Beyond the Urban Informality Discourse: Negotiating Power, Legitimacy and Resources

Author(s): PETER HERRLE and JOSEFINE FOKDAL

Source: Geographische Zeitschrift, Bd. 99, H. 1 (2011), pp. 3-15
Published by: Franz Steiner Verlag
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23226577
Accessed: 23-02-2018 18:04 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Franz Steiner Verlag is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Geographische Zeitschrift

This content downloaded from 146.182.9.9 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:04:36 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Geographische Zeitschrift, Band 99 · 2011 ■ Heft 1 · Seite 3-15
© Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart

Beyond the Urban Informality Discourse:

Negotiating Power, Legitimacy and Resources1

PETER HERRLE and JOSEFINE FOKDAL, Berlin

In recent years informality has been defined and re-defined in the context of urban development. Evolvin
from initially being understood as a 'sector' of the economy to currently being redefined as a 'new w
of life', 'informality' has become a rather ambiguous term. According to our understanding, many of
current concepts of informality do not capture the complexity and importance of connectivity between se
tors, levels, and actors. In particular, they neglect the importance of power relations and the blurriness
constantly negotiated and readjusted boundaries between the acceptable and the non-acceptable, legal a
non-legal. In this article, we question the usefulness of the term 'informality' and instead propose a set
parameters in order to describe negotiation processes inherent to the term 'informality'. We suggest a mod
that tries to avoid the ambiguity of the informality debate. It offers a tool to understand the typically co
posite pattern of actors and their interplay regarding the three dimensions: power, legitimacy, and resource

Jenseits der Debatte über urbane Informalität - Muster der Verhandlung von Macht,
Legitimation und Ressourcen

In den letzten Jahren wurde der Begriff „Informalität" im Kontext von Stadtentwicklung umdefiniert un
erweitert. Im Verlauf des Wandels von der ursprünglichen Definition als Wirtschaftssektor der städtischen
Armut zum derzeitigen Verständnis als 'neue urbane Lebensform' hat der Begriff seine Aussagekraft e
gebüßt. Die neueren Definitionen von Informalität sind zu vage, um die Komplexität der Beziehung
zwischen Akteuren abzubilden. Insbesondere werden Aspekte wie Machtverhältnisse und die Grauzonen d
Verhandlungsspielräume zwischen akzeptablen und inakzeptablen, legalen und nicht-legalen Arrangemen
nicht berücksichtigt. In diesem Aufsatz wird der Nutzen des Begriffs „Informalität" für die heutige St
debatte in Frage gestellt und stattdessen - ausgehend von einem akteurszentrierten Ansatz - eine Reihe v
Parametern entwickelt, welche die Unschärfe des gegenwärtigen Informalitätsdiskurses vermeidet. Das v
geschlagene Modell bietet ein Werkzeug zur Abbildung typischer Muster der „formellen" und „informellen
Verteilung von Macht, Legitimation und Ressourcen zwischen Schlüsselakteuren der Stadtentwicklung a

1 Introduction Since its introduction to the development

discourse in the 1970s the term has undergone
considerable changes and refinements, but only
This is not another attempt to define or re-define
the term 'informality' in the context of urban in the last decade has it witnessed a revival char

acterized by a new level of 'complexity' and a

development. Instead, our intention is to propose
a set of parameters to describe processes that prolific
are increase in meanings and contexts. Not
usually associated with the rather vague term only have various types of 'informality' been
identified, but also a wide range of fields where
'informality'. Our claim is that these parameters
concepts of 'informality' are employed as tools
deliver a more precise picture of what is usually
labeled 'informal'. to explain the functioning of economic, social

This content downloaded from 146.182.9.9 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:04:36 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Peter Herrle / Josefine Fokdal

and spatial urban development processes. In this 2 Informality as a 'sector '

article we intend to question the usefulness of the
The origin of the term 'informal' is widely
term 'informality', and to explore some of the
known and has frequently been reiterated
mostly unquestioned assumptions inherent to it.
From the very beginning, concepts of inforthroughout the body of literature (e. g. Herrle
1982, Komlosy et al. 1997, Hall/Pfeiffer 2000,
mality suffered from the bias caused by looking
Maloney 2004). It may suffice here to trace
at certain phenomena from the 'outside' world.
some of the more influential contributions and
For the observers from the northern hemisphere
of the 1970s it looked like a sheer miracle that
put them in the line of argument of this article.
people who were not represented in labor statis The term 'informal' was coined in a dis
tics were able to survive. Similarly, in the 1980s
course on the economy of developing countries
and 1990s urban planners pointed to slums and as early as the 1970s. It was first suggested in
squatter settlements as solutions for those who a study by Hart (1973) on Ghana and it came
were obviously not serviced by the housing into general usage after being adopted by the
International Labor Office (ILO) in a series of
sector of national and local policies, a fact that
gave rise to the term 'informal settlements'. studies. The dichotomy 'formal' vs. 'informal'
From understanding informality as a 'sector' superseded
of earlier models such as 'modern'
the economy via the 'continuum' concept up vs. to 'traditional' (Weeks 1975), 'capitalist' vs.
the recent re-conceptualizations as 'subaltern
'peasant production systems' (McGee 1971) or
'firm economy' vs. 'bazaar economy' (Geertz
urbanism' (Roy 20102), the term has retained the
1963). The characteristic trait that made the
ambiguity and middle-class outsider perspective
that make it so difficult to accept as a neutral
new term so attractive was that it recognized
theoretical concept. the transformation of pre-colonial economic
This observation has led us to look at the rel structures into those that had - at least to some
evant phenomena from a more 'systemic' view, extent - been 'modernized' without becoming a
bearing in mind that it is not possible to isolate
part of the modern economic sector. Obviously,
'informality' from other important factors such these informal systems provided low incomes for
as the urban social, economic and institutional urban dwellers without formal contracts or social
systems that determine the formation of urbansecurity and thereby helped migrants and poor
development. urban dwellers to survive under harsh economic
and physical conditions. The proximity of 'in
It may not be by chance that the trigger for
our re-consideration of the term 'informal' is
formality' to poverty seemed to justify a concept
of informality as a 'survival economy' (Herrle
not the typical city of the global South showing
1982). Evers and his team (e.g. Evers/Schiel
signs of urban dualism such as slums vs. gated
communities, impoverished masses vs. afflu 1979, Evers 1981 on Jakarta, Evers/Korff 1986
ence, uncontrolled development vs. prestigious
on Bangkok, Evers 1987) went a step further by
developer driven projects etc. Instead, the em
applying the concept of 'subsistence production'
to the productive and consumptive patterns of
pirical ground on which the following arguments
have been developed is the Pearl River Deltathein urban poor. They assumed that through self
south China, a region not explicitly knownhelpfor construction of housing, infrastructure and
loose development controls, weak enforcement the 'acquisition' of land, subsistence production
as a mechanism outside the market economy
of land use and building laws or 'informal' labor
arrangements. plays a major role in providing the urban poor
with basic goods and services.
However, as we concede in retrospect, the
limitation to poverty blanks out a whole range
of contextual conditions and phenomena that

