State, Society, and Informality in Cities of the Global South

Abstract

Contemporary urbanization in the Global South merits greater attention from scholars of comparative politics. Governance, associational life, and political behavior take distinctive forms in the social and institutional environments created by rapid urbanization, particularly within informal settlements and labor markets. In this special issue, we examine forms of collective action and claims-making in these spaces. We also consider how the state assesses, maps, and responds to the demands of informal sector actors. Tackling questions of citizen and state behavior in these informal urban contexts requires innovative research strategies due to data scarcity and social and institutional complexity. Contributors to this symposium offer novel strategies for addressing these challenges, including the use of informal archives, worksite-based sampling, ethnographic survey design, enforcement process-tracing, and crowd-sourced data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Constitutional reforms in India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Thailand have increased local government autonomy, and mayors are now elected in these and several other Asian countries (World Bank and United Cities and Local Governments 2008, pp. 57–58). In Latin America, all countries except for Cuba hold municipal elections (World Bank and United Cities and Local Governments 2008, p. 181). In sub-Saharan Africa, the majority of countries that hold regular national elections convene local government elections as well (Ndegwa 2002).

  2. 2.

    The informal sector is generally understood as economic and development activities that are untaxed and unregulated by the state. This would include unregulated or unregistered businesses, as well as settlements and infrastructure that were built outside of state regulations. The term “informal economy” was first used by Hart (1973) in his description of the Ghanaian economy, and as Castells and Portes (1989, p. 11) note, it is a “common-sense notion” with “moving social boundaries,” which makes precise definition difficult. A broader conception of informality could incorporate informal institutions (see Helmke & Levitsky 2004), unofficial or unregulated practices (e.g., Roy 2009; McFarlane 2012), or “flexibility, negotiation, or situational spontaneity that push back against established state regulations and the constraints of the law” (Boudreau & Davis 2017, p. 155).

  3. 3.

    In countries as diverse as Bolivia, Pakistan, the Philippines, and Tanzania, informal employment makes up more than 75% of total non-agricultural employment (International Labor Organization 2014, p. 9).

  4. 4.

    In some settings, traditional identities and modes of social control may be adapted to urban settings and retain much of their force (e.g., Cohen 1969).

  5. 5.

    These observations date back to the Chicago School of Sociology and have been noted across world regions (see Erdentug & Colombijn 2002). Note, however, that cities vary in levels of ethnic and racial mixing at the neighborhood level (e.g., Schensul & Heller 2011).

  6. 6.

    Extensive population movement can also occur in rural settings (see World Bank 2009, p. 153).

  7. 7.

    For example, a large survey of economically diverse residents in 11 Nigerian cities found that 30% of respondents had moved within the past 5 years (December 2010 data collected by Adrienne LeBas; see Bodea & LeBas (2016) for more details).

  8. 8.

    See Breman (1996); Gill (2012); Grossman (2016).

  9. 9.

    Scholars can also examine the extent to which state-sponsored venues for citizen participation at the community and city level affect political participation by the urban poor (e.g., Heller & Evans 2010).

  10. 10.

    Studying a Buenos Aires slum suffering from toxic exposure, Auyero and Swistun (2009) find that institutional complexity makes it difficult for community members to understand to whom they can direct their complaints, while in Santiago, Chile, community leaders in a slum point to the usefulness of NGOs, rather than political parties, in advancing environmental concerns (Roberts & Portes 2006, pp. 67–68).

  11. 11.

    Reliance on these strategies may vary even within a single city (Nathan 2016).

  12. 12.

    This question has attracted greater attention from other fields; see for example Cross (1998) and Davis (2013) on the role of government officials under a one-party regime and business elites, respectively, in regulating street vending in Mexico.

  13. 13.

    The most extreme example of this can be found in China, where labor migrants often do not appear in official counts. This sampling problem is not limited to urban populations: transient and migratory populations, such as African pastoralists, are also difficult to sample. See Randall (2015).

References

  1. Auerbach AM. Clients and communities: the political economy of party network organization and development in India’s urban slums. World Politics. 2016;68(1):111–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Auerbach AM. Neighborhood associations and the urban poor: India’s slum development committees. World Dev. 2017;96:119–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Auerbach A, & Thachil T. Capability, connectivity, and co-ethnicity: the origins of political brokerage in India’s urban slums. 2017.

  4. Auyero J. Protest and politics in contemporary Argentina. In: Levitsky S, Murillo MV, editors. Argentine democracy: the politics of institutional weakness. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Auyero J. Routine politics and violence in Argentina: the gray zone of state power. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Auyero J, Swistun DA. Flammable: environmental suffering in an Argentine shantytown. New York: Oxford University Press; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bacchetta M, Ernst E, Bustamante JP. Globalization and the informal jobs in developing economies. Geneva: International Labour Office and the World Trade Organization; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Banerjee A, Iyer L, Somanathan R. History, social divisions, and public goods in rural India. J Eur Econ Assoc. 2005;3(2–3):639–47. https://doi.org/10.1162/jeea.2005.3.2-3.639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bodea C, LeBas A. The origins of voluntary compliance: attitudes towards taxation in urban Nigeria. Br J Polit Sci. 2016;46(1):215–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Boudreau J-A, Davis DE. Introduction: a processual approach to informalization. Curr Sociol. 2017;65(2):151–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392116657286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bowles S, Gintis H. The evolution of strong reciprocity: cooperation in heterogeneous populations. Theor Popul Biol. 2004;65(1):17–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tpb.2003.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Branch A, Mamphilly Z. Africa uprising: popular protest and political change. London: Zed Books; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Brass JN. Allies or adversaries: NGOs and the state in Africa. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Breman J. Footloose labor: working in India’s informal economy. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cantor DJ, & Rodríguez Serna N. The new refugees: crime and forced displacement in Latin America. School of Advanced Study, University of London; 2017. Retrieved from https://www.sas.ac.uk/publication/new-refugees-crime-and-forced-displacement-latin-america

  16. Castells M, Portes A. World underneath: the origins, dynamics and effects of the informal economy. In: Portes A, editor. The informal economy: studies in advanced and less developed countries. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Clark G. Onions are my husband: survival and accumulation by west African market women. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Cohen A. Custom and politics in urban Africa: a study of Hausa migrants in Yoruba towns. New York: Routledge; 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cornelius W. Politics and the migrant poor in Mexico City. Stanford: Stanford University Press; 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Cross J. Informal politics: street vendors and the state in Mexico City. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Davis D. Irregular armed forces, shifting patterns of commitment, and fragmented sovereignty in the developing world. Theory Soc. 2010;39:397–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Davis DE. Zero-tolerance policing, stealth real estate development, and the transformation of public space: evidence from Mexico City. Lat Am Perspect. 2013;40(2):53–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/0094582X12467761.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. de Soto H. The mystery of capital: why capitalism Trumphs in the west and fails everywhere Else. New York: Basic Books; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Dickovick JT. The measure and Mismeasure of decentralisation: subnational autonomy in Senegal and South Africa. J Mod Afr Stud. 2005;43(2):183–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Eckstein S. The poverty of revolution: the state and the urban poor in Mexico. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ejdemyr S, Kramon E, & Robinson AL. Segregation, ethnic favoritism, and the targeting of distributive goods. 2015.

  27. Erdentug A, Colombijn F, editors. Urban ethnic encounters: the spatial consequences. London: Routledge; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ferguson J. Expectations of modernity: myths and meanings of urban life on the Zambian Copperbelt. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Field E, Levinson M, Pande R, Visaria S. Segregation, rent control, and riots: the economics of religious conflict in an Indian City. Am Econ Rev. 2008;98(2):505–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Gay R. Popular organization and democracy in Rio de Janeiro: a tale of two favelas. Philadelphia: Temple University Press; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gilbert A. The Latin American city (second). London: Latin American Bureau; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gill K. Of poverty and plastic: scavenging and scrap trading entrepreneurs in India’s urban informal economy. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Goodfellow T. Taming the “rogue” sector: studying state effectiveness in Africa through informal transport politics. Comp Polit. 2015;47(2):127–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Greif A. Contract enforceability and economic institutions in early trade: the Maghribi traders’ coalition. Am Econ Rev. 1993;83(3):525–48.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Grossman S. The politics of order in informal markets: evidence from Lagos (Ph. D. Dissertation). Cambridge: Harvard University; 2016.

  36. Grossman S, Honig D. Evidence from Lagos on discrimination across ethnic and class identities in informal trade. World Dev. 2017;96:520–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Habyarimana J, Humphreys M, Posner D, Weinstein J. Coethnicity: diversity and the dilemma of collective action. New York: Russell Sage; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hart K. Informal income opportunities and urban employment in Ghana. J Mod Afr Stud. 1973;11(1):61–89. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022278X00008089.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Heller P, Evans P. Taking tilly south: durable inequalities, democratic contestation, and citizenship in the southern metropolis. Theory Soc. 2010;39(3–4):433–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-010-9115-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Heller P, Mukhopadhyay P, Banda S, & Sheikh S. Exclusion, informality, and predation in the cities of Delhi. A report of the cities of Delhi project, Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi; 2015.

