A/HRC/25/54 Tenure Network (GLTN), enables the recording of multiple forms of individual and collective tenure, overlapping rights, and irregular spatial units in urban settlements.37 33. States, public and private utilities and service providers, businesses and other actors should recognize and respect the tenure rights recorded in settlement information systems, on an equal footing to established land cadastres and registries. 34. Professional technicians, including surveyors, planners and notaries, and the use of technology, such as satellite imagery and global positioning systems, should serve to facilitate community mapping and tenure-recording processes, and not pose an obstacle to the establishment of accessible and affordable land administration systems. 35. States should establish, in consultation with communities, a local dispute resolution mechanism, which is socially legitimate and culturally appropriate, to address disputes that arise during these processes. Dispute resolution mechanisms should be impartial, fair, competent, transparent and human rights-compatible, and affordable and accessible to all. Negotiation and mediation between parties to a dispute should be encouraged wherever possible in order to promote mutually beneficial outcomes that secure the tenure rights of all parties. D. Prioritizing in situ solutions 36. There are legitimate circumstances in which resettlement in a manner consistent with international human rights law may be appropriate to protect the health and safety of inhabitants exposed to natural disasters or environmental hazards, or to preserve critical environmental resources. However, the misuse of regulations aimed at protecting public health and safety or the environment to justify eviction of poor households in the absence of genuine risk, or when other options are available, is contrary to international human rights law.38 37. Where a genuine risk to health and safety or the environment exists, prior to any decision to evict being made, States must explore all feasible alternatives in consultation with affected persons. Specifically, States should use all resources at their disposal, including through international assistance, to explore in situ alternatives to mitigate and manage risks, regardless of the tenure status and housing standards of inhabitants unless the inhabitants prefer to be resettled to alternative adequate housing.39 38. Precarious housing structures in hazard-prone areas, such as along fault lines, on steep slopes or on river banks should be prioritized for incremental upgrading for current inhabitants, whenever feasible. States should explore technical options, like the construction of embankments and retaining walls, to transform the area into a safe location for housing. For example, a participatory project in the Lower Lempa River Valley in El Salvador led to the construction of safer houses with relocation of people living in particularly hazardous areas, improved woodland management as a natural buffer to floods, 37 38 39 Model used in Mbale under a joint project of the Ugandan Ministry of Land, Housing and Urban Development, GLTN, UN-Habitat and Slum Dwellers International. See www.gltn.net/index.php/land-tools/social-tenure-domain-model-stdm. For standards on resettlement under international human rights law, see Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, general comments No. 7 and No. 4; and the Basic Principles. Ibid. 13