This content downloaded from 146.182.9.9 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:04:36 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Beyond the Urban Informality Discourse: Negotiating Power, Legitimacy and Resources 5

equally escape statistics, formal procedures and by dependent clientele groups from the urban
regulations. Already in the early 1980's, in our poor communities. The further down one looks
study on the informal economies of Davao City on the ladder of middlemen, the smaller the
in the Philippines, we were able to verify Santos' radius becomes, the shorter the duration of the
three types of linkages to the outside world of credit, the higher the risk and the interest rate
'informality', i.e. capital, wholesale and trans charged (cf. Santos 1979, 123-124) and - one
portation (Santos 1979). We also encountered may add - the higher the dependence and the
fairly big enterprises in these (and other) fields, degree of exploitation of the individual informal
which could obviously no longer be labeled enterprise.
as 'survival activities.' They showed signs of The advantage of Santos' approach is that it
an economy of 'scale' - albeit on a modest gives up the biased one-way view on informality
level - but also a complex mixture of regulated and puts it in the framework of a two-tier system
and unregulated, controlled and uncontrolled, of mutual dependence from which both the ur
registered and unregistered elements (Herrle/ ban poor clientele and the middle men benefit.
Lübbe/Rösel 1981 ). What we saw neither fit into He realized that "the 'dualism' identified by so
a simplifying juxtaposition of the 'formal' with many authors is nothing more than the general
the 'informal' nor into the patterns of subsist manifestation of the upper circuit's hegemony,
ence production. Similar observations may have which can be seen in more striking terms in
brought some researchers to see informality as the guise of monopoly, on the one hand, and
a 'continuum' (e.g. Hall/Pfeiffer 2000, 71). To underemployment on the other" (Santos 1979,
our understanding this concept does not capture 27). This is in line with a number of other au
the composite patterns of certain economic thors who pointed at the structural 'symbiosis'
activities, nor does it reflect the importance of (Bienefeld 1975) and the interdependency of the
connectivity between sectors, levels and actors. two circuits (Bose 1974). Building on his earlier
Moreover, it tends to harmonize the imbalances works McGee (2002) also refers to the issue of
and conflicts inherent in the social and economic inter-dependency.
transaction processes involved. While Santos' analysis was correct for a
small part of what is understood by 'informality'
today, namely the poverty-related phenomenon
3 From 'sector'to 'circuit' and economic dependency, he overlooked i)
that certain patterns of informality also occur in
Milton Santos (1979) was among the first to(and circuits) other than those dominated
places
widen the view from 'activities' to 'systems'
by by
poverty and ii) that informality cannot be
describing the mutual dependence of formal and to the economic systems of cities only.
limited
informal economic circuits. He established the One of those areas is certainly the 'informal
model of "the two circuits of the urban econo urban development' discussed below.
my". A chain of middlemen links the informal
circuit with the formal part of the economy.
Key positions in this system are occupied by 4 Informal urban development
wholesalers, transport entrepreneurs and money
lenders who have access to the modern banking In parallel with the declining interest in the
'informal sector' debate in the 1990s, the term
facilities. All three operate in both sectors of
the economy. They possess modern means'informal'
of was adopted by planners, architects
and housing experts. Since then, it has been
storage, credit procurement and the necessary
used to denote 'unplanned', 'irregular' or il
supra-local radius of action to take advantage
of inter-regional price differentials. On the other
legal settlements that are often (but not always)
inhabited by low-income communities and/or
hand their position is secured over the long term

This content downloaded from 146.182.9.9 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:04:36 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Peter Herrle / Josefine Fokdal

