistentefforts to build participatory competence of the community
stakeholders and continuous engagement with suchstakeholders is required.
Lastly, it is critical to ensure that any institutionalarrangement (new or extant, permanent or interim) is
supported through sufficient revenue sources to sustain its
mandates. Also, institutional and financial arrangements
may need to adapt to changing needs and circumstances.
This flexibility must be built into the governanceframeworks.

04/
Facilitating urban regenerationof existing urban areasUrban regeneration is a constant process of evolutionthat involves replanning, retrofitting and rebuilding,allowing cities to address degradation of built
environments, revitalise distressed areas, and improve theoverall liveability, encompassing physical, economic, andenvironmental aspects. Regeneration has the potential
to improve aspects such as inclusion, resource efficiency,
availability of affordable housing, and result in moresustainable and safer areas. In several cases regeneration
activities can also lead to leveraging latent economic
potential of areas and land value capture. However,urban regeneration projects, being complex and involving
multiple stakeholders, often face challenges and can evenresult in partial or complete failure. To achieve sustainableoutcomes throughout the entire process, from scoping to
implementation, cities must effectively utilise their key
assets, encourage participation from the public and private
sectors, and carefully consider the intricate interplay ofsocio-cultural, economic, physical, and infrastructural
factors. A comprehensive approach is essential for
optimising regeneration efforts, promoting sustainableurban development, and incentivising stakeholder
engagement. In India, according to the 1901 census, there
were 1,830 urban centres in the country, suggesting thatthese cities are over 100 years old. Their age has started toreflect in the form of physical deterioration of the buildings,
inadequate infrastructure, congestion, long commutes
to new commercial developments, water logging andsocial disharmony such as road rage (Bhatiani, Ahluwalia,
Wadhwa, & Amuloju, 2022).

Facilitating Urban Regeneration
As regeneration initiatives vary based on specific contexts,
it is important to incorporate contextual intelligence intoplanning for regeneration. The objective of regeneration
policies should be to create conducive conditions thatcan equally adapt and respond to formal and informal
developments, heritage areas, ecologically sensitive zones,
transit corridors, and other contexts. Urban regenerationand city marketing are closely intertwined, as physicaltransformations in neighbourhoods, often through flagshipprojects, are utilised to enhance the competitiveness of alocation in attracting businesses, residents, and investments.
To guarantee the effectiveness of regeneration endeavours,

it is essential to implement institutional arrangements
and strategic actions that can address a range of needs,
promote spatial restructuring, empower local communities,
and ensure public outcomes.
A. Creating a specialised entity responsible for overseeing
and coordinating regeneration efforts could ensure
focused attention and expertise in managing the process
while working collaboratively with various stakeholders,streamlining decision-making processes, and facilitating
effective implementation of regeneration projects. A
number of cities have set up such dedicated agencies,
e.g. Urban Renewal Authority in Hong Kong, Urban
Redevelopment Authority in Singapore, etc. The functionsof such agencies may include identification of areas
for revitalisation, development of redevelopment plans,acquisition and clearance of properties, and collaboration
with stakeholders to carry out regeneration initiatives.
These agencies typically work closely with the government,
community organisations, and private sector partners tomobilise regeneration activities.
B. Introducing flexible planning and zoning regulations
to allow for more adaptive and responsive approaches
to development could facilitate regeneration. This may
include encouraging mixed land uses, promoting higher
density development in appropriate areas, and providing
flexibility in building design and use. It is critical to ensurethat such policies provide flexibility in terms of retaining
and retrofitting existing built structures as well as reuse ofbuilding material (wherever feasible), thereby introducing
circularity in the construction sector. In Netherlands, since
1980s the traditional, restrictive, plan-led system has been
evolving to make way for a more flexible, fragmented
and tolerant development-led system that facilitates
redevelopments to take place independently. This change
is reflected in an increased use of public–private partnershipmodels aimed at revitalising cities and the emergence of
new commercial actors in the property market (van den
Hurk & Tasan-Kok, 2020).

