Whatever the other surprises it brought, 2016 was an important year for international statements and declarations on cities and urban policy. Among the most significant, 2016 saw the publication of the Basque Declaration from the Covenant of Mayors in Europe in April, the Glasgow Declaration from the PASCAL International Conference on Learning Cities in June 2016, the Bogota declaration from United Cities Local and Regional Governments (UCLG) at their World Summit in October 2016 and culminated in the Quito declaration on the New Urban Agenda agreed at the UN Habitat III meeting also in October 2016.  In addition, important statements were made by the ‘Right to the City’ movement, on a new European Urban Agenda established at the Pact of Amsterdam in May by the European Union, and by OECD and the Champion Mayors Initiative in the Paris Action Plan for inclusive growth in cities. These statements are collectively referred to here as the ‘2016 statements’.

The impetus for this activity stems from two sources. The first was the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) agreed at the UN Sustainable Development Summit in Paris in 2015. Several of the SDGs and especially SDG 4 about access to education and opportunities for lifelong learning for all and SDG 11 which seeks to make cities and human settlements safe, resilient and sustainable are a central concern of the urban policy statements.  The second factor was the desire by many organisations to contribute to and influence the Habitat III process which led up to the formulation and adoption of the Quito declaration itself and then begin processes for the implementation of that agreement.

The 2016 statements all refer in varying degrees to the SDGs as they seek to present parameters for addressing the major challenges facing cities at very different stages in their development around the world, and urge programmes to encourage sustainable urban policy solutions which provide not just prosperity but most importantly, also address good governance and issues of equity, inclusiveness and social justice for rapidly expanding urban populations. The 2016 statements range widely in their scope and their priorities. All of them contain some references to the role of education and learning but the prominence given to these aspects is very variable. Whilst the focus of the Glasgow Declaration was explicitly on learning cities, drawing on the earlier work of the UNESCO Institute of Lifelong Learning enshrined in their earlier Mexico Statement, the Basque statement is particularly concerned with the development of sustainable cities, and the other statements are focused on steps to embrace a broad urban policy response to the raft of challenges cities face around the world.

That there is general expectation of a role for education and learning in policy responses across the huge urban agenda seems beyond doubt. This paper explores the significance given to education and learning in the 2016 statements. Then, in the light of some discussion of the role of learning in cities the paper offers some analysis and comment on the scope of the role for education and learning as it appears in the 2016 statements.  Finally, if effective and sustainable urban policy solutions are to be put in place it is argued that there is a huge agenda for education itself to address to fulfil the expectations placed upon it.

The 2016 Statements

The Basque Declarationcontinues a long strand of work amongst European Cities and Towns on issues of climate and energy following the Aalborg Charter in 1992 and is located clearly in the context of the United Nations SDGs and the developing European Urban Agenda launched later in 2016 by the EU. The declaration argues the need for new European pathways and sets out an agenda for change focussed on technological, socio-economic and socio-cultural transitions in European society.  It seeks sustainable solutions that increase the economic value that is captured in cities for the benefit of local people, and recognises the need for raised awareness and education, technical and social innovation and active engagement on the part of politicians, entrepreneurs and citizens.

The declaration then sets out a list of actions to support and accelerate the changes required including:

• Socio-cultural:  creating a ‘culture of sustainability’, participatory budgeting and implementation, re-thinking boundaries between public, private and civic sectors, promoting social innovation and civic engagement and nurturing a sharing economy.
• Socio-economic: innovative financing, environmental friendly supply chains and supporting the circular economy.
• Technological: adoption of smart technologies, addressing the digital divide, providing open data, and preparing society for changes triggered by innovative and smart technologies.

The Glasgow Statement, adopted at the PASCAL International Observatory Conference in June 2016, is concerned with innovation in building learning cities. It builds on the experience of cities participating in the PASCAL Learning City Network, taking the work of UNESCO outlined above into account.

The statement reflects the conference view that learning cities should not only address local needs but should also build global consciousness as good citizens of a shared planet, and emphasise peace, social justice and stewardship of the planet as fundamental features. Achieving these objectives will require a significant extension of partnership as the basis of holistic approaches and enable a significant contribution by cities to the UN SDGs in the Paris agreement.

The statement identifies 6 areas for innovation and exchange of information. These are:

• Holistic development in learning cities;
• Innovation and entrepreneurial approaches including applications of technology to promote inclusion;
• Culture-led approaches for cohesion and inclusion;
• Harnessing big data and technology;
• Cities to link with surrounding regions in evolving a universal learning society;
• Fostering global consciousness and citizenship.

These priorities are intended to inform and guide the Learning Cities Network agenda for the coming years.

The Bogota declaration was adopted at the World Summit of Local and Regional Leaders- the 5^th UCLG Congress – in Bogota in October 2016 on the eve of the UN Habitat III conference in Quito (see below). It comprises the Bogota Commitment and Action Agenda.

It commits cities and regions to govern in partnership and build governance arrangements which co-create cities and territories that preserve the Right to the City for all inhabitants, and to adopt production and consumption patterns for a sustainable future, to share and protect the commons, and to foster heritage, creativity, diversity, understanding and peace.

At national and international levels, it seeks to transform the role of local government in international policy-making.  It commits local and regional governments to organise to produce inputs to international policy processes, and to peer-to-peer learning through international networks.  It wishes the World Assembly to be recognised as the interlocutor of the international community on all matters relating to sustainable development.

The Global Platform for the ‘Right to the City’ emerged from the work of several prominent third sector organisations around the world and offers a prospectus aimed at mobilising local and national governments and international organisations towards a new paradigm for cities which is more inclusive and democratic, and at influencing the drafting of the New Urban Agenda in Quito.

The right to the city is defined as the right of all inhabitants to use, occupy and produce just, inclusive and sustainable cities defined as a common good essential to a full and decent life.  Such a city would demonstrate an inclusive economy, cultural diversity, quality public spaces, enhanced political participation, gender equality, inclusive citizenship free from discrimination and sustainability.  Interestingly, the work of this group is acknowledged in the Quito declaration (see below).

The Quito declaration represents the agreed outcome of the UN Conference on Housing and Sustainable Development, known as Habitat III, held in Quito from 17-20 October 2016. It establishes a New Urban Agenda which re-addresses the way cities and human settlements are planned, designed, financed, developed, governed and managed, guided by several fundamental principles and commitments intended to ensure no-one is left behind, in sustainable and inclusive economies and environmental sustainability.

The New Urban Agenda is a commitment to a paradigm shift for the way urban settlements are planned, financed and managed.  It seeks to re-invigorate the role of national governments in the definition of inclusive and effective urban policies for sustainable urban development, and to adopt sustainable, people-centred policies which are age and gender-responsive and integrated across all levels of government.

It goes on to specify many actions to progress these objectives which span planning, governance, investment and finance mechanisms, transportation, sanitation, housing, and energy amongst others.  For the purposes of this paper there is, amidst this long list of actions, one relating to creating opportunities for knowledge, skills and education facilities to contribute to an innovative and competitive urban economy.  There are also commitments to enhance data collection and the availability of data platforms and opportunities for knowledge exchange.

The Pact of Amsterdam also spells out a wide-ranging urban policy agenda for Europe aimed at realising the potential and contribution of urban areas in achieving the objectives of the EU and related national policies.  It advocates a more integrated and co-ordinated approach to territorial cohesion, and prioritises environmental issues such as air quality and climate adaptation, social inclusion issues on migrants and refugees, housing and urban poverty, socio-economic issues such as jobs and skills for the local economy, promotion of the circular economy and urban mobility, and also digital transitions to smart cities.  It emphasises place-based approaches to policy solutions, and to partnership working between relevant agencies.

In their Action Plan for Inclusive Growth in Cities the Champion Mayors commit to tackle the gaps between rich and poor in four policy domains, namely education, labour market and skills, housing and the urban environment and infrastructure and public services.  The plan aims to set out some shared principles for policy actions at city level, whilst recognising that the competences of local government vary from country to country and that local initiatives necessarily must operate within broader regional and national frameworks.

The role of education and learning in cities

The relationship between education and economic and social development has been subject to continual debate over many decades, and has evolved as both the role of cities and of the scope of learning and learning technologies have undergone significant and rapid change, especially in the late 20^th and early 21^st centuries and the emergence of sustainable development as the dominant paradigm.

Access to education is itself one of the fundamental sustainable development goals, yet rapid urbanisation itself may put education services under severe strain.  If provision and access to it is unable to keep pace with increasing populations and recognise the differing needs of incoming groups, it can exacerbate broader social inequalities; hinder access to employment and to participation in the social and civic life of the city.  

Several positive roles for education and learning within cities can be identified.  For example, the 2016 Global Education Monitoring report (GEM) from UNESCO includes the following.

• Education and learning fosters more inclusive economies by improving skills for work;
• Education and learning propel cities’ competitiveness and productivity;
• Education contributes to safer cities through the reduction of crime;
• Education programmes in schools and elsewhere can reduce prejudice and discrimination and reduce inequalities in access to public services;
• Education and learning makes environmental sustainability more likely.

Education and learning in the 2016 statements

So, in what ways is this potentially extensive role for education and learning reflected in the 2016 statements? In exploring this issue, it must be acknowledged at the outset that the 2016 statements were prepared by different kinds of organisations and for varying purposes.  The Basque and Bogota statements and the Action Plan for Inclusive Cities were prepared by local government associations (albeit in the case of the latter with the support of OECD), the Quito declaration is an attempt by the supra-national United Nations to provide a framework for national policies around the world, whilst the Glasgow declaration is from a group of academics and city representatives to help focus the work of the PASCAL Learning Cities Network, and the Right to the City is prepared by a collection of largely third sector organisations to provide a new shift in urban policy thinking.  The extent to which the statements could be expected to provide detailed plans for education is perhaps constrained by the cross-national contexts for which they have been adopted.  It is nevertheless instructive to look at how each treated education and learning.

The Basque declaration, despite its intention to pursue some 15 pathways to sustainable cities including creating a culture of sustainability, citizen involvement in co-production, co-design and co-innovation, promoting inclusion of marginalised groups and closing the digital divide, makes very few references to education and learning beyond requiring ‘education systems’ to reflect these values and promote their achievement.

The Bogota Commitment and Action Agenda includes some interesting statements on learning.  It urges that urban space should be a learning space that guarantees the free movement of knowledge using open and free licences, and that cities should be seen less as a space for consumption and more as a space for exchange, co-creation and learning. Public policies should nurture cultural practices and be able to expand the scope of institutional space for culture.  Education is a resource to aid policies for social inclusion of marginalised groups, migrants and refugees.

The Bogota statement places significant emphasis on the importance of peer-to-peer learning and exchange between cities in developing and evaluating innovative policy solutions.  The UCLG supports this with its own learning platform https://www.learning.uclg.org/learning-agenda .

The Quito declaration on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III) runs to some 170 paragraphs, but it is in only a small minority of these that explicit reference to the role of education and learning is made.  These relate to three main aspects: first, increasing economic productivity by providing the labour force with access to knowledge, skills and education facilities that contribute to an innovative and competitive urban economy, second, promoting access for youth to education, skill development and employment, and enable young people to be key agents of change when empowered to advocate on behalf of their communities, and third, capacity building for participatory governance processes, through peer-to-peer learning both at individual and institutional levels.  The declaration urges the development of subject partnerships, practitioner networks and science/policy interfaces.  

The Paris Action Plan from Champion Mayors is much more focussed on implementation of policies for inclusive growth in cities and sees education and learning as one indispensable pillar of inclusive growth.  It identifies four aspects where education and learning has a special role.  These are first, early childhood education as a mechanism to help even out social inequalities and boost female labour market participation; second, lifelong learning and skills development to provide the right skills for future labour markets, avoid groups such as older workers and those from disadvantaged backgrounds from being ‘left behind’; third, developing soft skills such as teamwork, communication and critical thinking as well as hard skills including proficiency in the use on IT; and fourth learning to facilitate participation in public life.

The Right to the City statement is rather different, as it is essentially concerned to set out a new paradigm for thinking about cities and urban policies, seeing the city as commons, which would have a spatially just distribution of resources, of which education is one, would enable its citizens to exercise full and meaningful citizenship, and would recognise cultural diversity and heritage.  It makes no further reference to an explicit role for education and learning.

In contrast again, the Glasgow Statement is directly focussed on learning and developing an agenda for the PASCAL Learning Cities Network.  The LCN follows the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning in defining a learning city as one which effectively mobilises its resources in every sector to promote inclusive learning, re-vitalise learning in families and communities, facilitate learning for and in the workplace, enhance the use of modern learning technologies, enhance quality and excellence in learning and foster a culture of learning throughout life.  The concept of lifelong learning is central to this vision, and in this way, cities will create and reinforce individual empowerment and social cohesion, economic and cultural prosperity and sustainable development.  The Glasgow statement identifies 6 aspects for the priority attention of the LCN in coming years.

A new agenda for education too?

It seems therefore that most of the statements reviewed have relatively little to say in any substantial or detailed way about the role of education within their formulation of an urban agenda for sustainable cities. Between them one can identify a range of roles for education and learning; perhaps unsurprisingly, these are most developed in those statements which are more focussed on implementation than setting out a high-level strategy.

As a general comment, references to education in the 2016 statements tend to be rather undifferentiated.  There are, for example, few attempts to distinguish the roles of formal and informal education, or to discuss the roles of different sectors.  Similarly, the statements for the most part have little to say in any specific way about community education, vocational or adult education, although there is some reference to lifelong learning in several.  Whilst some place an emphasis on learning by cities, through peer-to-peer platforms and information sharing, there is little mention of business learning, innovation eco-systems, or the role of higher education.

It is useful to draw together the different aspects of emerging urban policy for which, across the 2016 statements, there appears to be an expectation that education and learning can contribute. The following list can be identified:

• Creating a culture of sustainability;
• Promoting social inclusion of marginalised groups;
• Reducing social inequality by increasing opportunities for young people, women, and older people in the workforce;
• Closing the digital divide through access to IT skills and applications;
• Nurturing cultural practices, recognising cultural diversity and heritage;
• Increasing economic productivity through development of labour force access to knowledge and skills, and to opportunities for innovation;
• Promoting citizen involvement in co-production, co-design and co-innovation;
• Promoting opportunities for young people as agents of change and community empowerment;
• Encouraging participatory governance processes and the exercise of full citizenship;
• Promoting cities as spaces for co-creation, exchange and learning.

This amounts to a substantial policy agenda for which there is an expectation that education and learning will contribute directly and usually alongside other policy levers and actions.  It will require education and learning provision of different sorts and deployed in different contexts.  This illustrates the scope of the agenda for education and learning itself if it is to fulfil the role and expectations for it to deliver the contribution required if the new urban agenda is to be effectively addressed.