rural migrants. The term 'informal settlement'ing millions of people have been urbanized in
superseded a large number of euphemistic termsAsia, Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East
such as 'spontaneous settlements' (Oestereich following this pattern (See Payne 1997,7ff., ES
1980) or 'unplanned settlements' which gave CAP1997, chapter III for general characteristics,
Risbud 1989 on Delhi, India, Wehrmann 2005,
the misleading impression that these settlements
develop 'spontaneously' without planning or 45-46 and 157ff. on Accra, Ghana, Santos 2003,
strategic thinking. In many cases 'informal set 241 ff. on Vilar Carioca, Brazil). What makes this
tlements' illegally occupy private or public land transformation process special is the fact that it
and do not comply with existing subdivision and is widely tolerated by city officials or takes place
building regulations. However, since Turner'sbeyond the control of city authorities, outside
early studies on Lima (Turner 1967,1968,1972)their administrative boundaries.
we know that most of these settlements are far While definitions of informality based on the
from being unplanned, un-organized or irregu legality of land tenure and/or compliance with
lar. In Lima, up to the late 1990s new barriadas land use and building regulations may be easy
were not only planned by professional planners criteria for distinguishing 'informal' settlements
but also coordinated with the city government. from formal ones, again, they do not consider the
Although the early examples of Lima and typical mixture of the 'informal' and the formal,
other places show that there is a 'gray zone' nor do they reflect the ambiguous relationship
of government toleration in 'informal' urban between settlers, intermediaries and city govern
development, the legality of tenure remained an ments that seems to be endemic in contemporary
issue both for political practice and academic urban development in the global South. Moreo
research: For politicians, illegality provided the ver, they also tend to overlook the importance
pretext for massive evictions. Academics such of power relations and power plays between
as Payne (1999, 2002) and Durand-Lasserve/ various urban actors that increasingly define
Royston (2002) embarked on intense research on and constantly re-define the blurred boundaries
tenure issues proving that tenure security can be between the acceptable and the non-acceptable,
reached outside cumbersome and never-ending the legal and the 'not-so-legal'3.
legalization procedures. The importance of legal
izing land tenure for the urban poor was further
emphasized by writers such as Hernando de Soto 5 Informality as a 'way of life'
(2000) who, through a neo-liberal approach,
cultivated a positive view on the 'capacities' of Meanwhile, although not always explicitly ex
the poor. According to this line of argument the pressed, notions of 'informality' have become
stigma of poverty and exclusion could easily be part of a much wider and more theoretical de
overcome, if the potentials of the marginalized bate, encompassing the sensitive and sometimes
were unleashed from restrictive government poli precarious relationship between state organiza
cies and rigid regulations and their interactions tions, civil society, and issues of planning and
were integrated into formal systems. Recogni legitimacy (van Dijk/NoordhoekAVegelin 2002,
tion, legalization and 'regularization' were the Mitlin/Satterthwaite 2004). This has added a new
standard strategies derived for urban policy. dimension to discussions about urban planning
From many countries, other forms of mid issues and local governance (Goethert/Hamdi
dle class informality are reported: In India for 1997, Stratmann 1999) and instigated a new
example, many middle class families live in 'il wave of research into 'informality' culminat
legal subdivisions' in peri-urban neighborhoods ing in declaring informality a 'new way of life'
of large cities. Land is provided by developers (AlSayyad 2004). This statement is reminiscent
who illegally subdivide agricultural land forof Louis Wirth's famous article "Urbanism as a
residential purposes. Large tracts of land hous Way of Life", which drew our attention to "ur

This content downloaded from 146.182.9.9 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:04:36 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Beyond the Urban Informality Discourse: Negotiating Power, Legitimacy and Resources 7

banism" as a "complex of traits making up the actors, and a growing disembeddedness of

characteristic mode of life in cities [...]" (1938, local systems?
7). Whether deliberately or not, AlSayyad's
Following Roy (2005), Altrock (2010) suggests a
statement also recalls Jocano's well-known
'conceded informality'4 approach, which points
book on 'Slums as a Way of Life' portraying
at the way by which privileges are granted or
the lives of slum dwellers in the Philippines
negotiated in direct and indirect ways, politi
(Jocano 1975). All three authors generalize
cized and prone to conflicts. This comes quite
what had previously been considered a marginal
close to what we have earlier discussed as key
phenomenon. By declaring urbanism, slums,
determining factors in hybrid local governance
and informality a "way of life," they include a
systems (Herrle et al. 2005).
seemingly marginal phenomenon, which had
In terms of placing the discussion of 'infor
earlier been discussed along the narrow paths
mality' into the larger context of governance,
of physical or economic models, into a broader
social-science context.
Etzold et al. define 'informality' as a "continuum
of interrelated social processes and practices
According to AlSayyad/Roy urban informal
with different degrees and qualities of (in)
ity is "an urban logic". "It is a process of struc
formality" (2009, 4). They suggest a concept
turation that constitutes the rules of the game
of "informality as agency", which, based on
determining the nature of transaction between
individuals and institutions and between insti
Misztal (2000), highlights the importance of
social interaction. Etzold et al. introduce the term
tutions" (2004, 5). Taking up Wirth's language,
'arena' to denote the economic, social, temporal
it has also been epitomized as a "new mode of
and physical 'space' that is under consideration.
urban existence" (2004, 5). AlSayyad and Roy
Their article also concedes that "the question
go on to argue that urban informality as "a co
what is 'informal' and what is formal, [...] can
herent mode of life in an era of liberalization"
only be answered in perspective of the actors
is not really new, but has existed since the Mid
involved" (2009, 9). Why then re-affirm the
dle Ages and has persisted in many parts of the
term 'informality' with a concept that obviously
developing world.
transcends its origins by offering a much wider
The review presented above raises a number
and more coherent analytical framework?
of questions:
Thus, the more we open the term 'informality'
- Does 'informality' relate to phenomena only to an ever wider range of aspects of urban life,
in an 'era of liberalization'? Or does it exist the more difficult it seems to keep it operational
as an almost ubiquitous aspect of any urban- not only in empirical but also in theoretical
life independent of its political or economic terms. If almost everything becomes 'informal'
of even historical formation? - which obviously seems necessary - the widen
- Is there really something persisting? Or hasing itself may eventually erode and destroy the
'informality' always - as AlSayyad/Royusefulness of the term.
(2004) rightly concede - been there as an
integral part of urban formations?
- If 'informality' is no longer associated with 6 Informality - a myth?
urban poverty nor with illegality, nor with the
control of processes, as in the early days of
A myth typically tries to provide an explanation
the debate, what is it then? for things that are intransparent for one reason
- How can we operationalize the term 'infor or the other. Frequently myths help sustain tradi
mality' as a "mode of life" or a "mode oftions. In retrospect, i. e. once myths have been
urbanization" (Roy 2005, 147) in an era of
revealed as such, they seem to have prevented a
globalization of production, growing impormore rational view on certain phenomena, fresh
tance of networks, changing landscapes of thinking and new concepts. By definition, myths

This content downloaded from 146.182.9.9 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:04:36 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Peter Herrle / Josefine Fokdal

have to have a 'soft' core and be conservative.

