What we do

A Human Rights City may be defined as a municipality that has adopted human rights principles and laws, as guiding norms of governance. In practise, it provides for an inclusive civic engagement with city management, where people have the power to decide on policy proposals and politicians assume the role of policy implementers, hence fostering participatory democracy with solidarity and social justice. Such a commitment translates locally into an improvement in the quality of life of all residents.

In 2011, the 1^st World Human Rights Cities Forum of Gwangju, in South Korea, defined Human Rights Cities as “both a local community and a socio-political process in a local context where human rights play a key role as fundamental values and guiding principles”.

Since 1997, human rights cities have gradually developed in Europe, Africa, Asia and the United States, following the declaration by the city of Rosario, Argentina, of the world’s first human rights city.

At present, eight cities are officially self-declared human rights cities within the European Union territory: Graz, Salzburg and Vienna in Austria; York in the United Kingdom; Barcelona in Spain, Utrecht and Middelburg in the Netherlands, and Lund in Sweden.

In the cases of these cities, each process has been tailor-made, is context specific and based on individual commitments.

There is a diversity of approaches to human rights cities, but no harmonised commitment framework. Therefore, there is a lack of enforcement of the commitments and a deficiency in accountability mechanisms. At present, there is neither formal accreditation nor European or international minimum standards framing the development of human rights cities.

While the process varies from one city to another, two broad categories can be distinguished:

• An informal process where cities advance the human rights movement at local government level, often based on a specific human right and without formally declaring it as such. These cities are showcased through a variety of concepts such as “sustainable cities”, “green cities”, “rainbow cities”, “smart cities”, or “refugee cities”. Even if there is a great diversity of models within this category, they are not necessarily comparable, nor are there guarantees of a real commitment, translated locally, into an improvement in the quality of life of residents.
• A formal process where cities officially proclaim themselves a Human Rights City, on the basis of a formal commitment, usually a declaration, that serves as a reference for political action and accountability. Although the processes may differ considerably, in this case, the commitment to being a human rights city is generally translated into better local governance, addressing urban challenges related to fundamental rights more efficiently, with greater direct citizen participation. Thus, an officially designated human rights city is essentially distinguished by two aspects: the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as norms of governance, often combined with other human rights conventions; and the establishment of a socio-political process where the community and the municipality (usually represented by a governing body) cooperate to integrate the fundamental values ​​as a priority in the planning and governance of the city.

Yet, different degrees of commitment and responsibility exist among human rights cities, which may vary from the declaration of intention to the effective implementation of a process where residents’ political, economic, social and cultural rights are at the centre of the city’s governance and public policies.