III. The Struggle for Proletarian Hegemony under Present Day Conditions: Social and Economic Changes
Note of the Editorial Board: The following Chapter contains several figures. They can only be viewed in the pdf version of the book here for technical reasons.
In the previous two chapters we have outlined the principles of the united front tactic and have shown how the Marxist classics developed their understanding of it. Before we discuss some specific questions of the application of the united front tactic today, we need to take into account important changes which have taken place since the times of Lenin and Trotsky. We shall start with a summary of the economic and social developments.
In our book The Great Robbery of the South we have analyzed important changes in the composition of the world proletariat.  Let us summarize here the most important conclusions combined with actual data.
The Shift to the South of Today’s World Proletariat
The RCIT has always stressed that the focus of global capitalist production, and therefore of the international proletariat, has shifted during the past half century from the old imperialist metropolises (i.e., North America, Western Europe and Japan) to the South (i.e., the semi-colonial world plus new imperialist powers, in particular China). The basis for this shift has been a process of massive industrialization in the countries of the global South. This was caused on the one hand by the general economic upswing during the long boom of the 1950s and 1960s (accompanied by a rise in productivity in agriculture, accelerated urbanization, etc.) and by the massive shift of capital export of the imperialist monopolies to the South, in their desire to increase their profits by intensifying super-exploitation.  For part of this time, the industrialization of the Stalinist degenerated workers’ states in Eastern Europe, East Asia and Cuba also contributed to this development.
The massive growth of the global labor force during the past decades took place mainly in the semi-colonial world. In 2014, 51.5% of the global labor force was engaged in wage labor out of total of three billion working people  (See Figure 1). As shown in this graph, since 1991 the share of wage laborers has increased on all continents. 
Figure 1: Wage and Salaried Employment (% of total employment), World and Regions, 1991-2014 
Such proletarization has also taken place among women. Today 46% of all working women are wage laborers. 
Table 1 expresses the growth of the working class in the world’s regions by percentages since just before the turn of the millenium.
Table 1: Wage Laborers as a Share of Total Employment, 1999 and 2013 
Region 1999 2013
Africa 24.6% 26.2%
Asia 30.7% 40.2%
Latin America and the Caribbean 59.0% 62.8%
Middle East 71.9% 80.3%
Eastern Europe and Central Asia 74.9% 78.3%
Developed economies 84.1% 86.4%
The process of industrialization has necessarily led to a massive shift in weight of the proletariat from the imperialist metropolises towards the poorer countries and in particular to Asia (where 60% of the global industrial workforce lives today). A hundred years ago – at the time of Lenin and Trotsky – the proletariat in the colonial and semi-colonial world was still quite small. Capitalist industrialization outside of Europe, North America and Japan had taken place only to a relatively small degree.
Since then the growth of the working class in the South has accelerated. As a result, the huge majority of the world working class today lives outside the old imperialist metropolises. This is clearly demonstrated by the following tables and figures. Table 2 shows the increase of the wage laborers living in the so-called “developing countries” from 65.9% (1995) to 72.4% (2008/09). If one excludes the semi-colonial EU states the figure for 2008/09 is even higher (75%). In other words, three quarters of today’s wage laborers live and work in the semi-colonial and emerging imperialist countries.
Table 2: Distribution of Wage Laborers in Different Regions, 1995 and 2008/09 
Wage earners (in percent)
World 100% 100%
Countries with low and middle income 65.9% 72.4%
Countries with high income 34.1% 27.6%
Countries with high income (without semi-colonial EU-States) - 25%
Countries with low and middle income (including semi-colonial EU-States) - 75%
This shift is also visible if we examine the core sector of the working class – the industrial workers. In Table 3 we see that in 2013, 85.3% – or more than 617 million – of all industrial employees (the overwhelming majority of them workers) lived outside the old imperialist metropolises, where “only” 14.7% – or 106.8 million – of all those employed in industry were living. At the same time, nearly two third (62.5%) of all industrial workers were living in Asia (except Russia and the ex-USSR republics).
Table 3: Distribution of Labor Force in Industry in different Regions, 2013 
Labor force Distribution of
in Industry (in Millions) industrial Labor force
World 724.4 100%
Developed economies 106.8 14.7%
Eastern Europe & ex-USSR 44.8 6.2%
East Asia 250.1 34.5%
South-East Asia 59.0 8.1%
South Asia 144.3 19.9%
Latin America 58.3 8.0%
Middle East 18.7 2.6%
North Africa 13.0 1.8%
Sub-Saharan Africa 29.3 4.0%
Figures 2 and 3 confirm this tremendous shift by showing the increase in the proportion of manufacturing workers living in the South from about 50% (1980) to about 73% (2008). Bear in mind that in 1950 only 34% of industrial workers around the world were living in the South.  Note, however, that the numbers for employment in manufacturing and industrial employment in the statistics provided here are not synonymous, since manufacturing includes all industrial labor force but, in contrast to industrial employment, excludes those employed in the mining and the building sectors.
Developing Countries’ Share in World Manufacturing Employment, 1980–2008
Global Industrial Labor Force in Developed and Developing Countries, 1950–2010
The RCIT has repeatedly pointed out that, in fact, the actual shift of the proletariat towards the semi-colonial and emerging imperialist countries is even bigger than official statistics indicate. Why? Because, as noted above, the bourgeois category "wage earners" includes not only workers. Generally speaking, one can say that in the rich imperialist countries, a considerable minority of wage earners are not part of the working class, but are part of the salaried middle class (supervisory personnel, police, lower-grade manager etc.).  In an extensive analysis of the class’s structure, we have estimated that, in the imperialist countries, the number of wage earners – making up to 90% of the total working population – can be divided into two, with approximately 2/3 working class while 1/3 are middle layer.  In the poorer countries, the salaried middle classes are much smaller.
Furthermore, we also need to take into account the labor aristocracy, the uppermost part of the working class (e.g., certain sectors of the highly-paid skilled workers, etc.). It is the sector of the proletariat which is literally bribed by the bourgeoisie with various privileges. In the imperialist countries, this layer constitutes a much larger proportion of the working class than it does among the semi-colonial proletariat. The financial sources to pay off the labor aristocracy in the imperialist countries, and thereby undermine its working class solidarity, are derived precisely from the extra profits which the monopoly capitalists so readily obtain by super-exploiting the semi-colonial countries as well as migrants in the imperialist metropolises. Without any smoke or mirrors, monopoly capital uses part of these extra profits to gain the support of sectors of the working class in the imperialist countries, for it is at home that the capitalists need stability first and foremost. Thus, the “bought off” labor aristocracy can be a much smaller sector of the proletariat in the semi-colonial world.
Together with this, the labor aristocracy – along with its twin, the labor bureaucracy – plays a dominating role inside the trade unions and the reformist parties in the imperialist countries.
At the same time, as we have elaborated elsewhere,  the lower strata of the working class – and in particular migrants – have significantly gained in their relative numbers inside the imperialist countries. In the USA, for example, the share of migrants among the overall population rose from 5.2% (1960) to 12.3% (2000) to more than 14% (2010). In Western Europe, the migrants’ share of the population grew from about 4.6% (1960) to nearly 10% (2010).  According to latest data from the United Nations, 172.6 million migrants are officially living in the old imperialist countries (“high-income countries”), representing 13% of the total population.  As we have repeatedly pointed out, such official statistics invariably underestimate the number of migrants, as they do not include migrants with no legal status as well as migrants of the second or third generation.
The comparable proportion of foreign migrants in “middle-income” and “low-income countries,” i.e., the semi-colonial countries and the emerging imperialist China, is only 1%. 
In particular, migrants constitute a crucial sector of the proletariat in the urban centers of the imperialist metropolises. For example, in the early 2000s half of all resident workers in New York were black, Latino, or belonged to other national minorities. In inner and outer London, respectively 29% and 22% of residents were classified as ethnic minorities in 2000.  In our study on racism and migrants, we showed that in Vienna (the capital of Austria) migrants represent 44% of the population. Two thirds of them come from the former Yugoslavia, Turkey, or the Eastern European EU States. 
It is also important to realize that low and medium-skilled laborers constitute the vast majority of wage earning workers and oppressed, while highly-skilled employees constitute only a minority (even in the old imperialist countries). While the figures displayed in Tables 4 and 5, below, are not exclusively for the working class, and while the level of skill is not directly parallel to being positioned in the lower or middle strata vs. the upper and aristocratic strata of the working class, these figures still provide a useful approximation of the relative proportions composing the proletariat – both globally and by specific region.
