ABSTRACT
Drawing generalized conclusions from three unique countries to imply universally applicable policy solutions ignores the diverse histories, institutions and politics of these countries. Policy formulation and evaluation should never be an abstract academic exercise, but rather rooted in the various interests, powers, political and social movements and institutions within a country. Earlier chapters of this book have traced the evolution of urban tenure programmes, with insights drawn from researchers and activists in each country trying to understand their experience. In this chapter we highlight from that analysis six key issues for further discussion (all quotations are from the conference papers on which the chapters are based and not from the chapters themselves).
