This Chapter analyses the activities of EU member states and other bilateral and multilateral external support agencies (ESAs) in the field of development cooperation in support of urban environmental programmes and projects. Research has been carried out into the general structure and recent history of such cooperation in general and then into the specific activities supporting urban environmental programmes and projects.

Even when the general focus of bilateral and multilateral ESAs remains on rural issues, several signs reflect the initiation of a structural change in their funding and policy direction, characterised by an increasing attention and commitment given to the urban environment. Development cooperation in urban environmental planning and management has been traditionally approached through the financing of basic infrastructures and urban facilities. Recent developments indicate an opening out from this ‘conventional' approach to one which emphasises the need for capacity-building at the local level, building the institutional fabric necessary for a more autonomous local development process and the involvement of different actors of civil society in programme and project design and implementation.

These new approaches have a particular characteristic, articulating the activities of a broad set of actors: international donors, government agencies, NGOs, municipal associations and the private sector. Increasingly these actors are interlinking their activities and resources with a focus on supporting urban development that is environmentally, economically and socially sustainable. It might be said that the 1990s have been characterised by the emergence of closer working relationships between these different institutions and actors. This is also reflected in the development of a number of North-South networks and multi-partnerships aimed at promoting joint local action for sustainable development.

The analysis in this Chapter is concerned with the work and role played by these various actors in the field of urban environmental planning and management and aims to highlight existing and potential synergies amongst them and with the European Commission. The review is in no way intended to be comprehensive but to give a comparative perspective of the trends, approaches and activities of different organisations and some examples of a few of the more innovative initiatives in supporting urban EPM in the context of development cooperation.

Key institutions in most of the countries concerned have been consulted and invited to provide a summary of their activities in the field for the purpose of this study. The analysis is based on the information provided by many of these institutions, the Working paper for the follow-up to Habitat II (EC/DG VIII, 1997) and a number of recent publications in the field (Gilbert et al, 1997; ENDA Tiers Monde, 1994; Both ENDS/ENDA Tiers Monde, 1997). Where data is available the review includes information on the following aspects: implementing organisation(s); policy framework and objectives; working strategies and methodologies; types of activities; partners involved in urban EPM programmes and projects; geographical focus; and level of expenditure.

Like the European Commission itself, in the early 1990s, the member states bilateral cooperation agencies have undertaken a process of reviewing development cooperation strategies in the light of European and international challenges. Examples of this are the Herijking in the Netherlands (1995/96), A Developing World: Strategy for Danish Development Policy towards the Year 2000 (1994); Finland’s Development Co-operation in the 1990s (adopted by the government in 1994), and Irish Aid: Consolidation and Growth, which establishes the Irish aid strategy for 1993-1997. The key aspects of the revision and change of the approach of the EU member states to development cooperation can be characterised as follows:

• introduction of new approaches to development aid, with an emphasis on decentralised cooperation;
• geographic relocation of aid, shifting the traditional focus on low income countries to low and middle income countries;
• realignment of development aid policy within international economic, trade and political relations;
• emphasis on making the development cooperation system more consistent, efficient, effective and responsive to economic and political challenges through the incorporation of new organisational arrangements and more flexible instruments and management procedures;
• increasing cooperation with third parties through a broader spectrum of partners, including NGOs and local authorities;
• shift from the traditional focus on poverty alleviation through economic growth and strong rural bias of development aid to a greater recognition of the links between environment and development processes, and the role of urban systems in sustainable development.

Although it now tends to be less evident, bilateral agencies have traditionally structured their action towards the environment in two different ways: when the general angle of development is considered (better standards of living or struggle against poverty), its management is generally transversal through different units of each institution (i.e. in Italy). When the environmental theme is apprehended as a priority, however, the agencies have created specific units, laws and programmes (DOS, Belgium; SIDA, Sweden).

However, the urban environment is a very new concern in the development cooperation agendas of the member states. At the beginning of the decade, the increasing attention to urban issues might have been expected to be a temporary reaction encompassing the shift of the international community from rural to urban issues. With progress of the 1990s however, a new understanding has been achieved concerning the inter-relatedness of rural and urban concerns and about the crucial role of cities, both in the generation of problems and opportunities towards a sustainable development path, consolidated the place of urban environmental issues in European development cooperation activities.

The reallocation and mobilisation of new resources into urban environmental cooperation is a slow process and funding committed to it still represents a minor component of European development cooperation. Most support for development is still directed towards the rural world with, according to ENDA Tiers Monde (1994), only 6% going to urban development, albeit this varies considerably between different agencies. This statistic should, however, be accepted with caution, as there is a lack of reliable data on urban activities. This is the result of ‘urban' not being as well established a concern as, say, ‘poverty alleviation' or ‘women in development'. Many sectoral policies do in practice very often have a significant impact in cities.

In recent years, a number of EU member states have increased their efforts in the formulation of policies aimed at promoting sustainable urban development by means of setting up specific urban units within government departments and development agencies and, in some cases, increasing the volume of funds devoted to support urban environmental development cooperation programmes and projects. Nevertheless, policies and responses are uneven between different member states. Many European governments have now taken initiatives to focus on urban concerns in their development cooperation programmes, both in terms of policy and funding; a few countries, however, including Belgium, Italy and Ireland, whilst supporting a number of urban initiatives continue to lack a defined policy or strategy. A third group of countries, which include Austria, Spain, Portugal, Greece and Luxembourg, still have very little engagement in urban development cooperation.

The relatively low engagement in urban EPM cooperation of some member states is, very often, a result of the difficulties faced by the countries to incorporate a new area of cooperation into the existing machinery for development cooperation. Limited resources to expand existing areas of cooperation, lack of tradition and expertise in the field, and existing institutional arrangements that tend to neglect the role played by cities in the environment-development interaction, all militate against progress towards increasing support to the improvement of urban EPM in developing countries.

However, the increasing interest in this new area of cooperation expressed by many of the member states consulted during the study reveals the need to promote the policy debate and exchange of experiences and approaches adopted by the EC and the different member states within the European Union, as well as by other donor agencies. This could facilitate and accelerate the definition of individual country strategies towards the incorporation of the urban environment into consistent policy frameworks for development cooperation, avoiding the duplication of effort and leveraging individual efforts.

The analysis considers the structure and activities of those countries which currently have a significant programme in development cooperation in the urban environment. Table 4.1 provides an overview of the development cooperation activities of selected EU member states. Austria, Luxembourg, Portugal, Spain and Greece have not been included due to the lack of information about any relevant activities undertaken in the field of the study.

Policy Framework: Almost half of Danish ODA is channelled through multilateral agencies and the rest mainly divided between two organisations: DANIDA and DANCED. DANIDA – the Danish International Development Agency - is a longer-established organisation without a specific urban policy or programme. DANCED - the Danish Environment and Development Agency - is an agency within the Environment Ministry established following UNCED. The policy orientation of Danish development cooperation is outlined in A Developing World, Strategy for Danish Development Policy towards the year 2000. The new development strategy focuses on poverty reduction and promotes a stronger integration of environment and development issues. Cooperation in the field of the environment aims at combating global environmental problems following the priorities defined at UNCED in 1992.

Urban Environment: DANCED programmes are established in south-east Asia (Malaysia and Thailand) and Southern Africa (Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, Swaziland and South Africa). All its programmes are environmental, with a strong focus also on urban environment. Projects include support of national programmes, e.g. in institutional strengthening and industrial pollution control, as well as local programmes focusing on implementing Local Agenda 21 processes and supporting projects emerging from these processes. An example of DANCED programmes is the Thai Urban Community Environmental Activities (UCEA) Project, which has been jointly developed with the Urban Community Development Office (UCDO). Since its inception in 1996, UCDO has supported a total of 76 urban projects with DANCED funding. The outcomes of this activity have been disseminated to 385 communities in 27 provincial and district networks.

DANIDA supports several UN programmes including: the Urban Management Programme (UMP); the Community Development Programme (CDP) and the Settlement and Environment Programme. Bilateral cooperation is directed to urban development programmes and projects with special attention to capacity-building of local authorities, environmental improvement, housing and slum upgrading and water supply and sanitation. Danish environmental cooperation stresses decentralised cooperation principles and operates within a relatively flexible framework for the allocation of funding administered by DANIDA and DANCED. There are several Danish NGOs involved in development cooperation, which also support southern local initiatives to improve urban environmental conditions in developing countries.

Policy framework: Finnish development cooperation has been traditionally focused on supporting multilateral programmes mainly through the UN agencies. In 1993 the Government adopted a new policy approach, stressing the focus of bilateral aid on the poorest countries and aligning the country's development cooperation as an integral part of its foreign policy. Since 1994, the former Finnish International Development Agency (FINNIDA) has been renamed as the Department for International Cooperation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (DIDC). The environment plays a prominent role in the Finnish agenda for development cooperation. Although the focus is on global environmental issues, the urban environment is receiving increasing attention.

Urban environment: There are no specific policies yet formulated on urban development and urban environmental issues. However, DIDC has produced guidelines to orient future policies and activities with a focus on urban poverty, the feminisation of poverty, rural-urban interlinkages and participation of local groups in urban EPM. In recent years most urban development projects have been oriented towards water supply and sanitation.

DIDC has recently established a Non-Governmental Support Programme (NGO-SP) which is an important channel of resources to NGOs in developing countries. Projects cover a wide range of issues and in recent years environmental projects have received 9% of the resources available to this programme, however a marginal part of these projects were on urban-related issues. Funding is allocated not on the basis of priority themes but on their relevance to target groups.

Policy Framework: Traditionally, French development cooperation was almost exclusively directed towards ex-colonies in Africa, but this has been changing rapidly in the 1990s. French ODA is administered through many government agencies, coordinated by the Inter-Ministerial Committee for Development Aid (CIAD). Most of the French ODA budget is allocated to bilateral aid programmes (75%).

Urban Environment: Since the late 1980s, a focus on urban issues and the environment has developed rapidly. This has been associated with a significant move to decentralise development cooperation, including money directly available through embassies and support both of French development NGO work and of local authorities and NGOs in countries of the South. Apart from these instruments, the French government has several other mechanisms to provide decentralised aid in support of small projects in urban environment and other themes related to local development, including the Decentralised Intervention Credits (CDI) and the Aid for Basic Productive Activities (AIPB) among others. Urban environment remains, however, a relatively small component of total ODA expenditures.

Urban development cooperation aims at strengthening the role of public authorities and improving urban management and financing modalities. Special attention is given to the reinforcement of decentralisation processes and the partial disengagement of central and public institutions. Local authorities, NGOs and professional associations are the main partners for French aid cooperation in urban areas. Two supporting French NGOs play a fundamental role in promoting North-South decentralised cooperation strategies: Cités Unies France (CUF), the umbrella organisation of French local authorities, and the Association Française des Volontaires du Progres (AFVP), which currently runs 280 projects (covering urban and rural issues) in partnership with southern NGOs.

Research and academic institutions also play a special role in the French strategy, analysing and documenting current changes on urban phenomena. The engagement of the private sector is mainly focused on activities concerning the provision of urban infrastructure (particularly water supply and telecommunications).

Policy Framework: The Ministry of Economic Cooperation (BMZ) allocates the German ODA budget; economic cooperation is administered through the Bank for Reconstruction (KfW) and technical cooperation is administered mainly through the Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ). There is a number of other foundations also funded by the German government which tend to develop a more decentralised approach to development cooperation.

Direct financial assistance to southern local organisations is mainly provided through two programmes, the Development Projects in Developing Countries Programme, and GTZ's Programme for German Appropriate Technology Exchange (GATE), which supports micro-projects in Africa, Asia and Latin America and also provides non-financial assistance through dissemination and exchange of information and expertise in environmental protection and technological transfer.