Table 4: Numbers and Share of Employment by Broad Occupation (Skill), World and Regions, 2013 (in thousands) 
World region Low-Skilled Medium-Skilled High-Skilled
World 502,153 2,077,789 566,584
100% 100% 100%
Developed Economies 46,668 241,654 186,693
9.3% 11.6% 32.4%
Developing Economies 455,485 1,836,135 379,891
91.7%% 88.4% 67.6%
Table 5: Share of Employment by Broad Occupation (Skill), World and Regions, 2013 
World region Low-Skilled Medium-Skilled High-Skilled
World total 16.0% 66.0% 18.0%
Developed Economies 9.8% 50.9% 39.3%
Central & South Eastern Europe 14.1% 52.4% 33.5%
East Asia 8.2% 79.7% 12.1%
South East Asia and the Pacific 22.0% 65.6% 12.4%
South Asia 27.7% 58.5% 13.8%
Latin America and the Caribbean 19.0% 61.3% 19.8%
Middle East and North Africa 12.0% 65.7% 22.4%
Sub Saharan Africa 16.2% 79.2% 4.6%
These actual data from the UN’s International Labour Office demonstrate that low- and medium-skilled workers represent 82% of the global labor force, 61.7% in the old imperialist countries and 85.8% in the semi-colonial world and the emerging imperialists, namely China and Russia. Their share is even bigger than the figures shown in these tables suggest because – as we have said before – a minority of the wage earners are not part of the working class at all, but rather belong to the middle class. Naturally, the share of high-skilled laborers is much greater among the middle layers than among the working class. In short, these data support our theses concerning the composition of the working class as we outlined it in the RCIT’s Manifesto as well as we have described in greater detail in our book, The Great Robbery.
In addition, the proletariat in the poorer countries is larger in size than the numbers in these official statistics would appear to indicate. A considerable proportion of the workers in these countries are formally counted not as wage laborers, but as formally self-employed, due to the large informal sector. However, in fact, they are part of the working class. 
In general, the growing working class and other oppressed layers are very heterogeneous in terms of their employment status. The recently published ILO data for the employment status of the working population as a whole (i.e. including workers, peasants, self-employed, unpaid family workers, employers [albeit the later are insignificant in terms of numbers]) are extremely interesting. According to them, only around 26.4% of laborers are employed on a permanent contract, with around 13% on a temporary or fixed-term contracts and the significant majority (60.7%) work without any contract. Naturally, here too, there are huge differences between the situation for laborers in the old imperialist countries and those in the South. In the old imperialist countries (“high-income economies”), more than three-quarters of laborers are on a permanent contract (of which less than two-thirds are full-time), a further 9.3% are hired by temporary contracts, and only 14% work without a contract. Among advanced semi-colonies and emerging imperialist countries (“middle-income countries”), nearly 72% of all laborers are employed without a contract, while only 13.7% work under a permanent contract. Across the less developed semi-colonial countries, only 5.7% of laborers are employed with a permanent contract, while nearly 87% of laborers having no contract at all; the majority of these are working either as own-account workers or contributing family workers. 
If we calculate the existing ILO data for the wage laborers, we reach the conclusion that only 51.2% of all wage laborers have a permanent contract while the rest are only employed under temporary contracts or with no contract at all (see Table 6). Here again, there are extreme differences between the old imperialist countries on one hand and the semi-colonial countries and the emerging imperialist powers on the other. In the former, those designated by the ILO as “high-income economies,” the share of wage laborers with a permanent contract is 88.1%. However, this share is much lower in the countries of the global South (30.7% resp. 32.4%).
Table 6: Distribution of Contract Type of Wage Laborers (%) 
Permanent Temporary No Contract
All Countries 51.2% 25.0% 23.8%
High-Income Countries 88.1% 10.7% 1.3%
Middle-Income Countries 30.7% 32.3% 37.0%
Low-Income Countries 32.4% 42.6% 24.8%
Wage laborers with a permanent contract should again be divided, comparing those employed full-time and those who work only part-time. Unfortunately, for this issue the ILO provides data only for the imperialist countries where only 73.7% of all full-time workers have a permanent contract (but among women the share is even lower at 64.5%).
Furthermore, one has to take into account the rising number of unemployed workers. The latest ILO report gives the official figure of 201.3 million workers without a job in 2014. Or in other words, 5.9% globally. 
