 |
2000
Winners
Report of the Technical Advisory
Committee
Hosted by the City of Shenyang, China
5-8 June 2000
Overview and Contents
The City of Shenyang, China, hosted the 2000 Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) from 5 to 8 June 2000. The purpose of the TAC was
to review the 691 submissions and 70 updates received for the 2000
Dubai International Award for Best Practices. The TAC identified
115 submissions as Best Practices and prepared a short-list of 40
submissions for review by the Best Practices Jury. The report is
organized as follows:
• Introduction
• Evaluation Process
• Selection Procedure for the Global
Best Practices 100 List
• Short List of 40 Best
Practices
• Summary of Short-Listed
[PDF]
[RTF]
• Global Best Practices
115 List
• Members of the 2000 Technical
Advisory Committee
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduction
The 2000 round of submissions for the Dubai International Award
for Best Practices to Improve the Living Environment (DIABP) was
the third round of calls for best practices since 1996. The submissions
for the year 2000 represent, without a doubt, an improvement over
previous rounds in terms of quality and quantity of submissions.
While this improvement is attributable to the continued awareness-building
effort undertaken by Dubai Municipality, UN-Habitat and the
global network of partners of the Best Practices & Local Leadership
Programme, the members of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
wish to acknowledge, first and foremost, the efforts and willingness
of the people, communities and organisations involved in implementing
these submissions. We therefore concur with the opinion of the members
of the 1996 TAC, repeated by the 1998 TAC in "recognising the
wealth of commitment and endeavour shown by so many people across
the world, who are taking their destinies in their own hands to
improve their and their families, lives and the well-being of their
communities." The 2000 TAC wishes to further state that this
commitment and willingness of people and their communities to respond
to the call for submissions and to share experiences is tangible
evidence of the usefullness and validity of the best practices approach
as a means of promoting the exchange and transfer of knowledge,
expertise and experience in an increasingly interdependent and democratizing
world.
The TAC reviewed 691submissions and seventy updates from more than
110 countries. The sheer quantity of submissions obliged the TAC
to establish, as its first task, the screening of all submissions
and to differentiate between those that are truly good and best.
The quality of submissions received also obliged the TAC to depart
from the previous approach used, based on inclusiveness, and to
be much more selective. Its second task was to identify and select
among qualifying submissions and updates, a list of approximately
one hundred best practices. Its third task was to determine a short-list
of not more than forty practices, of equal merit, that will go forward
to the Jury.
Another marked difference with previous rounds is
the fact that the TAC took into consideration the 70 updates received
from practices submitted in 1996 and 1998. These updates were each
reviewed on the basis of their individual merit. The TAC decided
that many of these updates represent significant achievements in
scaling up and/or replication. This led to:
a. The upgrading of selected practices from good to best;
b. The unprecedented inclusion of more than 10
updates in the Best Practices 100 List and of two updates in the
short list
Every applicant should know that the TAC considered each submission
carefully. Those who made submissions that were not short-listed
should know that the competition from around the world was intense
and are encouraged to submit updates.
Nearly 50% of all submissions were categorised as non-qualifying.
However, it must be stated that this does not detract from the inherent
qualities or validity of these submissions within their respective
contexts. For this reason the 2000 TAC recommends to the Secretariat
and the partners of the BLP to include all those submissions that
comply with the basic criteria in a new category of promising submissions
in the Best Practices database. This recommendation is based on
the need to conciliate two opposing trends: (a) the higher standards
needed to differentiate between good and best practices over time
as clearly evidenced by the 2000 submissions; and (b) the essential
function and contribution of the Best Practices Database as one-stop-shop
for information on who is doing what in implementing the Habitat
Agenda and Local Agenda 21.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Evaluation process
The Second Substantive Session of the Preparatory Committee for
Habitat II held in Nairobi, Kenya, in March 1995, adopted Decision
II/7 and the following three basic criteria for nominating a Best
Practice:
• Tangible impact in improving the living environment - does
the practice have an impact, and one that can be measured quantitatively
or qualitatively?
