 Yn meddwl am y cyfnodd yma, ac mae'n meddwl i'w adeilad o'r pryd, mae'n meddwl i'w meddwl, dyma'n meddwl ar y bdoedd, ymddangos gyda'r reisor, ymddangos, ac yn ffiydd yma'r gweithio ar y cyfnodd. Yn ddiwedd yma, mae'n ddigon i ysbytdiad ar gyfer gweithfyrdd. Ac mae'n meddwl i'w meddwl i'w meddwl am y cyfnodd, that one of the four participants we've heard now? Yeah. I have a question to Hanpol's Hai Wang Heo and I think as a presenter is not him and the other people can answer this question too and I always have a question that for urban poverty and urban equality issues we should do something. For the case of Hong Kong, we can do something because Hong Kong Government has the resources. We also know how to do something. The question is why the government do not do something. For public policies we usually find this kind of puzzle. It seems we know Something want to make a reform, but the government always lagging behind. Can you make your judgment? You're thinking about why the government is not doing anything? Does the government have skeptical things? Or some other reasons? I think you can answer directly on that one. I think it's simple and complicated. I just told that there is no universal suffrage in Hong Kong, so our political leaders are representing the privilege, they are not representing the general public, especially the CEO, the Chief Executive. He is only elected by 800 members and many of them are land developers. They are not asked for reform, that is damage their privilege, damage their business. Even they will ask the government to do more to harm the unphilaged more because they will ask the supply name for them to build a luxury housing rather than public housing. So it can be simple also, it can be more political dynamic behind. So I think the solution is, it is a savage democratic system is important. Of course before this, we still can do something. We can push more social pressure. It is so good doing long time for this. For example, we draw the social attention from locally or internationally. There is some progress, but not as much as we want to see, but there is still something more. So I also to draw your attention and hope you support us. We can have international pressure for the government. And they will feel shame and they need to present you better Hong Kong. Thank you. And just to be sure, your organisation acts as a lobby itself. Yeah, yeah, we are a human rights organisation and we organise these people to fight for their human rights, their rights to housing. Right, thank you very much, Philip. This is a question for Sharon and sorry from the beginning, this is going to go back to the very basics. But just listening to the four presentations and of course yours, I wondered whether there is any evidence at either the city or the national level that we have successfully tackled health inequalities in the absence of healthy levels of income equality. Or whether that is ultimately what we need to talk about. Sharon. That is a nice easy question. We were having exactly the same discussion this morning on the radio programme. I do not agree that the only thing that matters or the basic thing that matters is income inequality. And the very fact that the relationship between income inequality and health inequities doesn't follow a straight line is for that very reason. There's other things that matter and I think what I was trying to make the comment about and that many others in the discussions have made is that income matters, social equity matters, but all of those other conditions matter. So whether it's about the quality of health care and the physical access and economic access to that or whether it's about the state of the food system or whether it's about the state of the built environment. So I don't believe that we'll ever see improvements in health inequities if we only look for cities that have gone some way to look at income inequalities. I think we've become very focused on the point that was made last night of if we only look at what's under the lamp, I'm paraphrasing badly, but if we only look at what's under the street light, then we miss all of those other things that have been happening around. So that was a long way of saying no, there's no demonstrated evidence of if you just deal with income inequality, you'll do something about urban health equity. You started by talking about Glasgow, which is Scotland's biggest city and has hugely redeveloped itself very successfully, economically, having an industrial decline, but it's evidence of just how good a city can be at rebuilding itself. Is there any evidence that, and you showed the figures with the life expectancy with Glasgow at the top and the bottom, has that narrowed in those years of success? Does the economic success of the city has returned? No, Glasgow hasn't in terms of its health inequalities and it's not unusual for cities that go through that sort of economic development. Nobody has really understood why Glasgow is the way it is in terms of those health and social inequities. It's the Glasgow conundrum, and I certainly can't explain it all, but there's just that real historical cumulative social disadvantage that's been there, but with also a very strong community resilience, but we've still continued to widen the health inequities. Actually, my question was the same direction. We had seen this very strong relation between social inequality and health inequities, and Jason introduced the question that we shouldn't discuss health with the city, but the question of health governance. I would be very curious if there exist successful examples of such health governance breaking this very strict relation between social inequalities and these health problems. We've seen a second question to Edgar to this splendid urbanism in Africa linked to the development of the informal development. I'm very much astonished when I'm looking at this informal development in the African cities that you find a very low form of contradiction of this informality compared with Latin American cities. I think the African cities are really in the trap of this not developing this informality in the form of formality, and by this these inequalities to health problems are reinforced. What can be the reason for this? You have a notion already. We'll