Let us now summarize our brief overview of the world proletariat today. We have shown that the international working class has shifted its focus to the South where about three-quarters of the wage laborers are located. Given the higher share of salaried middle class in the old imperialist countries (compared to the South), the proportion of the proletariat in semi-colonial and the emerging imperialist countries throughout the world could be as high as 80%. This being the case, we can conclude that today the heart of the world proletariat is in the South and in particular in Asia.
That does not mean that the proletariat in the old imperialist metropolises (i.e., the relatively rich countries of Western Europe, North America and Japan) has become irrelevant. Nothing could be further from the truth. The proletariat of Western Europe, North America and Japan continues to play a central role in the international class struggle. But it is vital for revolutionary communists to recognize the increased importance of the semi-colonial countries in Asia, Latin America, the Middle East and Africa, as well as of the emerging imperialists, China (and Russia). In other words, the process of the World Revolution is not one in which the front is located in and the entire issue will be decided upon in the old imperialist countries. Rather the proletariat in the semi-colonial world and the emerging imperialist China will play a decisive role. The Arab Revolution reinforced this thesis of the increasing importance of the semi-colonial proletariat.
We have summarized the ramifications of these important changes in the composition of the world working class in our program “The Revolutionary Communist Manifesto.” International workers’ organizations must pay particular attention to the South. The huge weight of the Southern proletariat must be reflected not only in their massive participation in international workers’ organizations, but also in the leaderships of these forces. And questions of particular importance for the Southern working class – their super-exploitation, their national liberation struggles against imperialism, etc. – must play a central role in the organizations’ propagandistic and practical work. 
The Misery of the Poor Peasantry and the Urban Poor
Irrespective of the growth of the global proletariat, Marxists must not ignore the fact nearly half of the global working population – and a clear majority in the semi-colonial world – still belong to the poor peasantry or the urban petty bourgeoisie. The figures in Table 6 give an indication about the general social composition of the working population. However, here too we repeat that, for reasons outlined above, the ILO category Wage Laborers is not synonymous with the Marxist concept of the working class. This reservation is also applicable for the ILO’s Own Account Laborers category which is also not equivalent to the Marxist category of the non-exploiting peasantry and urban petty-bourgeoisie. Nevertheless, the figures given below are useful approximations.
If we leave aside the very small number of capitalists (employers), which are most numerous in the imperialist
countries, we see that peasants and self-employed (and their contributing family members) represent 55.4% of the working population in the countries of the South. However, even here there are
important distinctions to be made. For example, while in the emerging imperialist China the share of wage laborers is 56% of the working population and the self-employed and their contributing
family members “only” 42.4%,
the self-employed and their contributing family members constitute 80.8% (!) of all working people in the less developed semi-colonial countries. (See Table 7)
Table 7: Shares of Status in Total Employment, World and Regions, 2013 (%) 
Wage Employers Own Account Contributing
Laborers Laborers Family
Advanced Economies 86.3% 3.6% 9.0% 1.0%
Developing Countries 42.6% 2.0% 40.5% 14.9%
Least Developed Countries 18.0% 1.2% 53.2% 27.6%
Income Countries 31.7% 2.1% 50.5% 15.7%
Emerging Economies 58.2% 2.2% 29.0% 10.6%
Capitalism means misery not just for the working class but also for the rural population and the urban poor. In order to understand this, we now provide some data about inequality and poverty among the world’s peasantry. According to data summarized by the ETC Group (AGETC), of the 450 million farms in today’s world, 382 million (85%) are worked by small peasants and have a size of 2 hectares or less. Nearly all of these (close to 380 million) are situated in the global South. Again, the overwhelming majority of them (370 million) are worked by indigenous peasants. In total, peasants work approximately half of the world’s cropland. It is estimated that, of the 1.56 billion arable hectares under permanent cultivation globally, 764 million hectares are worked by peasants; no less than 225 million hectares are cultivated by big farmers; and mid-size farmers would consequently hold approximately 571 million hectares.
An estimated 640 million peasant farmers and an additional 190 million pastoralists raise livestock for their own consumption and local markets. Furthermore, there are about 30–35 million full-time fishermen, but probably more than 100 million peasants are involved to some extent or another in fishing and the processing and distribution of the yield of this activity as food.