Reinventing Frameworks for Urban Governance and Planning 19

C. Enabling regeneration through a strategic approach,structured around financial incentives and creation offavourable market conditions can substantially enhance
uptake of regeneration activities.
 Implementing financial incentives and support
mechanisms in the form of additional/ incentive
development rights, tax breaks, grants, and loans forregeneration projects could attract private investment
and encourage participation. Additionally, offering
technical assistance, capacity building, and funding
opportunities for local communities and businesses
could empower them to actively contribute to theregeneration process. The Draft Master Plan of Delhi– 2041 has proposed incentives in the form of higher
Floor Area Ratio (FAR), mixed use, use of transferable
development rights within regeneration projects, etc.


The overall planning framework must also support
creation of demand for regeneration activities bystrategically limiting the availability of greenfield landfor development, identifying and providing special
norms and incentives for areas with high regeneration
potential, supporting pilot/ demonstration initiatives
to build market confidence, directing infrastructure
investments, etc. Creating conducive market conditions
are crucial for successful regeneration, as developers
and investors are more inclined to participate when
there is a clear demand and profit potential. The
strategic approach taken in creating favourable market
conditions in Canary Wharf, London demonstrates how
targeted policies and incentives could attract private
sector investment, stimulate economic growth, anddrive regeneration in urban areas (Case study: How
the Canary Wharf Group generates employment andcreates opportunities for local businesses in the Canary
Wharf Estate, 2016).



It is also critical to ensure that regeneration processes
are inclusive, equitable and do not result in large scale
gentrification of areas, particularly where regeneration
is targeted towards low-income communities.
Appropriate policies for protecting the interests oforiginal stakeholders, incentives for affordable andrental housing formats, ensuring deep involvement of
stakeholders in project and process design, etc. canhelp mitigate the social concerns associated with urban
regeneration and make the process more attractive to
local communities.

20 Urban 20 2023 White Paper

D. Vacant or underutilised public land and public
assets can be repurposed or redeveloped to catalyse
regeneration. Such projects can act as demonstration
projects, increase the land value of surrounding areas andact as powerful incentives for regeneration, encouraging
private investment and development in the vicinity. By
strategically identifying public land that has the potential
for regeneration, cities can unlock its value and stimulate
positive transformation in the surrounding areas. In addition
to increasing land value, using public land for regeneration
projects can also serve public interest objectives, byproviding opportunities to incorporate elements ofsustainability, affordability, and community benefit into
the development process. For example, public land could
be leveraged to create affordable housing, public spaces,
cultural institutions, or green infrastructure, thereby
ensuring that the benefits of regeneration are inclusive andaccessible to all. Effectively using public land for catalysing
regeneration requires careful planning, collaboration
between public and private stakeholders, and a clear
understanding of the local context and needs. The High Line
Park in New York City is a good example of such strategic
use of public assets. A historic elevated railway track that
had fallen into disuse and disrepair has been repurposed intoa unique linear park that spans several blocks of Manhattan.
This has spurred private investment in the area. Former
industrial buildings along the park have been repurposed
into high-end residential and commercial spaces, creating
new housing options and job opportunities. The increase inland value surrounding the High Line has incentivised further
redevelopment and regeneration in the vicinity. Moreover,the park incorporates sustainable design features andgreen spaces, promoting environmental sustainability andenhancing the overall quality of life for residents and visitors.
It provides a valuable recreational and cultural resource,
offering public art installations, community events, and apeaceful urban oasis amidst the bustling city.
E. Enhancing community engagement and participationin the decision-making process and giving communities
a voice in shaping the regeneration initiatives can fostera sense of ownership and ensure that projects alignwith community needs and aspirations. This can be done
through public consultations, community workshops, andestablishing community-led regeneration initiatives. It is
critical to build the capacity of public functionaries engaged
with regeneration processes to engage in meaningful
stakeholder engagement and participatory planning
processes to ensure success of such initiatives. Regeneration
efforts in London are successful examples of collaborationand participation of the London Boroughs, the Greater
London Authority, community organisations, housing
associations and research bodies.

F. Strategies and policies for urban regeneration mustbe nuanced to address different regeneration needs andfacilitate contextual public outcomes in different areas.
Urban regeneration can address issues like
preservation of traditional settlements, communities,
and practices by promoting adaptive reuse in heritage
precincts for the survival of indigenous communities
and the creation of new economic activities. Adaptive
reuse contributes towards facilitating employment
opportunities while ensuring the revival of traditional
skillsets. However, it is important to note that adaptive
reuse should be undertaken sensitively and theessence of the heritage precinct should be retained.
San Francisco’s Ghirardelli Square, which opened in
1964, was the first large-scale adaptive reuse projectin the United States. The adaptive reuse movement’s
greatest value is that hundreds of abandoned schools,
factories, hotels, warehouses, and garrisons can beused as affordable housing, office buildings, and evencommercial, civic, educational, and recreational centres,
as it extends the life of such buildings and avoids
demolition waste, encourages reuse of the embodied
energy and also provides significant social andeconomic benefits to the society.



Directing urban regeneration projects to facilitate
Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) can help tocapitalise on existing transportation infrastructureand enhance the connectivity and accessibility ofcities. By concentrating development and increasing
the density of buildings and activities near transit
nodes, TOD aims to maximise the advantages of transit
proximity and encourage more sustainable and efficientmodes of transportation. Through regeneration andredevelopment efforts, the surrounding areas of transit
stations can be transformed into compact, vibrant,
walkable neighbourhoods that offer a mix of residential,commercial, and recreational spaces.

Regeneration initiatives can also play a crucial role in
improving unplanned areas and informal settlements
such as slums, unauthorised colonies, etc. within acity by replacing substandard and unsafe housing,upgrading infrastructure and integrating environmental
sustainability measures into unplanned areas, suchas promoting green spaces, implementing waste
management systems, and adopting energy-efficient
practices. It is particularly crucial to involve the residentsof unplanned areas in the regeneration process.
Community participation and empowerment could
ensure that the initiatives align with the needs andaspirations of the residents and allows for better andmore efficient multi-use programming of spaces andfacilities created as part of the regeneration project..

G. Encouraging public-private partnerships can bringexpertise, resources, and innovative approaches toregeneration projects. This can involve joint ventures,development agreements, or contractual arrangements
where both public and private sectors work together
towards common regeneration goals. London’s Canary
Wharf project (presented above) is an example of how
private-public partnerships within designated zones cansupercharge regeneration and development.
H. Implementing robust monitoring and evaluation
frameworks enables the assessment of progress,
impact, and effectiveness. This ensures accountability,
identifies areas for improvement, and enables adaptive
management throughout the regeneration process.
The Critical Urban Areas Programme in Cova Da Moura,
Amadora, Portugal aimed at legalising the area’s landownership, laying the ground for social and economic
sustainability, and rehabilitating the community’s basic
infrastructure, is an example of using robust monitoringand evaluation instruments for collective and participatory
analysis of processes. With a focus on comprehensive andaction-oriented methodologies, the initiative aimed togain insights and knowledge from the dynamic nature ofprocesses involving various stakeholders. The goal wasto understand and analyse the fluctuations, patterns, andinteractions within these processes to foster a deeper
understanding and facilitate informed decision-making(Lechner, 2010).

Reinventing Frameworks for Urban Governance and Planning 21

05/
Conclusion

Rapid urbanisation, improved connectivity and land
and labour market dynamics are resulting in large
integrated urban systems like metropolitan areas
and other trans-jurisdictional urban forms, with interlinked
economies and labour markets, communities with common
interests, and the potential of benefiting from joint
planning and action in various sectors. Hybrid governancearrangements with cross-jurisdictional and cross-sectoral
coordination will have to be evolved. However, these areoften politically challenging and difficult to operationalise.
To enable this, institutional reforms need to be carefully
designed and implemented, to ensure setting of common
goals, strong inter-governmental and interdepartmental
coordination, active citizen engagement and accountability
mechanisms, and creation of institutions with functional
autonomy and financial powers to make impactfuldecisions.
Horizontal urban growth and land and labour market
dynamics also result in sub-optimal utilisation of land
and urban decay in city cores. While the experience in the
Global South is not one of ‘emptying cores’ since erstwhile
economies are being replaced with new, albeit often
informalised economic networks, the distress linked withinadequate infrastructure, degraded and unsafe built
environments, trapped land and real estate potential,
remain issues that need to be addressed through sensitive
urban policy. Cities need to develop nimble and innovative
solutions that shift away from a one-size-fits-all approach
towards context-based strategies that can be put into
action for planning and regeneration. Regeneration
combined with robust urban design can act as an effective
tool to revitalise older areas and infuse sustainability andresilience. Regeneration of brownfields is a complex process
and collaborative efforts are needed from all stakeholders
including the government, the realty sector, and thecommunity. Buy-in from the community and businesses
is a determining factor for ensuring the sustainability ofregeneration efforts, and this needs to be secured throughdevelopment of incentive frameworks and safety nets thatmake the process profitable and risk-free for stakeholders.
As cities experience rapid transformation, traditional
long-term, land use-based, over-regulated planning
methods must make way for strategic planning approaches
at all levels to adapt and manage change dynamically andcontinuously. This involves conducting regular self-analysis
to respond effectively to fast-moving events. It is important