Urban Environment: Large-scale urban infrastructure projects have been and continue to be funded by the KfW from a budget of approximately DM 750 million for projects and programmes at the implementation stage. GTZ urban programmes, with a total budget of around DM 300 million cover a wide range of activities placing special emphasis on stakeholder participation, decentralisation and limiting environmental destruction caused by urbanisation. A significant emphasis on the urban environment has developed in the 1990s moving beyond a traditional focus on integrated slum upgrading to one involving the development of comprehensive urban environmental planning and management tools. The guiding principles towards a more integrated approach are laid out in a policy paper entitled Environment-oriented Municipal and Urban Development, published in 1995, and also in the Environmental Handbook (BMZ, 1995).

The GTZ has developed a comprehensive methodological approach to urban environmental management based on the experience gained in projects run in Nepal and Thailand (GTZ, 1993; 1994). The Urban Environmental Training Materials Project constitutes a pioneering approach to the development and implementation of Local Agenda 21, based on ten principles: self-reliance, interdependence, training, improvement of baseline information, involvement of the community, information dissemination, empowerment of local communities, coordination and integration, effective implementation and reinforcement of legal frameworks.

Target groups for German urban development cooperation projects include local authorities, NGOs and CBOs. However, direct allocations for local communities and authorities in recent years have been low, accounting for 2% of the total funds available. Since the 1990s, German programmes have been concerned with cities in Asia, Latin America, Kenya, Egypt and South Africa and have supported the Urban Management Programme in Africa and Latin America as well as the UNDP LIFE programmes in Thailand and Egypt.

Policy Framework: Over the years, a policy framework strongly oriented towards sustainable development has led to strong efforts to ensure that development cooperation is environmentally sound. This has been reinforced in the 1990s with a new emphasis on promoting the decentralisation of aid and increasing the efficiency of the Dutch ODA system in a context of global political changes. As a result, new responsibilities have been assigned to the embassies in the formulation and implementation of development programmes in southern countries.

This has been accompanied by the integration of all the operations of the Ministries involved in administering the Dutch ODA and the restructuring of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (BUZA) in several forum, thematic and regional directorates created to streamline the Dutch ODA policy. The General Directorate for International Cooperation (DGIS) is the principal agency responsible for administering Dutch ODA.

Urban Environment: Strong support is given to urban development projects by both the General Directorate for International Cooperation (DGIS) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and by the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM).

Support is provided to several multilateral urban programmes such as the Urban Management Programme and the Municipal Development Programme for Sub-Saharan Africa. In addition to these, a number of innovative programmes have also been generated by the Dutch Government involving Dutch NGOs and the establishment of networks intended to develop and disseminate good urban environmental practice across the countries of the South. This includes funding of the Association of Netherlands Municipalities (VGN) to promote intermunicipal development through the Netherlands Intermunicipal Development Cooperation Programme (NIDCP).

Other programmes in urban EPM include the Urban Waste Expertise Programme, which aims at collecting information, promoting exchanges and supporting pilot projects for the improvement of the micro-environment; the Capacity-building for Urban Environment Management Program; and the Indo-Dutch Development Programme that supports the work of local NGOs in five Indian states for the improvement of urban environmental conditions and the prevention of industrial pollution. This programme is assisted by the Dutch NGO Both ENDS, which provides technical support and promotes the dissemination and exchange of experiences.

Policy framework: For many years Sweden has paid strong attention to development cooperation issues and its policy in the field is among the most advanced within Europe. In 1995 the country joined the EU and assumed new financial responsibilities, contributing to the EC development budget, the EDF and the EIB. Since then, Sweden has adopted several measures to improve the efficiency of its development cooperation policy, to articulate national ODA activities with the EC and also to influence the EC development cooperation policy. In 1995 five Swedish authorities hitherto responsible for development cooperation were incorporated into the Swedish International Cooperation Agency (SIDA), with a view to improving coordination of the country's ODA policy and to react better to changing global circumstances.

Sweden provides development cooperation through multilateral and bilateral channels to several countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America. The main focus of the Swedish development cooperation policy is on poverty alleviation, with special attention to equity issues and the conditions of women. Environmental issues are also becoming an integral part of all development cooperation activities. Special attention is given to the development of the capacity of the recipient countries for environmental management and protection.