There are also an estimated 800 million peasants who are involved in urban farming. Of these, 200 million produce food primarily for urban markets, and this activity provides full-time employment for about 150 million family members. On average, the world’s cities produce about one-third of their own food consumption. Finally, there are at least 410 million people who live in – or adjacent to – forests and derive much of their food and livelihood from them. 
Brazil provides an important example of the unequal distribution of land globally and the dire situation of poor and landless peasants in the age of decaying capitalism. About 26,000 Brazilian landowners possess 50% of all agricultural lands, large parts of which are either being poorly utilized for agriculture or are not being cultivated at all. At the same time, in Brazil there are 12 million landless peasants.
The urban poor are another, increasingly important layer of world’s population. They have no fixed class position, but rather include various and transitional elements. Most slum dwellers have no permanent job, but are unemployed, informally employed, or self-employed. Thus, they mostly belong to the lower strata of the working class, and either constitute semi-proletarian elements who are often involved in urban agriculture, are among the poor petty-bourgeoisie, or belong to the lumpenproletariat. Their extremely precarious position in the workplace increases the relative importance of their particular living and housing conditions. For these reasons we can speak of the urban poor as a specific layer.
It is estimated that about a third of the global urban population (32.7%) live in slums in the big cities, especially in the semi-colonial world. The proportion of people living in slum conditions in urban areas is particularly high in sub-Saharan Africa (61.7%). However, slum dwellers also constitute an important share of the urban population in Southern Asia (35%), in Southeastern Asia (31.0%), in Eastern Asia (28.2%), in Western Asia (24.6%), in Latin America and the Caribbean (23.5%), and in North Africa (13%). 
In short, we see that the poor peasantry and the urban poor constitute huge and important classes and layers. They too suffer daily, throughout their precarious lives, from the devastating consequences of capitalism in decay. It is a crucial task of the working class, and this means the vanguard of this class – the revolutionary party – to be in the front line to win these oppressed layers over as allies for the struggle against capitalist rule.
 See Michael Pröbsting: The Great Robbery of the South, e.g. pp. 69-80, pp. 179-188, pp. 228-240
 See on this: The Great Robbery of the South, e.g. pp. 57-62
 The category “labor force” includes all persons involved in economic activity, i.e., workers, peasants, self-employed, salaried middle class employees and capitalists.
 We briefly remark here that the bourgeois category "wage earners" includes not only workers but also the salaried middle class. However, the bourgeoisie statistics of the ILO and similar institutions naturally don’t differentiate between these two sectors. Nevertheless, these figures are nevertheless a useful approximation for the growth of the global proletariat.
 International Labour Office: World Employment and Social Outlook 2015. The changing nature of jobs, p. 29
 International Labour Office: World Social Security Report 2010/11. Providing coverage in times of crisis and beyond (2010), p. 28
 International Labour Office: Global Wage Report 2014/15. Wages and income inequality, p. 14 and Supporting Data
 World Bank: World Development Report 1995, p. 9, International Labour Office: Global Employment Trends 2011, p. 68; Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs of the European Commission: Labour market and wage developments in 2009; in: EUROPEAN ECONOMY Nr. 5/2010, pp. 188-190 and our own calculations. The category “Developed economies” excludes Eastern and South-Eastern European states and Malta and Cyprus.
 Sources: International Labour Office: Global Employment Trends 2014. Risk of a jobless recovery?, p. 97 and our own calculations
 John Smith: Offshoring, Outsourcing & the ‘Global Labour Arbitrage’ (2008), Paper to IIPPE 2008 – Procida, Italy 9-11 September 2008, p. 5
 UNIDO: Industrial Development Report 2011, p. 150
 John Smith: Imperialism in the Twenty-First Century, Monthly Review 2015 Volume 67, Issue 03 (July-August), http://monthlyreview.org/2015/07/01/imperialism-in-the-twenty-first-century/.
 In contrast to the revisionist theories of the CWI, IMT as well as the Morenoites (LIT-CI and UIT-CI), Marxists do not regard members of the repressive state apparatus as parts of the working class. Trotsky was very clear on this issue: „The fact that the police was originally recruited in large numbers from among Social Democratic workers is absolutely meaningless. Consciousness is determined by environment even in this instance. The worker who becomes a policeman in the service of the capitalist state, is a bourgeois cop, not a worker. Of late years these policemen have had to do much more fighting with revolutionary workers than with Nazi students. Such training does not fail to leave its effects. And above all: every policeman knows that though governments may change, the police remain.“ (Leo Trotzki: Was nun? Schicksalsfragen des deutschen Proletariats (1932) in: Schriften über Deutschland, Band 1, p. 186; in English: Leon Trotsky: What Next? Vital Questions for the German Proletariat (January 1932), http://marxists.architexturez.net/archive/trotsky/germany/1932-ger/next01.htm#s1)
 Markus Lehner: Arbeiterklasse und Revolution. Thesen zum marxistischen Klassenbegriff, in: Revolutionärer Marxismus Nr. 28 (1999)
 See on this e.g. Michael Pröbsting: The Great Robbery of the South, e.g. pp. 179-188, pp. 228-240, pp. 385-386; Michael Pröbsting: Migration and Super-exploitation: Marxist Theory and the Role of Migration in the present Period, in: Critique: Journal of Socialist Theory, Vol. 43, Issue 3-4, 2015, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03017605.2015.1099846; Michael Pröbsting: Marxismus, Migration und revolutionäre Integration (2010); in: Revolutionärer Kommunismus, Nr. 7, http://www.thecommunists.net/publications/werk-7. A summary of this study in English-language: Michael Pröbsting: Marxism, Migration and revolutionary Integration, in: Revolutionary Communism, No. 1 (English-language Journal of the RCIT), http://www.thecommunists.net/oppressed/revolutionary-integration/
 See Rainer Münz/Heinz Fassmann: Migrants in Europe and their Economic Position: Evidence from the European Labour Force Survey and from Other Sources (2004), pp. 5-6 and Carlos Vargas-Silva: Global International Migrant Stock: The UK in International Comparison (2011), www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk, p. 5
 United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2016). International Migration Report 2015: Highlights, p. 28
 In Russia, according to the same UN study 8% of the total population are migrants. We have examined the situation of migration in Russia and the reasons for this high proportion in our publication by Michael Pröbsting, Russia as a Great Imperialist Power: The Formation of Russian Monopoly Capital and its Empire – A Reply to our Critics, 18 March 2014, in: Revolutionary Communism No. 21, http://www.thecommunists.net/theory/imperialist-russia/
 See Peter Dicken: Global Shift. Mapping the Changing Contours of the World Economy (Sixth Edition), The Guilford Press, New York 2011, p. 496
 Michael Pröbsting: Marxismus, Migration und revolutionäre Integration (2010); in: Der Weg des Revolutionären Kommunismus, Nr. 7, S. 31-33, http://www.thecommunists.net/publications/werk-7; in English: Michael Pröbsting: Marxism, Migration and revolutionary Integration, in: Revolutionary Communism, No. 1 (English-language Journal of the RCIT), p. 42 http://www.thecommunists.net/oppressed/revolutionary-integration/
 International Labour Office: World Employment and Social Outlook – Trends 2015, pp. 72-89, Supporting Data and our calculations
 International Labour Office: World Employment and Social Outlook – Trends 2015, pp. 72-89, Supporting Data
 See on this e.g. Jauch, Herbert: Globalisation and Labour, Labour Resource and Research Institute (LaRRI), Prepared for the Regional Labour Symposium, Windhoek, 6.12.2005, p. 8
 International Labour Office: World Employment and Social Outlook 2015. The changing nature of jobs, p. 30
 International Labour Office: World Employment and Social Outlook 2015. The changing nature of jobs, p. 31 (our own calculation)
 International Labour Office: World Employment and Social Outlook – Trends 2016, p 72
 See on this Revolutionary Communist International Tendency (RCIT): The Revolutionary Communist Manifesto, published in 2012, pp. 28-30; online on the RCIT website at www.thecommunists.net/rcit-manifesto
 International Labour Office: World Employment and Social Outlook – Trends 2015, Supporting Data
 International Labour Office: World of Work Report 2014. Developing with jobs, p. 40
 ETC Group: Questions for the Food and Climate Crises, Communiqué Issue #102 (November 2009), p. 26
 See United Nations: Planning and Design for Sustainable Urban Mobility: Global Report on Human Settlements 2013, p. 215; United Nations: The Millennium Development Goals Report 2014, p. 46; Om Prakash Mathur: Urban Poverty in Asia. Study Prepared for the Asian Development Bank, National Institute of Urban Affairs, New Delhi 2013, p. 17