  41. Helmke G, Levitsky S. Informal institutions and comparative politics: a research agenda. Perspect Polit. 2004;2:725–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Herrera V, Post AE. Can developing countries both decentralize and depoliticize urban water services? Evaluating the legacy of the 1990s reform wave. World Dev. 2014;64:621–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Hidalgo FD & Lessing B. Endogenous state weakness in violent democracies: paramilitaries at the polls. 2015.

  44. Holland A. Forbearance. Am Polit Sci Rev. 2016;110(2):232–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Holston J. Insurgent citizenship in an era of global urban peripheries. City Soc. 2009;21(2):245–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Ichino N, Nathan N. Crossing the line: local ethnic geography and voting in Ghana. Am Polit Sci Rev. 2013;107(2):344–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. International Labor Organization. Women and men in the informal economy: a statistical picture. 2nd ed. Geneva: International Labour Office; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Jha S, Rao V, Woolcock M. Governance in the gullies: democratic responsiveness and leadership in Delhi’s slums. World Dev. 2007;35(2):230–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Joshi A, Prichard W, Heady C. Taxing the informal economy: the current state of knowledge and agendas for future research. J Dev Stud. 2014;50(10):1325–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Keener S, Luengo M, & Banerjee S. Provision of water to the poor in Africa: experience with water standposts and the informal water sector (no. WPS5387) (pp. 1–65). The World Bank; 2010.

  51. Khwaja AI. Can good projects succeed in bad communities? J Public Econ. 2009;93(7):899–916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2009.02.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Kjellén M, & McGranahan G. Informal water vendors and the urban poor (human settlements discussion paper series human settlements discussion paper series theme: Water-3 no. 978-1-84369-586-8). London: International Institute for Environment and Development; 2006. Retrieved from http://www.mumbaidp24seven.in/reference/informal_water_vendors.pdf.

  53. Kooy M. Developing informality: the production of Jakartaʼs urban waterscape. Water Altern. 2014;7(1):35–53.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Koter D. Urban and rural voting patterns in Senegal: the spatial aspects of incumbency, c. 1978-2012. J Mod Afr Stud. 2013;51(4):653–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Krishna A. Active social capital: tracing the roots of development and democracy. New York: Columbia University Press; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Krishna A. Stuck in place: investigation social mobility in 14 Bangalore slums. J Dev Stud. 2013;49(7):1010–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Kuznets S. Modern economic growth: rate, structure, and spread. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Larreguy H, Marshall J, & Trucco L. Can clientelistic ties be broken? Evidence from an urban titling program in Mexico. Working Paper, Harvard University; 2015.

  59. LeBas A. Violence and urban order in Nairobi, Kenya and Lagos, Nigeria. Stud Comp Int Dev. 2013;48(3):240–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Li S-M, Chan KW, He S. Migration, mobility, and community change in Chinese cities: introducing the special issue. Eurasian Geogr Econ. 2014;55(4):307–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Lund C. Twilight institutions: public authority and local politics in Africa. Dev Chang. 2006;37(4):685–705. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2006.00497.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Mares I, Young L. Buying, expropriating, and stealing votes. Annu Rev Polit Sci. 2016;19:267–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Marx B, Stoker TM, & Suri T. There is no free house: ethnic patronage in a Kenyan slum. 2015.

  64. McFarlane C. Rethinking informality: politics, crisis, and the city. Plan Theor. 2012;13(1):89–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Michelitch K. Does electoral competition exacerbate interethnic or Interpartisan economic discrimination? Evidence from a field experiment in market price bargaining. Am Polit Sci Rev. 2015;109(1):43–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Mitchell JC. Social networks in urban situations: analyses of personal relationships in central African towns. Manchester: Manchester University Press; 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Moncada E. Cities, business, and the politics of urban violence in Latin America. Stanford: Stanford University Press; 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Montgomery M. The urban transformation of the developing world. Science. 2008;319(5864):761–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Nathan N. Local ethnic geography, expectations of favoritism, and voting in urban Ghana. Comp Polit Stud. 2016;49(14):1896–929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Ndegwa S. Decentralization in Africa: a stock-taking survey. Africa region working paper series no. 40, Washington, D.C; 2002.

  71. Nelson J. Sojourners versus new urbanites: causes and consequences of temporary versus permanent cityward migration in developing countries. Econ Dev Cult Chang. 1976;24(4):721–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Nickson A. Local government in Latin America. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  73. O’Donnell G. On the state, democratization, and some conceptual problems: a Latin American view glances at some postcommunist countries. World Dev. 1993;21(8):1355–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Portes A. Rationality in the slum: an essay on interpretive sociology. Comp Stud Soc Hist. 1972;14(3):268–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Post AE, Bronsoler V, Salman L. Hybrid regimes for local public goods provision: a framework for analysis. Perspect Polit. 2017;15(4):952–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Potts D. Circular migration in Zimbabwe & contemporary sub-Saharan Africa. London: James Currey; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Randall S. Where have all the nomads gone? Fifty years of statistical and demographic invisibilities of African mobile pastoralists. Pastoralism. 2015;5:22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Resnick D. Urban poverty and party populism in African democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Roberts BR, Portes A. Coping with the free market city: collective action in six Latin American cities at the end of the twentieth century. Lat Am Res Rev. 2006;41(2):57–83. https://doi.org/10.1353/lar.2006.0029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Roy A. Why India cannot plan its cities: informality, insurgence, and the idiom of urbanization. Plan Theor. 2009;8(1):76–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Sánchez BEM. A city torn apart: forced displacement in Medellin, Colombia. International Law: Revista Colombiana de Derecho Internacional; 2013, p 22.

  82. Schensul D, Heller P. Legacies, change and transformation in the post-Apartheid City: towards an urban sociological cartography. Int J Urban Reg Res. 2011;35(1):78–109. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00980.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Simmel G. The sociology of Georg Simmel. (K. H. Wolff, Trans.). Glencoe: Free Press; 1950.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Snyder R. Scaling down: the subnational comparative method. Stud Comp Int Dev. 2001;36(1):93–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Stacey P, Lund C. In a state of slum: governance in an informal urban settlement in Ghana. J Mod Afr Stud. 2016;54(4):591–615. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022278X16000586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Stokes SC. Cultures in conflict: social movements and the state in Peru. Berkely: University of California Press; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Stren R, Cameron R. Metropolitan governance reform: an introduction. Public Adm Dev. 2005;25(4):275–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Sverdlik A. Tenuous wires, covert excrete flows, and a formal/informal interface: uncovering new facets of informality in Nairobi (Ph. D. Dissertation). Berkeley: University of California; 2017.

  89. Thachil T. Elite parties, poor voters: how social services win votes in India. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Thachil T. Do rural migrants divide ethnically in the city? Ethnographic and experimental evidence from India. Am J Polit Sci. 2017;61(4):908–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Tripp AM. Changing the rules: the politics of liberalization and the urban informal economy in Tanzania. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Tsai LL. Accountability without democracy: solidary groups and public goods provision in rural China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  93. UN-HABITAT. The challenge of slums. London: Earthscan; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  94. UN-HABITAT. State of the world’s cities, 2012/2013: prosperity of cities. New York: Routledge; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  95. United Nations. World urbanization prospects 2014. United Nations Pubn; 2015.

  96. Wirth L. Urbanism as a way of life. Am J Sociol. 1938;44(1):1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Woolcock M, Narayan D. Social capital: implications for development theory, research, and policy. World Bank Res Obs. 2000;15(2):225–49. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/15.2.225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. World Bank. World development report: reshaping economic geography. Washington D.C.: The World Bank; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  99. World Bank. East Asia’s changing urban landscape: measuring a decade of spatial growth. Washington, D.C.: World Bank; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  100. World Bank, & United Cities and Local Governments. Decentralization and local democracy in the world: first global report by united cities and local governments. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Benjamin Allen for research assistance. The authors are also grateful to special issue contributors for numerous insights, and to Leonardo Arriola, David Backer, Ravinder Bhavnani, Karsten Donnay, Shelby Grossman, Alisha Holland, Katerina Linos, Aila Matanock, Jeffrey Paller, Amanda Robinson, and members of the SCID editorial collective for helpful comments.

Funding

The authors thank the Institute for International Studies at the University of California, Berkeley, and the Schools of International Service and Public Affairs, American University, for providing funding for two workshops focused on this special issue.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adam M. Auerbach.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Auerbach, A.M., LeBas, A., Post, A.E. et al. State, Society, and Informality in Cities of the Global South. St Comp Int Dev 53, 261–280 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-018-9269-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Cities
  • Urbanization
  • Urban politics
  • Informality
  • Governance
  • Complexity
  • Informal institutions
  • Methods
  • Developing world