22 Urban 20 2023 White Paper

to note that strategic planning approaches do not replace
existing plans. Instead, they complement and enhance
conventional plans, making them more feasible by guiding
development and investments, both public and private,
and aligned with the strategic priorities (sectoral andspatial) that are identified by all stakeholders through a
consultative process. Flexible and tactical development
control regulations – inclusive zoning, mixed-use, density
bonusing, etc. could be most effective to implement andachieve the objectives of a strategic city plan. At a regional
level, strategic planning is imperative to prevent unplanned
sprawl beyond the city limits. Facilitating regional economic
clusters, regional transportation networks and satellite
towns can be a few steps in this direction.
Broadly speaking, four different transitions will have to
be enabled to ensure inclusive, responsive and strategicplanning and governance frameworks at all levels:
Transition from ‘norm-driven’ to ‘strategy-driven’frameworks - Most traditional planning has followeda land use linked regulation of norms. However, norms
and regulations should reflect and enable achievementof strategic outcomes such as sustainability andresilience, economic productivity, transit focus and soon. For instance, norms can be designed to support
transition from a sprawling urban form to a compact,
low-emission, resilient and resource-efficient urban
environment. This will require creation of customised
norms for different areas, prepared in collaboration withconcerned agencies and stakeholders.

Transition from siloed to integrated frameworks–
There is a need to go beyond jurisdictionalsiloes (whether within departments, sectors
or administrations) and adopt collaborative
metropolitan-level planning and governance to enablecross-jurisdictional and cross-sectoral coordination.
Moving from sectoral planning to integrated, data-led,gender-sensitive, evidence-based spatial planning willfurther ensure that development decisions are coherent
and aligned with overarching objectives.

Transition from input based to outcome-oriented
frameworks – This will really help to set long term
targets around macro-outcomes and provide flexibility
in the pathways adopted to lead up to those outcomes.
This also reduces the rigid nature of long-term planningand keeps it agile and responsive to changing urban
contexts.

Transition from ‘regulatory’ to ‘enabling’ frameworks Providing adequate flexibility in norms while regulating
certain essential public outcomes and safeguards
can help substantially boost private innovation andinvestment in building/ rebuilding cities.

Additionally, two cross-cutting aspects will be critical for
executing transformative solutions to emerging urban
challenges.


Building capacities of public agencies/ institutions willbe critical to the success of any transformative policy
and it must form an integral part of processes adopted
at all levels of government. Periodic assessment ofcapacity gaps and needs, use of innovative tools suchas inter-departmental deputation and internships
to improve coordination, sensitisation of politicalrepresentatives, citizens and businesses, incremental
self-paced learning instruments and peer learning andknowledge exchange platforms can play a major rolein creating a culture of innovation and collaborative
governance. It is critical, however to transition fromad-hoc efforts to learn from, and adapt, sustainableurban development lessons to systems for capturing
and sharing good practices and lessons learned
nationally and internationally.



Outcome-based and collaborative planning requires
robust data systems that provide reliable, updated
and granular data to all stakeholders. Setting up data
protocols in terms of periodicity, standardised metrics,
data sources, etc. will be critical. Funds may be allocatedfor creation of data infrastructure and cells, within eachcity and at the macro, regional scale. Some countries,
such as South Korea, India, Singapore, and Latin
American nations, have successfully developed land
information systems through Spatial Data Infrastructure(SDI) for effective urban governance. Fiscal incentives
may be provided to cities for adopting data-based
governance and decision-making processes. These
could be structured as a milestone-based achievementwith outcomes transparently verifiable by citizens or
third-party verifiers.