do this one at a time, short and sharp if we can. Edgar, do you want to talk out the informality point and governance if you wish to, but others may want to talk about governance? This is something that is of great interest to us, and I think that a big part of the Latin American story is that they've got a long tradition of social movements around urban rights. If you just look at Brazil, which is a leader in this case, in terms of informal settlement consolidation, working really sensitively with sort of layered technical understanding of topography, place, et cetera, et cetera, with community driven visions and plans for how consolidation should happen and intermediation in informal economies to supply certain building materials and so on, you had 20, 25 years of social struggles that consolidated into the statute of the cities, which really enabled this process to consolidate. So I think that one has to look historically, you've got to look long term, and the lesson that I take away from that is that when movements of the poor, social movements connect through intellectuals and so forth into the political system and are able to achieve simultaneously legislative consolidation that gives certain rights with a really sophisticated policy urban management framework that recognises and works with a grain of informality, you get progress. None of those conditions exist in most African context. The question of governance, I don't know if Sidharth, would you like to comment on the point that was made on governance? Urban governance is a complex phenomenon. There are always several elements in a city, several powers in a city which contribute to governance. Particularly in the developing countries, the municipal bodies are not very strong. So therefore there are several other forces that contribute to governance and therefore what we have learnt and many others have learnt is that building the community's negotiating capacity is a very important contributory force to put pressure on accountability and thereby increase, improve governance. So that's been our learning and it's been the learning of shag dwellers, internationals, national slum dwellers, federation, many others who've tried similar approaches. For talks in this session there was a kind of polarity between science based analysis and action and actually we can act before we have the science in a way, we know what to do. And except for the African part there was some poetry in it which I liked particularly. The question is and I would like to invite comments since you are coming to the end of this meeting. I mean the science space in urbanization, the kind of building cities on the one hand and health and disease on the other hand is completely different. And actually was completely differently expressed and the analysis was based on completely different methodology. Is there any way to create a, I mean there will not be a standard methodology but a way to work on methodologies which are comparable and which combine these two completely different worlds of building cities and living in the city in health and disease. I think this will be important and since this will concern 50% of the world population, I don't know of any science being more important than this one. I mean this concerns half of the population of the earth. So I think we have to think about how do we build a science around the problems which we have been discussing yesterday and today. And I think the talks you know in the last session but all the other talks showed how important that is if we want to understand each other. I mean I'll take that I think as a helpful thought which I'm sure both Richard and Christine will pick up at the end. The question which these conferences here in Hong Kong but in previous occasions when they take place have of course looked heavily at spatial and planning and transport type issues but this time deliberately at health. And the question of how it sends governance and other aspects, physical aspects of cities. I don't know if you want to say anything about this Richard, Ricky. The way those contribute better or worse towards improved health and wellbeing is clearly a theme that this conference was explicitly designed to raise and will be picked up clearly from here on. So I'll take that as a contribution rather than something for an answer. Literally I mean obviously it's nearly a rhetorical question yours which is that's the whole point of these meetings. I think the Alfred Herrhausen Society has been pretty generous already now by just starting this debate which cuts across different disciplines. I think the very very simple answer at the moment hearing what we've heard these days is that qualitative top-down assessment is not enough. And that an understanding of what happens at the qualitative side, at the subjective side is absolutely necessary. And to bring those two together is actually part of that new research agenda. I want to come back to that in a moment when we have time for another point. Quick question for Edgar. You used two words that visually you know compelling but familiar words splintered and fragmented. I wonder whether you can just elaborate a little bit more on why you see African urbanism, African cities are more splintered, more fragmented than Latin American cities or Asian cities. It just seems as there but I think quite the really compelling evidence that is more so in what ways is more splintered. Well, I was drawing directly on the conceptual work of Stephen Graham and Simon Movin and essentially their work tries to index the transition away from universal provision of bulk and network infrastructures to a more selective geography where infrastructure provision has tied to a capacity to pay for that basically universal service. And because the formal economies in African cities are so much smaller and because of the way investment for infrastructure has been structured in terms of the actual investment packages and the absolute insistence including from the World Bank of at least some capacity to return pay for services in a context of large scale poverty and informal economic life. You see two things happening. One you see very partial coverage and when you do see coverage it correlates directly with formal economic life and with new