The New Urban Agenda adopted by the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III) in 2016, being as a vision for cities and municipalities for the next 20 years.
The United Nations Development Programme reacted with approval its Strategic Plan 2018-2021, with the endorsement of Member States.
This Strategic Plan in recognizing that the rapid urbanization and changing demographic patterns challenges conventional thinking on development pathways, so that dealing with urban challenges which cause to be necessary the “cross-cutting, integrated applications of expertise and investment, customized for each country and circumstance and driven by global best practices and international standards”.
There are six Signature Solutions of the Strategic Plan, but the United Nations Development Programme sees distinctive opportunities to scale up its offer of services on sustainable urbanization with four of the Signature Solutions.
“Signature Solution 1”– Keep people out of poverty, which involves a mix of solutions that improve rural and urban livelihoods, strengthen gender equality, build social protection and provide basic services;
"Signature solution 2"– Strengthen effective, inclusive and accountable governance, including at municipal and sub-national levels;
"Signature solution 3"–Enhance national prevention and recovery capacities for resilient societies, which will help countries avoid crises and return quickly to stable development after crises occur, especially in large urban settlements;
"Signature solution 5" - Close the clean energy access gap and enhance energy efficiency, which will also help countries reduce the impacts of air pollution, particularly in urban areas.
“In line with the Secretary-General's reform agenda for the UN Development System, the Plan also calls for new ways of working to help sectors to work better for sustainable development, and enabling them to prevent crisis and recover faster.”
All this is very well, indeed, but how does this remedy the effects belonging to an earlier time, where in places the ill effects of this earlier time continues to contaminate, and spread, with harmful 'organisms'. Also, the expected climate changes that may add to the consequences.
How good the plan for “sustainable development”, if times of intense danger from an 'ill-effect' from an earlier time is not part of the Plan? I wonder how many of these places are in place through-out the world, are themselves part of the 'sustainable environment'? What would be the 'strategic solution' then?
“Thousands of cubic metres of radioactive waste lies buried under a concrete dome on the Enewetak Atoll in the Marshall Islands, the legacy of over a decade of US nuclear tests in the Pacific. Now rising sea levels are threatening to spill its contents into the sea.” https://youtu.be/autMHvj3exA