Advertisement

Civil Society Incorporation and Policy Ambiguity in Comparative Perspective

  • Gaja MaestriEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in European Political Sociology book series (PSEPS)

Abstract

This chapter develops the comparative dimension of the research by looking at how the dynamics observed in the persistence of the Roma camps work in two other cases of temporary yet enduring camps in France: the former migrant transit estates and the current Roma integration villages. It aims to show the relationship between regimes of civil society participation in formal governance and of institutional ambiguity with camp persistence. After summarising the findings that emerged from the analysis of the Roma camps, the chapter presents an analysis of the integration villages and transit estates. The comparison shows that, in both cases, the relatively weaker incorporation of associations in camp governance and the lower ambiguity of the legal framework reduced the polarisation between service providers and advocacy groups, on the one hand, and reinforced the claims of associations challenging governmental policies, on the other. Thus, pro-Roma groups have managed to negotiate the extension of some villages, and pro-migrant associations succeeded in obtaining the closure of the transit estates.

Bibliography

  1. Abdallah, Mogniss H. 2006. “Cités de transit: en finir avec un provisoire qui dure.” Plein droit GISTI 68 (1): 52–56.Google Scholar
  2. Aguilera, Thomas. 2012. “Ungovernable Dark Side of the City? Governing Slums in Paris and Madrid: Governance, Urban Policies and Illegalisms.” International Conference Governing the Metropolis: Powers and Territories. New Directions for Research, 28–29 November, Marie de Paris, France.Google Scholar
  3. Associazione 21 Luglio. 2014. Campi Nomadi s.p.a. Segregare, concentrare e allontanare i rom. I costi a Roma nel 2013. Frosinone: Nuova Stampa.Google Scholar
  4. Blanc-Chaléard, Marie-Claude. 2006. “Les immigrés et le logement en France depuis le XIX siècle. Une histoire paradoxale.” Hommes et Migrations, no 1264.Google Scholar
  5. ———. 2008. Des bidonvilles à la ville: migrants des trente glorieuses et résorptions en région parisienne. Paris: Université de Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne.Google Scholar
  6. Cahn, Claude, and Espelth Guild. 2010. Recent Migration of Roma in Europe. OSCE and Council of Europe. Google Scholar
  7. Cohen, Muriel. 2013. Des familles invisibles. Politiques publiques et trajectoires résidentielles de l’immigration algérienne (1945–1985). Paris: Université de Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, Muriel, and Cédric David. 2012. “‘Cités de transit’: The Urban Treatment of Poverty During Decolonisation.” Translated by Oliver Waine. Metropolitiques, March. http://www.metropolitiques.eu/Cites-de-transit-the-urban.html.
  9. Collet, Victor. 2013. Du bidonville à la cité: les trois âges des luttes pro-immigrés: une sociohistoire à Nanterre (1957–2011). Nanterre: Université Paris X.Google Scholar
  10. Cousin, Grégoire. 2013. “L’évacuation de bidonvilles roms. Circulaires et cycles médiatiques.” Métropolitiques, Novembre. http://www.metropolitiques.eu/L-evacuation-de-bidonvilles-roms.html.
  11. Daniele, Ulderico. 2011. Sono del campo e vengo dall’India. Etnografia di una collettività rom ridislocata. Roma: Meti Edizioni.Google Scholar
  12. DIHAL. 2011. French Government Strategy for Roma Integration Within the Framework of the Communication from the Commission of 5 April 2011 and the Council Conclusions of 19 May 2011.Google Scholar
  13. Edwards, Bob, and John D. McCarthy. 2004. “Resources and Social Movement Mobilization.” In The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, edited by David A. Snow, Sarah A. Soule, and Hanspeter Kriesi, 116–52. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  14. Groupe interministériel permanent pour la résorption de l’habitat insalubre. 1971. “Circulaire du 27 aout 1971 prise pour application de la loi n° 70-612 du 10 juillet 1970 tendant à faciliter la suppression de l’habitat insalubre.”Google Scholar
  15. Hmed, Choukri. 2008a. “L’encadrement des étrangers ‘isolés’ par le logement social (1950–1980). Eléménts pour une socio-histoire du travail des street-level bureaucrats.” Genèses 72.Google Scholar
  16. ———. 2008b. “Social Movements ‘on a Head of a Pin’? The Role of Physical Space in the Process of Contention in the Case of Mobilizations in Public Housing for ‘Isolated’ Foreigners.” POLITIX 21 (84): 145–65.Google Scholar
  17. Kapoor, Ilan. 2004. “Hyper-Self-Reflexive Development? Spivak on Representing the Third World ‘Other’.” Third World Quarterly 25 (4): 627–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Legros, Olivier. 2010. “Les ‘villages d’insertion’: un tournant dans les politiques en direction des migrants roms en région parisienne?” Asylon(s), Radicalisation des frontières et promotion de la diversité, 8 (Radicalisation des frontières et promotion de la diversité). http://www.reseau-terra.eu/article947.html.
  19. ———. 2011. “Les ‘villages roms’ ou la réinvention des cités de transit.” Métropolitiques.eu, March. http://www.metropolitiques.eu/Les-villages-roms-ou-la.html.
  20. Mahoney, James, and Kathleen Thelen, eds. 2010. Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Matland, Richard E. 1995. “Synthesizing the Implementation Literature: The Ambiguity-Conflict Model of Policy Implementation.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART 5 (2): 145–74.Google Scholar
  22. Ministère de l’aménagement du territoire, de l’équipement, du logement et du tourisme. 1972. “Circulaire du 19 avril 1972 relative aux cités de transit.”Google Scholar
  23. Ousset, Xavier. 1980. “La cité de transit… vers quoi?” Recherche Sociale 73: 35–43.Google Scholar
  24. Parlement français. 1970. “Loi n° 70-612 du 10 juillet 1970 tendant à faciliter la suppression de l’habitat insalubre.”Google Scholar
  25. Preféfecture de la Région île-De-France, and Préfecture de Paris. 2016. “Stratégie Régionale pour les Campements Illicites en île-De-France.” https://www.romeurope.org/IMG/pdf/4._—_strategie_regionale_idf_finale_—.pdf.
  26. Romeurope. 2012. Les ‘Roms migrants’ en Ile de France. Etat des lieux provisoire des expériences d’hébergement et de logement d’habitants de squats et bidonvilles. Paris: Romeurope.Google Scholar
  27. Said, Edward W. 1979. Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  28. Silver, Hilary, Alan Scott, and Yuri Kazepov. 2010. “Participation in Urban Contention and Deliberation.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 34 (3): 453–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Spivak, Gayatry Chakravorty. 1993. “Can the Subaltern Speak?” In Colonial Discourse and Post-colonial Theory: A Reader, edited by Patrick WIlliams and Laura Chrisman, 66–111. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Streeck, Wolfgang, and Kathleen Thelen, eds. 2005. Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Tricard, François. 1980. “Gérer le provisoire.” Recherche Sociale, 43–47.Google Scholar
  32. Tyler, Imogen, NIck Gill, Deirdre Conlon, and Ceri Oeppen. 2014. “The Business of Child Detention: Charitable Co-option, Migrant Advocacy and Activist Outrage.” Race & Class: A Journal on Racism, Empire and Globalization 56 (1): 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Uitermark, Justus, and Walter Nicholls. 2014. “From Politicization to Policing: The Rise and Decline of New Social Movements in Amsterdam and Paris.” Antipode 46 (4): 970–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Vermeersch, Peter. 2005. “Marginality, Advocacy, and the Ambiguities of Multiculturalism: Notes on Romani Activism in Central Europe.” Global Studies in Culture and Power 12: 451–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ville de Montreuil. 2012. “Rapport de la mission d’information et d’évaluation de la maîtrise d’œuvre urbaine et sociale ‘Roms’.”Google Scholar
  36. Ville de Saint-Ouen. 2013. “Village d’insertion des Roms de Saint-Ouen La Ville demande à l’Etat une solution d’hébergement d’urgence.”Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Media, Communication and SociologyUniversity of LeicesterLeicesterUK

Personalised recommendations