There is an increasing recognition of the
Without a certain degree of vagueness they
importance of connectivity of various urban
would lose their attractiveness. Why then is subsystems
the (at various levels) including interac
concept of 'informality' a myth? tion between systems as factors determining the
To our understanding the term 'informality'
patterns of how resources are distributed and how
helps sustain myths about urban phenomena access
for to services in cities is granted; this calls for
a number of reasons: a shift of interest toward governance processes.
As many authors have stated - informality is
- The proliferation of new 'informalities' of
nothing new. As an un- or less regulated part of
fered in recent writings provides ample evi
state organization, it has been part of the every
dence of the structural ambiguity of the term
day urban life in societies (not only in urban ar
and its ever-changing formations. Current
eas) throughout history. Regulative mechanisms
concepts of 'informality' cross the border of
were often kept to a minimum in ancient Asian
the conventional stringent definitions at the
as well as medieval European cities5. Societies
cost of giving up the claim for an exactness
were organized around 'informal' arrangements.
and clarity. Some of them obviously play with
Despite all efforts to formalize urban life and
the vagueness of connotations and meanings
development, the formal systems seem to rep
in different fields of knowledge.
resent just the tip of the iceberg on a broad base
- The concept still retains the problematic
of all kinds of unregulated, partly regulated or
legacy of its founders: If not clearly defined
(and narrowed down to operational terms), de-regulated subsystems of the urban society.6
'informality' remains something inside the
'black box'. We do not know exactly what is
happening inside, but we assume that there 7 Beyond informality
must be something that does not follow the
logic of the outside. In trying to describe the
If we leave the inherent deterministic conno
inside we find ourselves among unique tation
cir of the formal-informal dichotomy (or
cumstances that cannot easily be generalized.
the 'continuum' as its modification) behind,
- There is a tricky mechanism in using the
we realize that in cities there are a number of
concept 'formal-informal': It almost inevita
mechanisms or subsystems that, in a more or
bly re-establishes a dichotomy that so many
less permanent way, organize and secure the
observers claim to have overcome.
(unequal) distribution of resources, the (unequal)
Our conclusion has not been to discard the at access to services and the (unequal) distribution
of power. Depending on the political system,
tempts to further define and develop coherent
economic conditions, social and cultural tradi
concepts of 'informality' for specific sub-groups
tions, effectiveness of the administration etc.
of an urban society, but rather to move towards
a more complex explanatory model that tries there may be countless variations in how the
result is achieved, but in most cases there is a
to avoid the latent ambiguity of the informality
debate. For a number of reasons the model we constant process of negotiation.
suggest cannot be developed from 'inside' the What we see here appears as a reiteration of
informality discourse. These reasons include: the 1980s debate, when the term 'informality'
As emphasized in the recent informality was branded as an explanation of why so many
discourse, phenomena of 'informality' occur people still exist in cities with staggering econo
beyond poverty and exclusion, economy andmies and live under devastating living condi
settlement, private and public, state and civil tions. Currently we are encountering a similar
society. Following the recent debate, the term 'miracle' at the collective level. Why are cities
describes a 'mode' shaping physical as well asstill functioning (and continuing to be attractive)
social and political environments in cities. although their government systems are weak,

This content downloaded from 146.182.9.9 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:04:36 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Beyond the Urban Informality Discourse: Negotiating Power, Legitimacy and Resources 9
plans are not implemented, their population
shows an increasing social divide, and a coherent
management structure is not in place? The gen
eral experience is that in many countries, large
cities would long have collapsed, had there not
been certain clandestine factors keeping them
together and granting economic progress and a
minimum of coherence (cf. Mertins 2009, 59).
The reason seems to be that cities are being
produced by not just one group nor are they
planned and implemented by planners or politi
cians alone; they are rather the common product
of a wide range of actors, some of which are
known and understood, others are less known,
but play an equally important role. The result
is by no means a neutral one, it is rather based
on the power play and 'negotiation' between
'collective actors' as it has been suggested by
scholars such as Scharpf (1997) and earlier by
Mayntz (1963). Herrle et al. (2006) argue that
negotiation and consensus-building form vital
parts of contemporary local governance systems
particularly in the global South. This view is
also reflected in propositions of the new insti
tutionalism which ascribes conflicting interests
to actors that are interdependent. A theoretical
concept supporting our approach is also the inter
institutional model of clientelistic relationships
developed by Pierre (1999) and DiGaetano/
Strom (2003) and consolidated by Ley (2010).
Negotiation as we understand this term does
not necessarily involve face-to-face contact:
There may be numerous forms of indirect in
fluence on decision-making processes in which
media coverage, financial pressure, mobilization
of masses may sometimes be the better than
those made by representatives at the negotiating
table (see also Benz 2007). In the governance
discourse of negotiations, it is most often as
sumed that the aim of negotiations is to achieve
an optimized situation for the general public
(Benz 2007) however this is not always the
case. As found in our research in the PRD, ne
gotiations between several stakeholders are often
neither a matter of acting nor of solely reacting,
but rather something in between. Furthermore,
the individual interest is often the motivator and
This content downloaded from 146.182.9.9 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:04:36 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
the common profit is just a side product of the
maximized individual gain, as also described by
Börzel (2007). The concept proposed in chapter
8 draws on these approaches.
8 The re gime-matrix: power; legitimacy,
resources
The regional focus of studies on 'info
mainly been on Latin America, Sout
the Middle East (AlSayyad/Roy 2004
al. 2009, de Soto 2000) and on count
significant degree of social exclusion
poverty. In our study on the Pearl
(PRD) in South China, we observed
that may well be attributed to wha
labeled as 'informal': tolerated and s
violation of building regulations,
sponsibilities, illegal land and labo
intransparent and fragmented decis
procedures, uncontrolled transfer o
rights etc. However, in this environm
urban poverty nor subsistence produ
significant role. If at all, 'informalit
tected as a mode of urbanity inheren
patterns and processes. Under the
cumstances of Chinese economic liberalization
since the mid 1980s and the special conditions
of the Pearl River Delta it seems that a certain
level of de-regulation was conducive to local
initiative and economic growth. Especially the
'urban villages' (chéng zhong cüri) as parts of
cities or located in peri-urban areas enjoy certain
privileges and benefit from loose control (see
Herrle et al. 2008).
Our case of the urban villages in the PRD
provides a good example for 'negotiated' assets.
Urban villagers, as a collective, and based on
their collective legitimacy (and as long as they
are 'defined' as rural) hold large resources of
land as an economic asset as well as a source
of power (Wu 2009, Liu et al. 2010, see also
Fokdal/Herrle 2010 for a summary account
on land legislation and negotiation processes).
Investors and developers from Hong Kong
seek access to these resources, as do the local
 Peter Herrle / Josefine Fokdal