foreign direct investment to get certain commodities out of the country to the ports and so on. So connectivity infrastructures and so because of the historical lack of investment compared to Latin American Asia the physical spatial manifestation of that is just a lot more extreme. But I want to I have to respond to this because it is the heart of if I may on the knowledge thing because so just two very quick thoughts. The one is that I think that what I've taken away from this is that I do think one mechanism to facilitate the science communities to come together is to figure out what are the multiple deprivation indices that is really the most helpful and to make sure that we can collect the data at a small geographical scale so that we can really understand intra-urban inequalities. So for me that is very very clear and I take that back to our healthy studies interdisciplinary group as a way of refining that because also what that does is it helps us to understand the repertoire of policy instruments that's available how to work flexibly with that given different geographical dynamics going on in a particular space. But at the same time the qualitative stuff from the bottom up is absolutely essential. And in fact there's so much variation in the manifestation of certain illnesses or lack of well-being and so that is so culturally specific that unless you have some way of allowing people to define for themselves and response to some quantitative data what they think are the priorities and what they think is worth investing in in relation to their conception of what are pathways that make sense at that scale you're kind of missing the point of dealing with what you know from the from the indices. And so the real trick I think is to invest in both systems but to build the mechanisms to facilitate that intermediation and within that to recognise that the model of the universities we've got is obsolete. So unless we have an agenda about fairly fundamentally reforming the kind of big science machines that drive the universities and the disciplinary systems we're not going to be able to serve as these kinds of scientific endeavours in a meaningful way so that's just an additional comment. Right okay and patiently you've been waiting there and then two, three okay one, two, three short and sharp if you can because we're running towards five, ten. I think that it was amazing coverage on the presentations we got in terms of all the different issues. One thing that it seemed to I felt was missing a bit was a discussion of something that's come up a number of times and that was the migration issue and I just want to quickly mention where I think it was missing. I mean it was brought up in relation to Hong Kong as what's not really migrants, at least it's not just migrants, but I think we've brought it up several times in relation to the challenge that migration can create largely in terms of as if it's an infrastructure service housing problem, but to some degree that in many places it seems as if the challenge that migration brings is also a destructive type of politics that comes out of a situation where prejudice is against migrants so that you even have situations where the migrants are not particularly represented in the poor, the exploding slum informal settlement areas and yet it creates a politics that actually undermines a lot of the other types of actions that can be taken. We'll maybe a couple of the presenters could respond to that. Okay, and we'll take Gora next. Thank you. I just have a two point. One is related to that presentation on unlisted slum in India. This is just a note of hope because I remember very well when we published slum in 2004. Estimates the slum population of India in terms of proportion, 35%. We received an official letter from the Government of India saying that this is not true. Our slum proportion is 16%. Myself, in 2005, I travelled to India. I worked with the National Historical Office to show them the methodology used by Habitat. That's when communication is important. We can measure, but if we establish dialogue with government, they can. In 2010, India launched what we call nationwide mapping of slum and now they have a programme called nationwide slum free. Therefore, there is hope that even if you take time for government here to listen as they are here and I hope that what happened in India will happen in other places. Do you find that there is a willingness in countries to move towards a wider acceptance of better measures, even if those better measures produce less desirable figures? Or do they resist in some cases? There is progress. I remember seven years back we have about 100 local urban observatories. But now there are more than 500. Why? Because there is a request now from countries where they want now to better monitor themselves. That's slum condition and we are receiving requests and requests for that because they understand now measurement is very important. And when we say measurement is not only counting slum, it's the integrated system where you have education, indicator, housing and so on. Therefore now housing is not just physical aspect. It's now understanding that housing has an impact on the social and health aspect of people. I'm personally so interested in statistics. We can go and talk about this for hours, but I must resist. But thank you. Catherine. My question is to Edgar and I think you painted such a stark picture of the urban landscape in Africa. And I think you hit the nail on the head when you said that some of the structure issues have to do with the obstinence of government to recognise and acknowledge that urbanisation and especially slum development are things that need to be addressed. And the question I had is is this how it has been like 20 years ago? I mean, are there any glimmers of hope that perhaps governments are starting to realise that this is the reality they have to deal with and that there are examples of that? But the second, I think, more important question is why? Why are governments obstinate, but what are we not doing right? And we being the people in this room, what are we not doing right that governments that are hitting like these brick walls with governments to sort of penetrate to a place where they can start doing something? Edgar, yours. OK, very briefly. I want to respond to Gordon's point just to absolutely emphasise that it is, it's a major mission, it's a fundamental question in understanding at least my topic for this discussion, but Gordon is the expert, so read his work. In terms of Catherine's question, yeah, I don't know, it's a really complicated issue. Yes, there are shifts and the reasons that there are shifts is that the kind of impressive growth rates of the last decade is increasingly tied to a discourse driven by Mackenzie and by monitor and so forth, that if you want to sustain this growth you've got to understand the role of your cities and you've got to invest in the right kinds of infrastructures and so on. The problem is that those discourses are feeding very directly into the splinted form of urbanism that I'm talking about because there's no understanding about the need for using these kinds of long term investments to address systemic questions in cities. And the reason that is happening is that I think we are not part of those elite discussions and we are not in a way articulating our research and our work so that they can understand that as the shift is happening that there's a different way of imagining urban trajectories. The second issue is that the big problem in Africa is a big political economy question, so the slums are really the seed beds of political opposition. So most politically elites in many African countries are deeply anxious about this because they see this as the place where their own demise is being fostered. And that weaves into clientelist economic activity where local councillors are vested economically in the land redistribution and other informal trading and taxation systems within the slums. And so by definition they've got no vested interest to solve the problem. So it is really intricate, it's complex. OK, thanks. Now Ki wants to speak. No, just two observations. Just thinking when we started yesterday I showed the water pump in central London as it was then in Soho which caused the first cholera epidemic as a sort of beginning of the problem. And then in showing the image of the different sewers which were across the beginning of a solution which had massive impacts in terms of planning and the relationship of public health and physical form. There seems an incredible simplicity and certainty about that solution. I've got a problem. You put sewers in and you recreate the city and you make them, you humanize them. And more or less that's what happened to a lot of the cities we know. I sit here after two days, what's that one solution? I mean it's just interesting that I don't think sewers would do it. I mean we've talked so much about the need to retrofit. It's an observation and maybe times a different visit. That's one point. The other thing as I was very struck by Sharon's comment that the work that she'd done with Michael and many others was seen as evidence-based ideology. I love that idea. I mean I think the notion that somehow you know what the solution is and then you work around some sort of argument which sort of fits it. Which then sort of confronts the reality that we heard from Edgar, certainly from Soco, even from Carrie Lam this morning and certainly from Sigard of the invisibility of what is actually there. I mean it's very clear what the problem is. I mean I will never forget Edgar when you and I went a month and a half ago to meet the new mayor of Cape Town. And it was as if the descriptions of Will Smith and you earlier of your city, it wasn't the city that they recognized. I mean the people in the room were colored in white. The population is mainly black. Where the black population lives is literally invisible. It wasn't talked about until the foreigner happened to mention the fact that from the airport to her office all you saw was sort of basically shacks without sanitation. So this notion of invisibility but ever since based ideology which impacts on policy makers interests me. And interests me in terms of the work we've been doing now for a number of years with Wolfgang Ute and the LSE colleagues. What is the role then of a center like ours? What does it do? It's partly and I'm saying this because Bruce Raymer often raises this to raise awareness and therefore maybe work more outside the box with different media. In fact in terms of television newsprint and others to bring this out so that the policy makers notice. And just a question of what really the role of research and academia can be in a group like this. Again it's not offering a solution except that clearly just an awareness that you need to represent the evidence in order to confirm the ideologies. I think a very powerful idea for all of us concerned in this sort of activity. Okay well we got to move on. I mean I just add to what Ricky said. I mean it's clear that to answer a part to move on from the question he's just posed. It's clear that both national and city governments always face a dilemma. There's a question rather than a statement. Always have to address the dilemma of whether they are trying to boost their country or boost the city and present it in its best light which they all feel the need to. Or be open about the problems that they face. I think that challenge is not unique to any city or country is it? Everywhere is faced with this problem of trying to show the best of itself whilst trying to address the problems. And the question that Edgar raises about whether to repress or address poverty again is I suspect not unique to Africa now. There's always been one that threatens power elites in any city at any time. One final point before I hand Arthur Richard's Senate to say a few words is simply to say the one issue that personally I think we could gainfully address in future is the extent to which resource redistribution is an issue in all of this because the way in which tax systems work when they work and allow redistribution of resources to address health needs I think is a profoundly important one. We haven't discussed it much in the last couple of days but it clearly is one that has an enormous potential to shift resources in order to address health care and public health problems. Anyway, I'd like to thank our four speakers Sharon, Edgar, Selie and Siddarth. One more round of applause for them.