Urban environment: In recent years the urban environment has received increasing attention within the Swedish development cooperation policy, with an emphasis on building up new capacities and strengthening the role of local municipal institutions in developing countries (SIDA, 1995). Three key aspects are emphasised within this approach: flexible, pragmatic and context-specific responses to the urban environmental problematic of the developing countries. Therefore special attention is given to the promotion of decentralised cooperation schemes aiming at strengthening local capacities to handle immediate urban problems, such as the local management and maintenance of water supply, sanitation, energy use and supply, primary health care, physical planning and housing, etc.

Sweden co-finances with the World Bank an urban rehabilitation project in Angola and supports together with other bilateral donors two major international programmes: the Urban Management Programme and the UNDP LIFE programme. SIDA works closely with the so-called ‘framework organisations' which include: Forum Syd, the Church of Sweden Aid (SCA), the Swedish Cooperative Centre (SCC) and the Council of International Trade Union Cooperation (LO/TCO). Their work has been traditionally focused on rural areas, but they are currently expanding their activities to urban areas.

Policy Framework: Administration of development cooperation is centralised in one agency. Until early 1997 this was the Overseas Development Administration within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office but has now been raised in status to become the separate Department for International Development

(DFID). Part of the British development funds goes to multilateral environmental programmes, such as the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), the Global Environmental Assistance Programme (GEA), the Montreal Protocol Fund and several UNDP programmes. Bilateral cooperation concentrates on 20 countries in Africa and Asia and environmental issues are increasingly being incorporated into development projects.

Urban Environment: Until recently, UK development cooperation paid little attention to urban issues. However, between 1990 and 1995 bilateral cooperation programmes in urban areas grew significantly, accounting for 10.5% of the aid to Asian countries, 2.7% of the aid to Latin American countries and 2.0% for African countries. Much of this urban work is joint-funded with NGOs, focusing on poverty alleviation and small-scale projects. However, a number of comprehensive environmental planning projects have also been recently funded. Examples of British ODA in urban EPM include:

The Faisalabad Area Upgrading Project in Pakistan is a community development project aimed at integrating various activities in health, education, small enterprise development, infrastructure upgrading and environmental management.

The New Generation Slum Improvement Project in India aimed at reducing poverty in a sustainable way through integrated social and infrastructure development, with particular attention to community participation and appropriate income generation.

In addition to these, DFID has been supporting urban and regional environmental planning exercises in a number of countries, including China, Chile and Egypt.

Starting in a significant way in the 1960s, European and North American municipalities initiated a process of ‘twinning'. This has resulted in various activities in which municipalities cooperate: in some cases this is no more than a matter of mutual visits and fostering of mutual understanding. In others there are substantive projects and programmes of mutual technical or economic support. In the 1970s twinning was initiated between cities of the North and the South which involved in many cases an aspiration on the part of northern cities to provide aid and assistance. It should be noted that in the first instance there was much naivete in such programmes, with participants from northern municipalities having no experience and little awareness of the difficulties which would arise in attempting such projects and in many cases the presumption was one of paternalism rather than genuine partnership.

However, into the 1990s this mode of cooperation has been maturing with experience resulting in considerably more realistic approaches to cooperation (Shuman 1994). This is not to say that the paternalism is entirely gone and in many cases municipalities have little altruism in their desire to engage in such cooperation, expecting some tangible economic benefits if they are to expend their own resources. Nevertheless, part of the maturing process has involved national municipal associations establishing development cooperation divisions or agencies to assist their members to develop appropriate and effective partnerships for development cooperation with municipalities in the South.

In several EU member countries national governments are now lending support to these arrangements, in some cases providing financial assistance either directly to municipalities or via projects and programmes of their bilateral development cooperation agencies. The EC has also supported these initiatives to a significant degree, notably via the Decentralised Cooperation and URBS programmes. The following paragraphs describe the activities of the EU country municipal associations most strongly involved in these initiatives.

Association of Netherlands Municipalities (VNG): In the Netherlands there are two specific programmes for decentralised cooperation. The first is the Netherlands Intermunicipal Development Cooperation Programme (NIDCP), the second is the Municipal Initiatives Programme (MI). Both programmes are funded by DGIS and administered by the Association of Netherlands Municipalities (VNG).