Urban planning and governance frameworks must undergo
continuous reinvention if they are to keep pace withchanging requirements of emerging urban morphology
and growth. Forward-looking urban planning tools withstrategic thinking to adopt integrated, inclusive, andreflective approaches as suggested in this Paper, can not
only provide a more implementable framework to address
the challenges of cities and regions, but also help to localise
global urban agendas such as urban climate change
resilience, economic vitality, and inclusiveness.

Reinventing Frameworks for Urban Governance and Planning 23

06/
Bibliography
1. United Nations. (2015). Retrieved from https://www.un.org/: https://www.un.org/development/desa/jpo/wp-content/
uploads/sites/55/2017/02/2030-Agenda-for-Sustainable-Development-KCSD-Primer-new.pdf
2. United Nations Climate Change. (2022, 07 11). Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/: https://unfccc.int/
process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement
3. Habitat, U. (2007). Inclusive and Sustainable Urban Planning: A Guide for Municipalities, Volume 1- Introduction to Urban
Strategic Planning. Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements Programme.
4. Albrechts, L. (2015). Reframing strategic spatial planning by using a coproduction perspective. Environment andPlanning B: Planning and Design, 42.
5. PARIS21. (2022). 2021-2025 Strategy - Better Data for All. Paris: PARIS21.
6. (2023). 2023-2027 Strategic Plan City of London. London: London Canada.
7. World Bank. (2023, April 03). World Bank Urban Development. Retrieved May 2023, from https://www.worldbank.org/
en/topic/urbandevelopment/overview
8. Bertaud, A. (1996). Ahmedabad: Land Use Issues & Recommendations. Urban Development Division, The World Bank. .
9. Bertaud, A. (2018). Converting Land into Affordable Housing Floor Space. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No.
6870. SSRN.
10. Cai, H. Z. (2017). “To Build above the Limit? Implementation of Land Use Regulations in Urban China.”. Journal of Urban
Economics 98, 223-233.
11. Annez, P. C. (2010). Working with the Market: Approach to Reducing Urban Slums in India. Policy Research . Journal ofurban design, 5475.
12. Sweta Byahut, B. P. (2020). Emergence of sub-optimal land utilization patterns in Indian cities. Journal of Urban Design,11.
13. Evans. (2005). Measure for Measure: Evaluating the Evidence of Culture’s Contribution to Regeneration. Urban Studies,42.
14. Roberts, B. H. (2014). Managing Systems of Secondary Cities - Policy responses in International Development.
15. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2006). “The Governance of Metro-Regions”, in Competitive
cities in the Global Economy. Paris: OECD Publishing.
16. Slack, E. (2007). Managing the Coordination of Service Delivery in Metropolitan Cities- the Role of Metropolitan
Governance. Washington DC: Policy Research Working Paper, World Bank.
17. Yang, J. (2009). Spatial Planning in Asia - Planning and Developing Megacities and Megaregions. (C. Ross, Ed.)
Megaregions: Planning for Global Competitiveness, 35-52.
18. Andersson, M. (n.d.). Unpacking Metropolitan Governance for Sustainable Development.
19. Richard Dobbs, S. S. (2011). Urban world: Mapping the economic power of cities. McKinsey Global Institute.
20. Anguera, R. (2006, May). The Channel Tunnel-an ex post economic evaluation. Transportation Research Part A: Policy
and Practice, 40(4), 291-315.
21. UNESCAP. (2016). Intergovernmental agreement on the Asian highway network. Retrieved June 2023, from UNESCAP:
https://www.unescap.org/resources/intergovernmental-agreement-asian-highway-network
22. Fay, D. a. (1999). IMF. Finance and Development. Retrieved June 2 2023, from IMF: from https://www.imf.org/external/
pubs/ft/fandd/1999/12/dillinge.html
23. Souza, M. L. (2011). Uma introdução crítica ao planejamento e à gestão urbanos.
24. Khanna, P. (2012). McKinsey & Company. Retrieved June 2023, from Mckinsey & Company: https://www.mckinsey.com/
industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/the-rise-of-hybrid-governance

24 Urban 20 2023 White Paper25. Han Verschure, A. F. (2019). Capacity Building and Knowledge form the foundation of the New Urban Agenda: a position
paper.
26. Nallathiga, R. (2014, July). Capacity Building for Urban Governance: CENA Approach of Andhra Pradesh. Urban India,
34(II), 37-54.
27. Local Government Association. (2016, December 12). Case study: Porto Alegre, Brazil. Retrieved June 2023, from Local
Government Association: https://www.local.gov.uk/case-studies/case-study-porto-alegre-brazil
28. Blume, S. N. (2008). Urban Growth. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics.
29. (2001). The components of urban growth in developing countries. Population Division Department of Economic andSocial Affairs United Nations Secretariat.
30. Mingxing Chen, H. Z. (2014). The Global Pattern of Urbanization and Economic Growth: Evidence from the Last Three
Decades. (U. V. Alejandro Raul Hernandez Montoya, Ed.)
31. (2018). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision, Online Edition. United Nations, Department of Economic andSocial Affairs, Population Division.
32. Gilles Duranton, D. P. (2013, May). The growth of cities. Handbook of Economic Growth, II.
33. International Energy Agency. (2021). Empowering Cities for a Net Zero Future: Unlocking resilient, smart, sustainableurban energy systems. International Energy Agency.
34. Osman-Elasha, B. (n.d.). United Nations. Retrieved June 2023, from UN Chronicle: https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/
article/womenin-shadow-climate-change
35. OECD. (2021). Developing Strategic Approached to Infrastructure Planning. Paris: International Transport Forum, OECD.
36. PIB. (2022, October 4). Press Information Bureau: Online Building Plan Approval System (OBPAS) extended to five more
Cantonment Boards. Retrieved May 2023, from https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1865191
37. Aayog, N. (2021). Reforms in Urban Planning in India. New Delhi: NITI Aayog, Governement of India.
38. Steele, W. &. (2012, April). Flexibility versus Certainty: Unsettling the Land-use Planning Shibboleth in Australia. Planning
Practice and Research., 27, 155-176.
39. Roberts, P. (2000). Urban Regeneration: A Handbook. In H. S. Peter Roberts, Urban Regeneration: A Handbook (pp. 9-36).
Sage.
40. Skyes, P. R. (2000). Current Challenges and Futur e Prospects. In P. R. Skyes, Urban Regenertaion: A Handbook. Sage.
41. Rana Amirtahmaseb, M. O. (n.d.). urban-regeneration worldbank. Retrieved June 2023, from The World Bank: https://
urban-regeneration.worldbank.org/
42. Hubin Wei, Y. C. (2023). The Vanishing and Renewal Landscape of Urban Villages Using High-Resolution Remote
Sensing: The Case of Haidian District in Beijing. Remote Sensing Applications for Interaction between Urbanization and
Eco-Environment, 15(7).
43. Xinqu Liu, Y. L. (2022). The Spatial Pedigree in Traditional Villages under the Perspective of Urban Regeneration—Taking
728 Villages in Jiangnan Region, China as Cases. Urban Regeneration and Sustainable Construction Management, 11(9).
44. Nikos Karadimitriou, C. d. (2013). Planning, Risk and Property Development Urban regeneration in England, France andthe Netherlands. London: Routledge.
45. Rhodes J, P. T. (2005). Assessing the effect of Area Based Initiatives on Local Area Outcomes: Some Thoughts based on
the National Evaluation of the Single Regeneration Budget in England. Urban Studies, 42.
46. Balaban, C. K. (2020, January). Sustainability of urban regeneration in Turkey: Assessing the performance of the North
Ankara Urban Regeneration Project. Habitat International, 95.
47. Osman Balaban, J. A. (2014, September). Understanding the links between urban regeneration and climate-friendly
urban development: lessons from two case studies in Japan. Local Environment, 19(8).
48. Osborne, S. (2010). The New Public Governance: Emerging Perspectives on the Theory of Public Governance. Abingdon:
Routledge.
49. al, C. e. (2014).
50. NTNU. (n.d.). Global Gridded Model of Carbon Footprints (GGMCF). Retrieved June 15, 2023, from https://www.
citycarbonfootprints.info/
51. United Nations. (2020, October 27). World Cities Day 2020: Better city, better life. Retrieved July 2023, from United
NAtions Convention to combat desertification: https://www.unccd.int/news-stories/stories/world-cities-day-2020-bettercity-better-life#:~:text=The%20world’s%20cities%20occupy%20just,take%20place%20in%20developing%20world.
52. The World Bank. (2023, April 3). The world bank urban development overview. Retrieved July 2023, from The world bankurban development: https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/urbandevelopment/overview
Reinventing Frameworks for Urban Governance and Planning 25

53. Teller, J. (2021, March 25). Regulating urban densification: what factors should be used? Buildings and Cities, 2(1),302-317.
54. Jillian Du, A. M. (2019, January 31). World Resource Institute Insights. Retrieved July 2023, from World Resource Institute:
https://www.wri.org/insights/too-many-cities-are-growing-out-rather-3-reasons-thats-problem
55. The Lancet Planetary Health. (2020, December 21). Health and economic impact of air pollution in the states of India: the
Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. The Lancet Planetary Health 2021, 5(1), 25-38.
56. UN Habitat. (n.d.). UN Habitat Urban Regeneration. Retrieved July 2023, from UN Habitat Urban Regeneration: https://
unhabitat.org/topic/urban-regeneration#:~:text=Urban%20regeneration%20brings%20back%20underutilized,prosperity%20
and%20quality%20of%20life.
57. Andersson, M. (2015). Unpacking Metropolitan Governance for Sustainable Development. Metropolitan Regions as
Governance Systems. (F. P.-H. Verena Maier (GIZ), Ed.)
58. Guido Van Huylenbroeck, A. V. (2009). Public Good Markets: The Possible Role of Hybrid Governance Structures in
Institutions for Sustainability. Institutions and Sustainability, 175-191.
59. Aditya Bahadur, T. T. (2016, November). Enhancing Urban climate change resilience. Seven entry Points for Action. ADB
Sustainable Development Working Paper Series(47).
60. Goldblatt, R. (2021, April 23). Building more resilient cities using geospatial data. Retrieved July 2023, from data4sdgs:
https://www.data4sdgs.org/blog/building-more-resilient-cities-using-geospatial-data
61. BBMP. (n.d.). Reimagining Bengaluru’s Governance and Administration. Retrieved July 2023, from BBMP Web site:
http://www.bbmprestructuring.org/
62. Un-Habitat. (2007). An Introduction to Urban Strategic Planning. In I. B. al, INCLUSIVE AND SUSTAINABLE URBAN
PLANNING: A GUIDE FOR MUNICIPALITIES (Vol. 1). Un-Habitat.
63. Toutain, O., & Gopiprasad, S. (2006). Planning for Infrastructure. India Infrastructure Report, 59-81.
64. van den Hurk, M., & Tasan-Kok, T. (2020). Contractual arrangements and entrepreneurial governance: Flexibility andleeway in urban regeneration projects. Urban Studies, 57(16), 3217-3235.
65. Case study: How the Canary Wharf Group generates employment and creates opportunities for local businesses in
the Canary Wharf Estate. (2016, May 16). Retrieved July 2023, from Sustaincase: Building a proactive and sustainable world
together: https://sustaincase.com/case-study-how-canary-wharf-group-generates-employment-and-creates-opportunities-for-local-businesses-in-the-canary-wharf-estate/
66. Brooks, G. (2010). Reusing and Repurposing New York City’s Infrastructure: Case Studies of Reused Transportation
Infrastructure.
67. Lechner, D. E. (2010). Urban Renewal in Cova da Moura. Retrieved July 2023, from United cities and local governments:
https://uclg-cisdp.org/en/observatory/urban-renewal-cova-da-moura
68. Adaptive Reuse. (n.d.). Retrieved from Academic accelerator: https://academic-accelerator.com/encyclopedia/
adaptive-reuse
69. Walsh, C. (2012, February). Spatial Planning and Territorial Governance: Managing Urban Development in a Rapid
Growth Context. Urban Research and Practice, 5(1), 44-61.
70. Mathews, R., A. Kundu, P. Chawla, T. Sebastian, R.B. Palanichamy and M. Pai. 2023. “Morphology of Delhi National Capital
Region’s Economic Geography and its Implication for Planning.” Report. WRI India.
71. Bhatiani, G., Ahluwalia, S., Wadhwa, A., & Amuloju, S. (2022). Sustainable Urban Networks for Dynamic and Resilient(Sundar) India. Delhi.

26 Urban 20 2023 White Paper

Reinventing Frameworks for Urban Governance and Planning 27

28 Urban 20 2023 White Paper