• Partnerships - are at least two partners involved (e.g.,
central and/or local government, NGOs/CBOs, the private sector,
academic/training institutions, etc.)?
• Sustainability - has the practice resulted in changes in,
for example, decision -making processes, resource allocation, management
systems, policies or technology so as to sustain its initial impact?
For the 2000 round of submissions, two additional non-eliminating
criteria were used:
• Gender and social inclusion; and
• Leadership and community empowerment.
In addition to the above, the TAC used the two following considerations
in assessing the individual merit of each submission:
• The substantive impact of each practice on improving quality
of life; and
• The demonstration value of each practice in terms of lessons
learned and its potential for transfer.
Following the detailed appraisal of the 2000 submissions the TAC
identified three categories within which the submissions could be
grouped. These categories are:
a. Governance and civic engagement with a strong emphasis
on comprehensive and participatory approaches to development, including
environmental planning and management, infrastructure development
and management;
b. Gender, community empowerment and social inclusion,
including social services, safety and poverty reduction;
c. Special practices including those relevant to
shelter, land tenure and access to credit, disaster management and
other practices.
These themes, categories, and criteria provided a matrix to reach
objective judgements on widely differing practices. Every practice
submitted, from those we were not able to recommend to those which
we have sent forward to the Jury has been judged by reference to
the same matrix.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Selection Procedure
The TAC members and the Secretariat met in Shenyang from 5 to 8
June 2000. As mentioned above, the TAC, in a significant departure
from methods used by previous TAC meetings, proceeded first with
the elimination of practices. This was done in three groups based
on considerations of equitable workload. These groups were: (a)
the Americas representing North America and Latin America and the
Caribbean; (b) Africa, Arab States and Europe; and (c) Asia and
the Pacific.
Subsequent stages of the TAC closely followed the methodology used
by the two previous TAC meetings. This consisted of dividing the
TAC into two committees with each committee assessing the retained
practices in a "double blind" process. This process was
used twice, once to identify the 100 Best Practices List and once
to identify the Short List of not more than 40 practices. Members
of the committees were rotated between the two rounds.
The lists resulting from the double-blind process were discussed
in plenary sessions. As in the past, there was a substantial level
of agreement between the two groups resulting in an overall first
round consensus representing approximately a 70% rate of concurrence
for the Best Practices 100 list and a rate of concurrence of over
60% for the Short List.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Members of the Technical Advisory Committee
Meeting
Hosted by the City of Shenyang, China
5-8 June 2000
1. Ms. Agata Miazga
The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe
Hungary
2. Ms. Moema Maria Marques de Miranda Valarelli
Co-ordinator of the Local Participation and Development Unit
IBASE - Brazilian Institute of Social and Economic Research
Brazil
3. Ms. Dr. Maria Isabel Carmona
Chile
4. Mr. Jose Antonio Corraliza
Professor Titular de Universidad, Psicologia Social y Metodologia
Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Campus de Cantoblanco
Spain
5. Mr. Faisal Al-Gurg,
Director-General of the Sheikh Zayed Housing Programme
U.A.E.
6. Mr. Mario Zolezzi
Board member of DESCO, Ficong and HIC-LAC
Peru
7. Ghislaine Hermanus
Prof. of Architecture at the City College of New York
USA
8. Ms. Bernadia I. Tjandradewi
Programme Manager, CityNet
Indonesia
9. Ms. Gertrude Ngenda
Coordinator, Regional Information Centre on Local Government
Municipal Developmnent programme and Commonwealth Local Government
Forum
10. Gil-Fernando C. Cruz
Executive Director
League of Cities of the Philippines
Philippines
11. Prof. Zhitong Sui
Shenyang, China
Secretariat:
12. Mr. Nicholas You
Co-ordinator, Information and Best Practices
The Urban Secretariat, UN-Habitat
13. Mr. Stephen Walsh
Best Practices Officer, UN-Habitat Regional Office for Latin
America and the Caribbean
Special Advisor to UNCHS:
14. Mr. Ed Frank
Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies
The Netherlands
|
|