authorities. However, the process of leasing these

land processes occur. Drawing on an earlier at
directly to investors and establishing industries
tempt (Herrle et al. 2006) and backed up by our
(circumventing the local government) is illegal.
research in the Pearl River Delta we suggest a
Moreover, on an individual level, the villagers
set of three parameters that may help to describe
the process of negotiation more precisely than
are seeking to optimize their profit by building
housing for legal and illegal migrants working
'informality' approaches can: access to 1) power,
in the surrounding industries. The emerging 2) legitimacy, and 3) resources. They form the
structures supersede the building regulationskeyin parameters of local governance systems
terms of height, densities, land use etc. The(Herrle
vil et al. 2006) and local regimes. Typi
cally, governance systems in large urban areas
lagers thereby provide a service (housing) that
show a composite pattern of antagonistic actors
is solving the housing problem of huge numbers
of migrants who are not taken care of by the collectively
lo providing inputs related to these
cal government. Since economic developmentparameters in a more or less complementary
is generally welcome, local governments tend
way that keeps the system as a whole together.
to tolerate the situation, even though it impliesThere may be more factors currently in use
to describe the division of actors and their roles
violations of existing regulations and constitutes
(see Risse et al. 2007). We assume, however, that
'informal' processes. In fact, they are actively
involved in those negotiation processes. They
the three parameters shown in this matrix are
benefit from the informal housing provision
sufficient to adequately depict specific constella
since it lowers the risks of social unrest from tions of actors. For our purpose we have arranged
the side of migrant workers and at the same
these three parameters in a matrix by combining
time saves resources for investment in basic inthem with a set of actors. It is meant to capture
'formal' as well as 'informal' interactions and
frastructure (transportation, energy etc.) needed
the key actors deriving from an actor analysis.
for the booming economy. The emerging system
can be interpreted as a fragile and permanently
It may be worth noting that what is presented
below is not a normative model, but a matrix
re-negotiated balance of interests involving vil
lage collectives, investors/developers and local
displaying roles and relationships of various ac
governments as the key actors. It is a process that
tors in a certain field. There is neither an attempt
to derive a 'best practice' nor to conclude that
is self-'regulated' in the sense that it is driven by
certain combinations of distributions of assets
its inherent dynamics and ever changing rules,
are better compared to others. What has been
and constantly oscillating between what is often
labeled as formal or 'informal'. categorized as 'formal' or 'informal' appears as
Obviously, the classical concepts of 'infora property or capacity ascribed to a certain group
of actors. As a standard matrix to demonstrate
mality' cannot capture a situation as described
the concept we have correlated the parameters
above. This is one of the reasons why we resorted
to regime theory approaches as suggested by three groups of generalized actors7 taken
with
Stone (1989, 1993). Although the growthfrom
ma our study on the Pearl River Delta. They
chine and the importance of the business sector
present a simplified set of actors that may well
in the USA have influenced the regime theory
be modified and specified from case to case.
Inasmuch as a setup of actors and their inter
approach suggested by Stone, it seems to provide
play of roles and activities is able to grant basic
a valuable entry point for explaining the general
modalities of actors, their mutual relationships
standards of security, social wellbeing, equity
and general economic prosperity, they are usu
and interactions. According to Stone, the regime
where interests and actors meet constitutes for ally accepted as a way to organize resources,
mal and informal negotiation processes (1993).power and legitimacy in an efficient albeit com
plex and sometimes confusing way. Moreover,
Starting from Stone's approach we felt it nec
a 'composite' set of actors making differing
essary to further structure the regimes in which

This content downloaded from 146.182.9.9 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:04:36 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Beyond the Urban Informality Discourse: Negotiating Power, Legitimacy and Resources 11

State Investors, Developers Urban villages

(City government) as collectives

Power Power to plan and imple Power through capital to Power to implement
ment infrastructure, to negotiate with the city gov projects and manage firms
acquire land classified ernment
as and with the urban (global network), occa
villages.
'rural', to demolish illegal sionally strong negotiation
housing. power vis-à-vis city govt,
through media support.
Legitimacy Strong legal position by Limited (guarantor for Strong legitimacy base in
law. Decisions not always progress and modernity). village collectives/village
accepted by local people committees avoiding social
and villagers, pressure on unrest by housing migrants
participation, pressure on - allow for illegal building
modernization processes. and land use.

Resources Rich but not unlimited, Capital, knowledge. Limited financial resources
dependent on overall eco (based on revenues from
nomic situation and rev collectively run businesses
enues from land leasing of and rented factory build
land classified as 'urban'. ings).
Land (rural or EDL* - as
the most important asset is
dwindling).
High level of influence on the negotiation process
Moderate level of influence on the negotiation process
Low level of influence on the negotiation process
No or limited influence on the negotiation process

* The farmlands of former rural collectives are acquired by the city government and turned into state-owned land
(urban land). In return, the Guangdong provincial government requires 8-12% of the former farmland to be returned
to the urban village as economic development land (EDL) (Wu 2009, Liu et al. 2010)

Fig. 1: The regime matrix: power, legitimacy, resources, a simplified example from the Pearl River Delta

contributions to general welfare and basic values
seems to form the rule rather than the exception
in the governance of many countries including
Europe8 and North America. It is typical that
the equilibrium between actors and the level
of their command over power, legitimacy and
resources cannot be kept static for a long time.
Although in a democratic state power is assumed
to be vested with the government, there is plenty
of room for investors, pressure groups and the
civil society to exercise power and thereby push
their own interests to the forefront. Power is also
needed to enforce regulations and maintain law
and order.

It is constantly being re-negotiated and part of The legitimacy parameter is an important

the development process itself.
The power parameter tells us something about
the distribution of power between various actor
groups. Without a minimum of power there is no
implementation of projects and on the other hand
no resistance against power from other groups.
asset when it comes to implementation. In most
countries law-based legitimacy is not sufficient,
and even powerful actors would risk the break
out of open conflicts if they have no legitimacy
base within the civil society or other powerful
groups. Typically, in many cities of the global

This content downloaded from 146.182.9.9 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:04:36 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Peter Herrle / Josefine Fokdal

South legitimacy bases are fragmented not onlying an economic phenomenon to include spatial
structures and processes, towards 'a new way of
along party lines but also within social, ethnic
and economic groupings. This may lead to life',
al it has become a blurred term - a myth. What
ternative arrangements and alliances. has often been defined as 'informality' seems
The resources parameter indicates the availto be an almost ubiquitous aspect of any urban
ability of human, technical and financial re life independent from its political or economic
or even historical formation.
sources (incl. information) needed to provide
services and implement projects. In many cases Therefore, we suggest moving away from
local governments are poor both in terms theof term 'informal' with its inherent duality and
poverty connotations, towards defining negotia
technical capacity and human resources and have
tion processes by discussing related phenom
to rely on financial support from investors. This
in turn might undermine their legitimacy basisena through a set of three parameters, namely:
with the civil society or certain groups therein.
power, legitimacy, and resources and put these in
Obviously in cases where 'informality' be the framework of an actor analysis. It may still
be too early to say whether these three dimen
comes immoral, criminal and detrimental to gen
erally accepted values of human development,sions will suffice to capture urban development
trends elsewhere, but at least for the case of the
or in the situation of 'failing states' the matrix
Pearl River Delta we claim their usefulness for
shows a shift of all three assets, i.e. power,
legitimacy and resources towards fragmentedunderstanding the urban dynamics. What we
(maybe rivaling) non-state actors. find in the PRD provides an example for vari
We are aware that the parameters presented ous stages of development and different forms
of territorial organization of resources. It keeps
here are not new. They have been brought up in
various discourses. However, in the context of
systems incoherent, fluid and versatile, provid
our discussion they have the potential to reveal ing the systemic potentials to quickly adapt local
the dynamic relationships between actors andeconomies and social systems as well as physi
translate into more precise terms what has been cal structures to global forces of development.
disguised as 'informality'. Now, where is 'infor The strength of those flexible systems derives
from their ability to adapt and change and - at
mality', after all? As has been said at the outset
of this paper: Our claim is not to add another the same time - conserve or develop the stabil
ity and the level of coherence needed to create
definition for 'informality' but rather to develop
a tool that contributes to a better understandinga reliable framework for social and economic
of the processes underlying phenomena superinteraction and investment. The emerging pat
ficially labeled as 'informal'. terns are characterized by permanent negotiation
among stakeholders and constantly shifting
power relations.
9 Conclusion In such an environment the search for 'infor
mality' becomes a futile and obsolete exercise,
In rapidly changing societies, the half-value the term itself loses its relevance as an explana
period of theoretical constructs describing tory model. In as much as basic characteristics
certain aspects of urban formations is becomof urban development in the Pearl River Delta
ing shorter. This also applies to the concept of
are also valid for contemporary urban develop
urban 'informality' as it has developed since ments elsewhere we believe that it may be worth
the 1970s. Many of the 'informality' conceptsapplying the tool to other countries as well and
are transcending the original dichotomy and the
thereby developing it further.
notion of urban poverty that has been associ
ated with it in the early writings. As the term
'informality' has developed from solely defin

This content downloaded from 146.182.9.9 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:04:36 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Beyond the Urban Informality Discourse: Negotiating Power, Legitimacy and Resources

References Evers, H.-D. andKorff,R. (1986): Urban Subsistence

AlSayyad, Ν. (2004): Urban Informality as a "New"
Way of Life. In: AlSayyad, N. and Roy, A. (eds.):
Urban Informality. Transnational Perspectives
from the Middle East, Latin America and South
Africa. Lanham, Maryland, 7-30.
Production in Bangkok. In: Development - Jour
nal of the Society for International Development
4, 50-55.
Evers, H.-D. and Schiel, T. (1979): Expropriation der
unmittelbaren Produzenten oder Ausdehnung der
Subsistenzwirtschaft - Thesen zur bäuerlichen

AlSayyad, N. and Roy, A. (2004): Urban Informal und städtischen Subsistenzreproduktion. In: Ar
ity. Transnational Perspectives from the Middle beitsgruppe Bielefelder Entwicklungssoziologen
East, Latin America and South Africa. Lanham, (eds.): Subsistenzreproduktion und Akkumulati
Maryland. on. Saarbrücken, 279ff.
Benz, A. (2007): Verhandlungen. In: Benz, A. et Fokdal, J. and Herrle, P. (2010): Negotiated Space:
al. (eds.): Handbuch Governance. Wiesbaden, Urban Villages in the Pearl River Delta. In: Tria
106-118. log 102/103, 10-15.
Bienefeld, M. (1975): The Informal Sector and Geertz, C. (1963): Peddlers and Princes. Social
Peripheral Capitalism: The Case of Tansania. In: Change and Economic Modernization in Two
Institute of Development Studies Bulletin 6(3), Indonesian Towns. Chicago.
53-73. Goethert, R. (2005): Planning with People - Challeng
Bose, A.N. (1974): The Informal Sector in Calcutta es to the Paradigm. In: Herrle, P. and Walther, U.-J.
Metropolitan Economy. In: WEP Urbanization (eds.): Socially Inclusive Cities. Münster, 9-22.
and Employment Research Program (eds.): Work Goethert, R. and Hamdi, N. (1997): Action Planning
ing Paper 5. Geneva. for Cities: A Guide to Community Practice. West
Börzel, T. (2007): Regieren ohne den Schatten der Sussex, England.
Hierarchie: Ein modernisierungstheoretischerHall, P. and Pfeiffer, U. (2000): Urban Future 21: A
Fehlschluss? In: Risse, T. and Lehmkuhl, U. Global Agenda for Twenty-first Century Cities.
New York.
(eds.): Regieren ohne Staat? Governance in
Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit. Baden-Baden, Hart, K. (1973): Informal Income Opportunities
41-63. and Urban Employment in Ghana. In: Journal of
De Soto, H. (2000): The Mystery of Capital: Why Modern African Studies, March, 61-89.
Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Ev Herrle, P. (1982): The Informal Sector: Survival
erywhere Else. New York. Economy in the Third World. In: Economics.
A Biannual Collection of Recent German Con
DiGaetano, A. and Strom, E. (2003): Comparative
Urban Governance: An Integrated Approach. In: tributions to the Field of Economic Science 26,
Urban Affairs Review 38(3), 356-395. 109-126.

Durand-Lasserve, A. and Royston, L. (2002): HoldHerrle, P., Lübbe, H. and Rosei, J. (1981): Slums
ing Their Ground: Secure Land Tenure for the und Squatter-Siedlungen. Thesen zur Stadtent
Urban Poor in Developing Countries. London. wicklung und Stadtplanung in der Dritten Welt.
ESCAP (1997): Urban Land Policies for the Uniniti Stuttgart.
ated. Retrieved 5 October 2011, from http://www. Herrle, P. and Walther, U.-J. (2005): Socially Inclu
sive Cities. Münster.
unescap.org/huset/land_policies/index.htm
Etzold, Β., Bohle, H.-G., Keck, M. and Zingel, W Herrle, P., Jachnow, A. and Ley, Α. (2006): The
P. (2009 ): Informality as Agency - Negotiating Metropolises of the South: Laboratory for Inno
Food Security in Dhaka. In: Die Erde 140(1), vation? Towards Better Management with New
3-24. Alliances. Development and Peace Foundation
Evers, H.-D. (1981): The Contribution of Urban (ed.), Policy Paper 25.
Subsistence to Incomes of Jakarta. In: Bulletin Herrle, P., Ipsen, D., Nebel, S., and Weichler, H.
of the Indonesian Economic Studies 17, 89-96. (2008): Wie Bauern die mega-urbane Landschaft
Evers, H.-D. (1987): Subsistenzproduktion, Markt in Südchina prägen. Zur Rolle der „Urban Vil
und Staat. Der sog. Bielefelder Verflechtungsan lages" bei der Entwicklung des Perflussdeltas. In:
satz. In: Geographische Rundschau 39,136-140. Geographische Rundschau 11, 38-45.

This content downloaded from 146.182.9.9 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:04:36 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Peter Herrle / Josefine Fokdal

Pierre, J. (1999): Model of Urban Governance. The

Jocano, F.L. (1975): Slum as a Way of Life. A Study
of Coping Behavior in an Urban Environment. Institutional Dimension of Urban Politics. In:
Quezon City. Urban Affairs Review 34(3), 372-396.
Risse, T. and Lehmkuhl, U. (2007): Regieren ohne
Komlosy, Α., Parnreiter, C., Stacher, I. and Zimmer
mann, S. (1997): Der informelle Sektor: Kon Staat? Governance in Räumen begrenzter Staat
zepte, Widersprüche und Debatten. In: Komlosy, lichkeit. In: Risse, T. and Lehmkuhl, U. (eds.):
A. et al. (eds.): Ungeregelt und unterbezahlt. Der Regieren ohne Staat? Governance in Räumen
Informelle Sektor in der Weltwirtschaft. Frank begrenzter Staatlichkeit. Baden-Baden, 13-37.
furt, Wien, 9-30. Rostalski, M. (2010): Gelebte Orte - Geplante Stadt.
Ley, Α. (2010): Housing as Governance. InterfacesInformelle Nutzung urbaner Räume und parti
between Local Government and Civil Society Orzipative Stadtentwicklung. Das RAW-Gelände
ganisations in Cape Town, South Africa. Münster. in Berlin. Unpublished PhD thesis. Bauhaus
Liu, Y„ He, S., Wu, F. and Webster, C. (2010): UrUniversität Weimar.
ban Villages under China's Rapid Urbanization: Risbud, N. (1989): Informal Sector Land Delivery
Unregulated Assets and Transnational Neighbourand Servicing in Delhi. Report prepared by the
hoods. In: Habitat International 32, 135-144. Centre for Environmental Planning and Technol
Maloney, W.F. (2004): Informality Revisited, Washogy, Ahmedabad for USAID. Delhi
ington (USA). Roy, A. (2005): Urban Informality. Towards an Epis
Mayntz, R. (1963): Soziologie der Organisation. temology of Planning. In: Journal of the American
Hamburg. Planning Association (JAPA) 71,147-158.
McGee, T.G. (1971): The Urbanization Process in Santos, M. (1979): The Shared Space. The Two Cir
the Third World. Explorations in Search of a cuits of The Urban Economy in Underdeveloped
Theory. London. Countries. London.
McGee, T.G. (2002): Reconstructing the Southeast Santos, P. (2003): Neue Instrumente der Stadtpla
Asia City in an Era of Volatile Globalization. In: nung in Brasilien. Das Ende der illegalen Stadt?
Asian Journal of Social Science 30(1), 8-27. Münster.

