Global Report on Human Settlements 2007 - PoA-ISS

Reducing urban crime and violence
253
• whether goals are being achieved;
• whether individual projects are succeeding given the
different timeframes to which they relate;
• whether the implementation process is effective;
• whether partnership structures continue to be fit for
purpose; and
• whether the partnership process itself is operating
appropriately. 45
The importance of identifying this multiplicity of evaluation
activities is that it sees evaluation not just as a set of activities
at the end of the process, but as something that is
integral to the process itself at several stages, and which
probably operates as a series of iterations, rather than as a
linear process.
This is an important corrective to the all-too-common
view that evaluation is something that only happens at the
end of the process. The fact that there are many different
types of evaluation, and that these can contribute in various
ways to an effective process on an ongoing basis, challenges
this view. The experience of evaluation activities also
suggests that these are best done if they are built into the
process from the beginning, with the intention to evaluate
systematically helping to structure how the process and its
various stages are conceived. An important point that is by
no means always recognized is that valuable lessons can be
learned from what has not gone well, as well as what has
succeeded. Indeed, it can be argued that the need to
identify what is not working as quickly as possible in order
that consideration can be given to changing it is one of the
most important tasks of evaluation, especially when it is
seen not just as a task to be carried out at the end of a
process, but as something integral to that process at several
stages.
This often raises issues about what gets published by
way of evaluative material, especially on websites, where
there seems to be a tendency not to include material about
what has not worked well for what appear to be public
relations reasons. It is understandable that organizations
will look at their websites in this manner in the contemporary
world; but they do need to reflect on how credible this
stance is among those stakeholders who are aware that
there have been issues and expect them to be covered in
published evaluative material. It is also more helpful for
outsiders looking at material of this nature in an attempt to
learn from it to see a ‘warts and all’ presentation. The fact
that these are still relatively rare, and that a presentation
which only highlights the positive aspects is much more
common, may have contributed to the phenomenon
discussed above of the uncritical borrowing of ideas from
elsewhere. The need, therefore, is to move towards
honest, open and transparent reporting – and if organizations
find this difficult from a public relations perspective,
one action that they can consider is publishing alongside
such material a statement of how they intend to address
the issues raised.
THE CHALLENGES OF
IMPLEMENTATION
One of the most important considerations for any partnership
is the need to think carefully about how what it wants
to do can be effectively implemented in the particular
circumstances of its remit. As a consequence, one of the
early issues to be faced in such situations is an identification
of what the barriers to implementation might be and how
they might be overcome. This must be about the local situation
since implementation is about making something work
in a specific context. The key question here is how can
things be made to work? This relates to the previous discussion
about adapting to local circumstances, rather than
uncritical borrowing, since without careful consideration of
the particular circumstances in which something is going to
be applied, there can be no guarantee that what has worked
well elsewhere can be transplanted effectively.
Having underlined the importance of locality, this
section looks at five implementation challenges that are
commonly faced and which are more thematic in nature.
These are defining appropriate institutional structures for
action; involving and mobilizing local communities; capacitybuilding
at the local level; integrating crime prevention into
urban development; and effective international support for
initiatives against crime and violence. Each of these is
discussed in turn.
Defining appropriate institutional structures
for action
In most instances, the appropriate local player to take the
lead on actions against crime and violence at the urban scale
will be the local authority. Not only will it have a large
number of service functions that it can bring to bear on
these problems and a resource base that can be used to
address them, 46 but it will also see itself as having a central
responsibility for the quality of life in its area and for the
welfare of its citizens. If these reasons were not enough by
themselves to explain why local authorities can normally be
found in leading roles in relation to urban initiatives against
crime and violence, it is also likely that the local authority
will attach considerable importance to the representational
role that it plays on behalf of its city.
To enable it to do all of these things well, it will need
to be in regular touch with its citizens and its businesses, to
be an effective communicator and provider of information,
and to be responsive to the feedback that it receives through
these channels. In order to do these things, it will almost
certainly have to work with a wide range of other local stakeholders,
and as has already been argued, in practice this
often leads to the creation of formal partnership mechanisms
to provide vehicles for activities of this nature. All of these
things help to explain why local authorities increasingly
accept that taking a lead in fighting against urban crime and
violence is an integral part of their approach to providing
good governance for their locality. 47 And they also help to
explain why leadership in these terms comes not merely
from the executive arms of local authorities, but also often