UPSC Prelims 2021 Q81: Right to the City and UN-Habitat — Explained
Consider the following statements:
1. 'Right to the City' is an agreed human right and the UN-Habitat monitors the commitments made by each country in this regard.
2. 'Right to the City' gives every occupant of the city the right to reclaim public spaces and public participation in the city.
3. 'Right to the City' means that the State cannot deny any public service or facility to the unauthorized colonies in the city.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- 1 only
- 3 only
- 1 and 2
- 2 and 3
Answer: (d) 2 and 3
Statement-wise explanation
- 1: incorrect — The 'Right to the City' is not an agreed human right. No binding treaty recognises it. The New Urban Agenda, adopted at Habitat III in Quito on 20 October 2016, only 'notes the efforts of some national and local governments' to write it into their legislation, political declarations and charters (paragraph 11). The concept was contested during the negotiations, and the UN human rights office (OHCHR) has said it does not promote the term. UN-Habitat does not monitor country commitments on it.
- 2: correct — The idea comes from the French sociologist Henri Lefebvre (1968). It holds that the people who live in a city, not only the state or the market, should shape it. Its core claims are that all inhabitants share equitably in public spaces and take part in urban decision-making. UN-Habitat's Right to the City discussions and the Habitat III policy unit 'Right to the City and Cities for All' stress both points.
- 3: correct — The concept treats every inhabitant as entitled to basic urban services, whatever their tenure or legal status. That includes people in slums and unauthorised colonies. The aim is to stop people being excluded from water, sanitation, shelter and similar services because they live in informal settlements. In 2019 the Delhi High Court relied on this reasoning to protect slum dwellers in Shakur Basti from forced eviction. The official key accepts the statement as a description of what the concept demands, not of what Indian law already guarantees.
How to eliminate
Statement 1 is the easiest to drop. 'Agreed human right' plus 'UN-Habitat monitors the commitments made by each country' is a very strong claim. Agreed human rights come from treaties such as the ICCPR and ICESCR, and the human rights treaty bodies monitor them, not UN-Habitat. A slogan that came out of academia and civil society does not usually carry that status. Once statement 1 goes, options (a) and (c) go with it, leaving (b) and (d). Statement 2 just paraphrases the phrase itself: reclaiming public space and participation is what a 'right to the city' would naturally mean. Accepting it gives (d). Statement 3 is the weak point. 'Cannot deny any public service' sounds absolute, but it is how the concept's advocates state the entitlement of informal settlers. You could reach the answer without that detail, since the option structure leaves no choice that pairs statement 2 with statement 1. Fact to remember: the Right to the City appears in the New Urban Agenda (2016) only as an idea some governments have adopted. It is not a recognised human right.
Know more
Right to the City: origin and status
Henri Lefebvre coined the phrase in Le Droit à la ville (1968). He argued that city space was being shaped for profit, and that the people who live in a city should collectively decide how it is made and used. Later, social movements, mainly in Latin America, turned it into a political demand. Brazil wrote it into its City Statute (2001), and Ecuador's 2008 Constitution recognises it.
It entered the UN system through UN-Habitat. The 5th World Urban Forum (Rio, 2010) took 'The Right to the City: Bridging the Urban Divide' as its theme. Habitat III (Quito, 2016) had a policy unit called 'Right to the City and Cities for All'. The final New Urban Agenda (NUA) uses the phrase only once, in paragraph 11, as a vision some governments have adopted.
| Feature | Position |
|---|---|
| Legal status | Not a treaty right. The NUA is a non-binding outcome document |
| Endorsed by | UN General Assembly, 23 December 2016 |
| Follow-up | UN Secretary-General reports on NUA progress every four years, drawing on UN-Habitat inputs |
| Core elements | Non-discrimination, participation in decisions, equitable access to public space and basic services, social function of land |
| Linked SDG | SDG 11: inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable cities |
In India
India has no statute on the right to the city. Courts reach similar results through Article 21 (right to life, livelihood and shelter): Olga Tellis (1985) on pavement dwellers, the 2019 Delhi High Court ruling in Ajay Maken v. Union of India on slum evictions, and the Street Vendors Act, 2014. Schemes such as PMAY-Urban and AMRUT address housing and basic-service gaps.
In the news
Two developments probably kept the concept in Indian discussion before the 2021 exam. In 2019 the Delhi High Court invoked the right to the city in the Shakur Basti eviction case. Then the 2020 COVID-19 lockdown and the migrant workers' exodus showed how many urban residents live without secure housing or basic services.
NCERT Concepts to Revise
- Social rights: Statement 3 is about access to public services and facilities, which is the core of social rights.