Advertisement

Theory and Society

, Volume 39, Issue 3–4, pp 433–450 | Cite as

Taking Tilly south: durable inequalities, democratic contestation, and citizenship in the Southern Metropolis

  • Patrick HellerEmail author
  • Peter Evans
Article

Abstract

Drawing on Charles Tilly’s work on inequality, democracy and cities, we explore the local level dynamics of democratization across urban settings in India, South Africa, and Brazil. In all three cases, democratic institutions are consolidated, but there is tremendous variation in the quality of the democratic relationship between cities and their citizens. We follow Tilly’s focus on citizenship as the key element in democratization and argue that explaining variance across our three cases calls for analyzing patterns of inequality through the kind of relational lens used by Tilly and recognizing that patterns of contestation are shaped by shifting political relationships between the nation and the city. We conclude that Tilly’s theoretical frame is nicely sustained by the comparative analysis of cases very different from those that stimulated his original formulations.

Keywords

Social Movement Civil Society Organization African National Congress Indian City Urban Governance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Appadurai, A. (2002). Deep democracy: urban governmentality and the horizon of politics. Public Culture, 14(1), 21–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson, D. (2007). Taking to the streets: Has developmental local government failed in South Africa? In S. Buhlungu, J. Daniel, R. Southall, & J. Lutchman (Eds.), State of the nation: South Africa 2007 (pp. 53–77). Cape Town: Human Social Science Research Council.Google Scholar
  3. Baiocchi, G. (2006). Inequality and innovation: Decentralization as an opportunity structure in Brazil. In P. Bardhan & D. Mookherjee (Eds.), Decentralization and local governance in developing countries (pp. 53–80). Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  4. Baiocchi, G., Heller, P., & Silva, M. K. (2008). Making space for civil society: institutional reforms and local democracy in Brazil. Social Forces, 86(3), 911–936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bayat, A. (2009). Iran: a green wave for life and liberty posted on “Open Democracy” 7 - 07 - 2009 http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/iran-a-green-wave-for-life-and-liberty.
  6. Beall, J., Crankshaw, O., & Parnell, S. (2002). Uniting a divided city: Governance and Social Exclusion in Johannesburg. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  7. Bond, P. (2004). South Africa’s resurgent urban social movements: The case of Johannesburg, 1984, 1994, 2004. Report No. 22, Centre for Civil Society, University of KwaZulu Natal.Google Scholar
  8. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Caldeira, T., & Holston, J. (2005). State and urban space in Brazil: From modernist planning to democratic intervention. In A. Ong & S. J. Collier (Eds.), Global anthropology: Technology, governmentality, ethics (pp. 393–416). London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  10. Chatterjee, P. (2004). The politics of the governed. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Davis, M. (2006). Planet of slums. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  12. Desai, A. (2002). We are the poors: Community struggles in post-apartheid South Africa. New York: Monthly Review Press.Google Scholar
  13. Desai, A. (2003). Neo-liberal Resistance in South Africa. Monthly Review, 54(8):16–28.Google Scholar
  14. Fernandes, E. (2007). Constructing the ‘Right to the City’ in Brazil. Social & Legal Studies, 16(2), 201–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Holston, J. (2008). Insurgent citizenship. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Houtzager, P., Acharya, A., & Lavalle, A. G. (2007). Associations and the exercise of citizenship in new democracies: evidence from Sao Paulo and Mexico City. Working paper 285, Institute of Development Studies.Google Scholar
  17. Kaplinsky, R. (2005). Globalization, poverty and inequality: Between a rock and a hard place. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  18. Keck, M. E. (1992). The Workers' Party and Democratization in Brazil. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Lee, C.-K. (2007). Against the law: Labor protests in China’s Rustbelt and Sunbelt. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  20. Mann, M. (1986). The sources of social power. Volume I: A history of social power from the beginning to A.D. 1760. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Peck, J., & Tickell, A. (2002). Neoliberalizing space. Antipode, 34(3), 380–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Seekings, J., & Nattrass, N. (2005). Class, race, and inequality in South Africa. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Sekhar, S., & Bidarkar, S. (1999). Municipal budgets in India: comparison across five cities. Economic and Political Weekly, May 15.Google Scholar
  24. Somers, M. R. (1993). Citizenship and the place of the public sphere: law, community, and political culture in the transition to democracy. American Sociological Review, 58, 587–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tilly, C. (1998). Durable inequality. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  26. Tilly, C. (2004). Social movements, 1768–2004. Boulder: Paradigm.Google Scholar
  27. Tilly, C. (2010). Cities and states in world history, this issue.Google Scholar
  28. United Nations. (2006). Fact sheet 4: Urban and rural components of population growth. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2005 Revision.Google Scholar
  29. van Donk, M., Swilling, M., Pieterse, E., & Parnell, S. (Eds.). (2008). Consolidating developmental local government: Lessons from the South African experience. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.Google Scholar
  30. Weinstein, L. (2009). Democracy in the globalizing city: Democratic participation in Mumbai’s mega-project development. Politics and Society, 37(3):397–427.Google Scholar
  31. Whitehead, J., & More, N. (2007). Revanchism in Mumbai? Political economy of rent gaps and urban restructuring in a global city. Economic and Political Weekly, 23, 2428–2434.Google Scholar
  32. World Bank. (2006). World Bank development report: Equity and development. Washington DC.Google Scholar
  33. Zérah, M.-H. (2008). Splintering urbanism in Mumbai: contrasting trends in a multilayered society. Geoforum, 39(6), 1922–1932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Brown UniversityProvidenceUSA
  2. 2.University of California, BerkeleyBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations