Better Coordination, Better Urban Policy
The scale of urbanization and the rate at which it is occurring all around the world is characterized by an increase in the demand for housing, employment, infrastructure and transportation systems (to name a few). Last week, we met with alumni working at the provincial and federal levels of government, who emphasized the need for cooperation and oversight related to municipal matters.
While urbanization brings positive outcomes, if poorly managed there are severe consequences directly impacting the lives of citizens. And so, building cities that have the means to accommodate these large flows of population calls for coordination at all levels of government, along with wise investment decisions.
But how is this possible in a country that might not have an explicit national urban policy?
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has identified that Canada lacks a national urban policy as cities and municipalities constitute a provincial responsibility. According to Neil Bradford, “urban policy-making in Canada has always been a largely disjointed and implicit national undertaking.”
As the federal government impacts sectors of urban development including infrastructure, monetary, economic and housing policy, as suggested by UN-Habitat, the need for coordination is inevitable.
So, how does Canada do it? Well, Bradford suggests three multi-level governance models:
1. Federal-provincial/territorial agreements with municipal involvement
2. Direct federal-municipal/community programming
3. Federal-provincial-municipal policy adaptation
Reflecting upon these models, as well as the discussion last week, as municipalities are often responsible for the implementation and delivery of programs directly to citizens, it is important to note that their voices must be heard.