NIDCP was established in 1991 to facilitate and promote exchange of expertise and experience between municipalities in the Netherlands and those in countries of the South. It operates according to two formulae: advisory missions of up to three months duration by experienced municipal officers and elected administrators to municipalities and other related institutions in developing countries; and internships of up to six months in the Netherlands for municipal officers from southern countries.

These exchanges allow partners to establish personal contact, obtain a clearer image of each other and facilitate mutual understanding as a foundation for lasting cooperation between municipalities from the Netherlands and countries of the South. In recent years this programme has been organised for municipal officers from Central America, Africa and Asia. The VNG also provides short courses to prepare Dutch municipal officers for advisory missions and advice and technical support to Dutch municipalities willing to engage in international projects.

The MI Programme has a similar structure to the NIDCP but co-finances projects between local authorities that have already a durable relationship. In practice the NIDCP usually constitutes the starting point for town to town cooperation arrangements and the MI supports further initiatives when the initial relationship has matured.

Local Government International Bureau (LGIB): The LGIB has been established by the UK municipal associations and organisations to serve as an intermediary between British local governments and bilateral and international organisations and development cooperation agencies, promoting partnership programmes and providing advice, support and grants to local authorities wishing to establish links with partners in developing countries. The passage of the Local Government (Overseas Assistance) Act in 1993 gave British local authorities the right to spend a proportion of their budget in links with overseas local authorities, promoting new twinning arrangements. The LGIB and the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives (SOLACE) facilitate overseas access to UK local government management, training and technical skills, both via in-country training and cooperation programmes and via the organisation of training and work placements with British local authorities.

Local authorities in the UK have won a reputation for leadership in the implementation of Local Agenda 21. So far, this experience has been drawn upon via cooperation arrangements with cities in some countries, including China and South Africa. The LGIB has several decentralised cooperation programmes in eastern and southern Africa, funded under the EC decentralised cooperation programme. It is also one of the partners of the ICLEI African Sustainable Cities Network, also co-financed by the EC.

Cités Unies Développement (CUD): The French municipal association is closely associated with the Paris-based international municipal association the United Towns Organisation which is discussed further below. The CUD nevertheless has its own decentralised cooperation programme in Latin America, West Africa and Vietnam which it executes together with the French Association of Mayors and with EC support.

Charitable NGOs in EU countries have over the past 20 years reoriented their focus away from pure welfare activities towards development cooperation and in the process have become key actors in development cooperation. At the same time, they are in process of becoming an important channel of bilateral and multilateral funding of development cooperation programmes and projects. However, their engagement in the field of the urban environment is as yet in its early stages. As in many other areas these organisations orient their actions in substantially different ways.

Development NGOs based in EU member countries have traditionally focused their attention on ‘welfarist' concerns, while the focus of environmental NGOs has hitherto been mainly on global ‘green agenda' problems giving priority in their development cooperation activities to rural problems and in particular to the preservation of ecosystems. The confluence of both these types of organisation in the field of the urban environment reflects a new understanding about how the relationship between environmental and development processes works and the role played by cities in these processes.

Though still a minority interest of development NGOs looked at as a whole, urban projects and programmes are growing both in terms of financial flows and innovative practices. These have been delayed, arguably, by the concern for quality and the need to adapt old tools to a new field. Nevertheless, investment in urban capital came as a necessity for northern NGOs to address issues which their southern counterparts are seeing as increasingly important. In consequence, studies on urban issues are appearing from the NGO community and new specialised urban units are emerging inside the NGO sector.

Not all NGOs agree on the way to deal with urban issues: some believe that the ‘push and pull' effect justifies the priority given to the rural world, and they limit their urban contribution towards the most disadvantaged groups in cities. Other focus on medium scale cities, seen as a migratory stage of the rural world towards the urban world. In general, the emergence of urban concerns in North-South NGO co-operation is characterised by a strong desire to develop the volume of these activities, by dedicating complementary financial resources for urban activities, without reducing activity aimed at rural development issues.

Although the majority of the urban activities of the NGOs have strong environmental implications (such as housing, hygiene, solid waste management in poor areas) they are essentially aimed at alleviating urban poverty often centring on support of local economic development through the generation of micro-enterprises. Programmes dealing directly with the urban environment are as yet relatively few. For a few northern NGOs, however, the urban environment is becoming an important issue - e.g. OXFAM (UK) with its recent programme on primary environmental care.

Hitherto northern NGOs concerned with the urban environment have worked more with their local partners in Latin America and Asia, where associations are strong. Now Africa (including the Maghreb), possessing the highest urbanisation rate, is becoming a more pronounced focus of attention, being reflected also in changing budgets. Examples include MISEREOR (Germany) and NOVIB (The Netherlands) cooperating with ENDA Tiers Monde in Dakar and the Italian AFRICA 70 EPM projects.

Increasing attention is being given to the way in which the activities of northern NGOs are being mainstreamed into the development cooperation chain as a whole, with development cooperation agencies providing substantial finance to northern NGOs to work with southern NGOs. A number of EU bilateral agencies are having recently reviewed and assessed their co-operation with NGOs. The outcome of these evaluations reveals that development cooperation could become more efficient, effective and accountable, emphasising the need to focus more attention on monitoring and assessing projects and programmes, and facilitating the exchange and networking of experiences.

Experience shows that the type and level of co-operation between NGOs, CBOs and local authorities has a direct and significant influence on the sustainability of urban environmental projects. There is an increasing shift from the perception of southern NGOs as ‘recipients of aid' to ‘partners in the development cooperation process'. A better recognition and enhancement of the capacities and accumulated experience of southern NGOs and commitment to long term institutional strengthening accompany this. In addition to this, as NGOs are becoming more involved in the implementation of official development programmes, partnerships between NGOs and local and national authorities are emerging.

With no intention of being comprehensive, the following paragraphs review the main components that characterise emerging approaches in NGO development cooperation on urban EPM and some examples of the experience of northern NGOs:

Promotion of Local Agenda 21: Several EU-based NGOs are becoming actively involved in supporting the implementation of Local Agenda 21 and promoting collaborative partnerships worldwide. In Belgium the National Centre for Development Cooperation (NCOS) stimulates the implementation of LA 21 in Belgium and promotes the exchange of initiatives with Third World partners. There are several examples of NGO - local authority - community group cooperation in implementing Local Agenda 21 such as the links established between Gloucestershire Vision 21 (UK) and the Kisumu We Want Project (Kenya) or the link between Leicester (UK) - that has gained the title of ‘Environment City' - and Vrindavan in India. These links are strongly supported by the respective African and Asian local communities of both UK cities, and have gained support for the improvement of environmental conditions in both southern cities.

Campaigning and raising public awareness: European charitable NGOs have a long tradition of sensitising the European public and seeking public support for government aid policies. The Centre National de Coopération au Développement (CNCD) (Belgium) organises the annual 11.11.11 - Campaign in collaboration with other NGOs, aiming at creating public awareness concerning problems in developing countries and raising funds for development cooperation. Some 60% of Italian development NGOs are active in urban development issues in countries of the South. Their campaigning has helped to place urban issues in the Italian official ODA agenda.

Demonstration projects: There is now a number of northern development NGOs specialising in support for innovative and context-adapted initiatives in the South concerning the urban environment. A key factor for their success is the integration of demonstration projects in framework programmes, which allows the confrontation of experiences and the cross-fertilisation of methodologies and technologies. Examples of this approach are the programmes developed by the Dutch NGO WASTE and ENDA Tiers Monde. WASTE's Urban Waste Expertise Programme (UWEP) aims at linking and empowering small enterprises with limited funds and knowledge and local communities, which are not integrated in urban management systems. A similar approach is adopted by ENDA's Popular Urban Environmental Economy Programme (PRECEUP), co-financed by the EC, which supports urban EPM projects and South-South networking in several continents.

Capacity-building and institutional strengthening: This refers to the promotion of internal professional capacities, knowledge and attitudes through individual needs and perspectives and to the improvement of institutional capacities through organisational development and institutional and legal framework development. The Dutch NGO Both ENDS has recently formulated a CITIES Project, which focuses on the recognition and enhancement of the intermediary capacity of NGOs to address urban environmental problems. This project aims to strengthen both local capacities and the political leverage of cooperation between NGOs, CBOs and local authorities.

Linking for development: Northern development NGOs have progressed far from their earlier paternalistic approaches to development cooperation, now seeing this largely in terms of a collaborative enterprise amongst equal partners or ‘people linking'. The approach to development cooperation has therefore moved on to examine the most effective ways of promoting good practices in linking, where cooperation, mutual learning and cross-cultural awareness can grow, preparing the ground for effective ‘linking for development'.

The UK One World Linking Association (UKOWLA) is a self-help linking support network, that has made a major contribution to devise and disseminate this approach to development cooperation facilitating training for, and exchange between, different actors engaged in local initiatives for sustainable development. There are several mechanisms applied by NGOs to promote linking activities between local partners in the North and the South. NOVIC, a Dutch NGO, has a programme for ‘project linking', which is an arrangement whereby the NGO recruits Dutch municipalities to ‘adopt' a project in a developing country. The Dutch municipalities provide additional funding for given project components and in return NOVIC provides information material on the project and the target group whom the project is intended to benefit.

Dissemination and communication: The development of systematic methods to learn from experience, disseminate new working methods and to improve North-South communication and mutual exchange of expertise are key components in most of the examples reviewed. The Deutsche Stiftung für internationale Entwicklung (DSE) provides a forum for development policy dialogue and advanced training for managers and decision-makers from Africa, Asia, and Latin America (and also for Central and Eastern Europe). In 1994, the DSE organised an international round table on ‘Sustainable City Development' aiming at promoting new insights and policy guidance to decision-making officials and politicians from large cities in developed and developing countries.

Traditionally, the participation of the private sector in external cooperation activities has been tied to economic purposes, primarily opening-up southern markets for northern products and the sale of technologies and services. Although the engagement of the private sector towards sustainable urban EPM is still low, there is a number of initiatives that help to devise a new role that can leverage the impact of bilateral agencies.

There is a number of such examples. Development cooperation involving the private sector funded by the government of the Netherlands has been encouraged through the MILIEV Programme, which provides support for environmental activities of Dutch companies operating abroad and has funded several decentralised twinning arrangements between Dutch electricity companies and their partners in developing countries.

French enterprises have for many years played a major role in the urban engineering and infrastructure sector around the world. Of a global market of US$ 106 billion in 1995, their share was of 15 %, slightly behind the USA (16 %) and Japan (21 %), being number one in Africa with 40 % of their investment concerning developing countries (ENDA Tiers Monde, 1994).

Their first activity concerns technical coordination, since what is exported is mainly know-how on engineering, urban services and technical management. French firms manage the construction and moreover the exploitation of urban services like water supply, sewage and drainage systems, electricity, etc., frequently as upgrading interventions. Searching for the most convenient financing of these works (interest rate, time terms, guarantees) on behalf of their clients is as important an aspect of this French cooperation as the technological know-how they provide.

The widespread process of privatisation of urban services in countries of the South has encouraged northern enterprises to engage themselves in important direct investments. Thanks to their know-how in delegated management of public services, they have been able to develop financing models such as BOT (Build Operate Transfer) that facilitate financing of the purchase of equipment through running projects for a given period following construction. However, the increasing participation of European companies in the processes of privatisation of public utilities in developing countries is not always accompanied by environmentally sound and socially equitable interventions.

The incorporation of the private sector into urban environmental cooperation activities requires specific strategies and trigger mechanisms addressing the following objectives: to facilitate market-based approaches to environmental protection, with emphasis on pollution prevention and reduction and the sustainable use of natural resources; to develop North-South research and development networks sensitive to context specific solutions in areas of mutual interest; and to increase the urban EPM management capacity of southern partners in the development and use of environmental technologies and services. Based on these criteria, the approach adopted by the EC in its environmental cooperation strategy with its notion of ‘technology windows' provides a comprehensive approach and innovative mechanisms to mobilise the private sector towards long lasting and environmentally sound investments.