Mertins, G. (2009): Megacities in Lateinameri Scharpf, F.W. (1997): Games Real Actors Play. Ac
ka: Informalität und Unsicherheit als zentrale tor-Centered Institutionalism in Policy Research.
Probleme von Governance und Steuerung. In:Boulder/Oxford.
Technikfolgenabschätzung - Theorie und Praxis Stone, C.N. (1989): Regime Politics. Governing
18(1), 52-61. Atlanta, 1946-1988. Lawrence, Kansas.
Mitlin, D. and Satterthwaite, D. (2004): The Role of
Stone, C.N. (1993): Urban Regimes and the Capacity
Local and Extra-local Organizations. In: Mitlin, to Govern: A Political Economy Approach. In:
D. and Satterthwaite, D. (eds.): EmpoweringJournal of Urban Affairs 15, 1-28.
Squatter Citizen. London, 278-306. Stratmann, B. (1999): Stadtentwicklung in globalen
Misztal, B.A. (2000): Informality: Social Theory and
Zeiten. Lokale Strategien, städtische Lebensqua
Contemporary Practice. London. lität und Globalisierung. Basel.
Oestereich, J. (1980): Elendsquartiere und WachsTurner, J.F.C. (1967): Barriers and Channels for
tumspole. Beiträge zur räumlichen Planung in derHousing Development in Modernizing Countries.
Dritten Welt. Köln. In: Journal of the American Institute of Planners
Payne, G.K. (1997): Urban Land Tenure and Prop 3, 167-180.
erty Rights in Developing Countries. A Review.Turner, J.F.C. (1968): Housing Priorities, Settlements
London. Patterns and Urban Development in Modernizing
Payne, G.K. (ed.) (1999): Making Common Ground.Countries. In: Journal of the American Institute
Public-Private Partnerships in Land for Housing. of Planners 6, 354-363.
London. Turner, J.F.C. (1972): Housing as a Verb. In: Turner,
Payne, G.K. (2002): Land, Rights and Innovation.J.F.C, and Fichter, R. (eds.): Freedom to Build.
Improving Tenure Security for the Urban Poor. Dweller Control of the Housing Process. London,
London. 148-175.

This content downloaded from 146.182.9.9 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:04:36 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Beyond the Urban Informality Discourse: Negotiating Power, Legitimacy and Resources

Van Dijk, M.P., Noordhoek, M., and Wegelin, E. Wirth, L. (1938): Urbanism as a Way of Life. In:
(eds.) (2002): Governing Cities: New Institutional The American Journal of Sociology 44(1), 1-24.
Forms in Developing Countries and Transitional Wu, F. (2009): Land Development, Inequality and
Economies. London. Urban Villages in China. In: International Journal
Weber, M. (1921): Die nichtlegitime Herrschaft
of Urban and Regional Research 33(4), 885-889.
(Typologie der Städte). In: Archiv für Sozialwis
senschaft und Sozialpolitik 47, 621ff.
Authors: Prof. Dr. Peter Herrle, Habitat Unit A53, Faculty
Weeks, J. (1975): Policies for Expanding Employ
VI, Planning - Building - Environment Berlin, Institute
ment in the Informal Urban Sector of Develop
of Technology, Straße des 17. Juni 152, 10623 Berlin,
ing Countries. In: International Labour Review
E-Mail: peter.herrle@tu-berlin.de
111(1), 1-13. Josefine Fokdal, Habitat Unit A53, Faculty VI, Planning
Wehrmann, Β. (2005): Landkonflikte im Urbanen - Building - Environment Berlin, Institute of Technology,
und peri-urbanen Raum von Großstädten in Ent Straße des 17. Juni 152, 10623 Berlin, E-Mail: josefine.
fokdal@tu-berlin.de
wicklungsländern. Mit Beispielen aus Accra und
Pnom Penh. Münster.

1 This article presents thoughts that have been developed in a research project on Urban Villages in the Pearl Ri
Delta within the framework of a DFG Priority Program on „Megacities - Megachallenge. The Informal Dynam
of Global Change". We wish to acknowledge the support provided by the DFG.
2 Ananya Roy on a colloquium of Priority Program „Megacities - Megachallenge. The Informal Dynamics of Glob
Change" in Berlin on May 10-11, 2010.
3 In many countries where an official land title is beyond the reach of poor settlers, paying water or electricity bills i
a common way to create some sort of tenure security. Subletting of structures in settlements on illegally occup
land is another form of the blend of legal with illegal. "Invasions" that are publicly announced and even invit
by the mayor as was practiced in Lima in the 1990s (Klaus Teschner, personal communication 1999) are a way
guiding development through 'informal' planning.
4 Uwe Altrock on a colloquium of the DFG funded Priority Program "Megacities - Megachallenge. The Inform
Dynamics of Global Change" in Berlin on May 10-11, 2010.
5 Interestingly Max Weber's writings on the city ( 1921 ) appeared under the title „Die nichtlegitime Herrschaft" [
Illegitimate Mode of Rule]. Weber saw the medieval bourgeois „Zweckverband" as emerging outside the traditio
legitimate patrimonial system - i.e. in terms of the formal-informal dichotomy as something 'informal'.
6 Goethert (2005, 19) asks himself: "The customary perspective has been from the formal sector. But in the cont
of our helplessness and the dominant role of the informal [sic!], who then is excluding whom? Perhaps it is us,
minority formal sector of development planners that are the excluded and irrelevant?"
7 For the purpose of simplification we have defined the actors according to the Chinese system, however, we ar
aware of the dynamics and moving actors, shifting roles etc. (see Ley 2010).
8 Rostalski in his dissertation (2010) provided a detailed analysis about the inter-relationship between formal urb
planning and informal occupation in the process of re-developing an abandoned 19th century industrial area i
Berlin, the RAW-area.

This content downloaded from 146.182.9.9 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:04:36 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms