1. Shuaib Lwasa Department of Geography Makerere University Lwasa_s@asrts.mak.ac.ug UGEC 2010 16 th October 2010

2.  Introduction  Understanding Institutions  Mechanics of institutions  Character of cities, actors and spheres of decision making  Innovation for sustainability  Conclusion

3. © 2007 David Sasaki Urbanisation  Institutions are more than organizations and structure  Rules of engagement' determining the nature of relations, authority and power in decision making  Decision making spheres interwoven and diverse  Decisions for sustainable urban development;  Action and or lack of such impacts urban systems and people

4.  Within a hierarchy and operating in many spaces  Decisions framed largely by legal instruments  Upstream and downstream relations  Traditional top-down but increasing evidence of “botto-up”

5. Constraint Noise Scale Macro- Meso- Micro- Example Household Municipality City council Actors and spheres of decision making Neighborhood Municipality Urban corridors City

6. Valparaiso Chile: UGEC ViewPoints 4 October 2010 5 Municipal councils 1 city council 18 Ministries 3 Public transport operators Two million dwellers 7 waste management companies 100 large industries 10 real estate operators 2 energy companies 1 water supply company 100s of contractors Civil society organizations

7. Researchers Leadership in knowledge generation Elected Officials (national and local) Wield power to guide decisions City management officials Strategic and routine guidance? Communities Receivers? Served? Adhere? Private sector, industrialists International organizations

8.  Formal and informal  Informality of the formal and formality of the informal  Decisions and planning policy; official, unofficial and official-unofficial  Slow policy response on sustainable development

9. Policy & Solution Crisis Management Action as a Fix Assessment or Pseudo? Report Stored On shelf NextCrisis Forgetting

10. Innovation “change and or development of alternate systems enabling creativity based on local adaptation needs” Mainstreaming incentives Identifying leverage points; e.g. from projects to programs Redefining community role in decision making Expansion of decision sphere? Side by side formal and informal operations? Bridging the gaps between institutions: UNUF

11.  Champions, tradeoffs and co-benefits  Multi-actor knowledge platforms and knowledge bases  Debunking the formal and informal rules  Redefining and pursuing common interests  Innovatively closing ‘capacity gaps’  Institutional adaptation

12.  Caveats  Urban inclusiveness  Mainstreaming systems for maintenance and replacement  Responding to dynamics of demand and need

13.  Understanding rules of engagement is important  The multi-actors and rules drive urban development programs to widely differing directions  Institutional innovation will have to involve creating spaces for the majority in decision making  Internal weaknesses of legally established institutions must innovate and attend to outcomes

14. Thank you