A/HRC/28/62 resources can lead subnational governments to make decisions that negatively affect the realization of the right to adequate housing. For example, at the municipal level it is not uncommon for available land or property to be used as an asset for real estate development rather than for the provision of adequate housing. (b) Insufficient knowledge and capacity regarding the right to adequate housing and related human rights: Local and other subnational government officials are often unaware of their obligations under international human rights law with respect to adequate housing and may at times lack any institutional or legislative framework of accountability for their decision-making. They may also lack institutional or technical capacity to administer programmes efficiently, to contend with corruption, to regulate land speculation, to ensure sustainable practices or to maintain and repair infrastructure. (c) Overlapping, unclear and conflicting web of responsibilities: In countries with large and rapidly expanding urban and peri-urban populations, there is often a complex web of overlapping and colliding responsibilities between different levels of government and between local governments. It is very difficult to ensure accountability to human rights obligations if there is a lack of clarity about which levels of government are responsible for what. In many cases there is tension between the interests of national and local and other subnational governments regarding priorities. Those in need of housing are caught in the middle, with no level of government assuming responsibility. In some other cases, lack of clarity or multiple layers create power vacuums and can become a fertile ground for abuse of authority. (d) Protectionism and discrimination: When communities define themselves around a local identity, there can be a tendency to exclude perceived “outsiders”, such as migrants, refugees, asylum seekers and ethnic, religious or other minorities. That often leads to discriminatory barriers in accessing and maintaining adequate housing and related programmes. Scapegoating, stigmatization and discrimination against homeless people can also be more pronounced at the local level, where communities may define themselves as homogeneous and coalesce to drive disadvantaged groups out of local communities.22 22. Viewed through a human rights lens, from the perspective of those whose right to housing is at stake, those common challenges facing local governments or housing providers can be seen as barriers to the realization of rights. Those who are disproportionately affected by the challenges identified tend to be the most marginalized groups – those whose right to housing is most at risk. It is those groups who suffer most when local governments lack capacity or resources, when there is an absence of local human rights accountability, when local government becomes protectionist and exclusionary, and it is those groups who often confront the most complex web of governmental decision-making and authority, with the least information available to them. 23. The situation of residents of informal settlements in many cities around the world illustrates how allocation of responsibilities among different levels of government plays out in peoples’ lives. For example, a recent study considers the situation of residents of the Mukuru settlement in Nairobi. They live in windowless shacks on privately held land without sewage or water infrastructure. They have been unable to determine title through local governments and therefore lack security of tenure, rendering them ineligible to apply for basic water, sewers or electricity. With the Kenyan Constitution now recognizing “the right to accessible and adequate housing and to reasonable standards of sanitation”, the 22 8 For more information, see the report of the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights (A/66/265) and the report of the Special Rapporteur on the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation (A/HRC/21/42).