This article revisits the notion of radical planning from the standpoint of the global South. Emerging struggles for citizenship in the global South, seasoned by the complexities of state—citizen relations within colonial and post-colonial regimes, offer an historicized view indispensable to counter-hegemonic planning practices. The article articulates the notion of insurgent planning as radical planning practices that respond to neoliberal specifics of dominance through inclusion — that is, inclusive governance. It characterizes the guiding principles for insurgent planning practices as counter-hegemonic, transgressive and imaginative. The article contributes to two current conversations within planning scholarship: on the implication of grassroots insurgent citizenship for planning, and on (de)colonization of planning theory.

This article is concerned with the South African state's adoption of global neoliberal ideology and how this contributes to the casualization of labor. While most research has examined labor casualization with respect to the behavior of private sector companies and firms, this article examines the behavior of the public sector. Taking the example of Cape Town's municipal government, known as the unicity, and its strategies for collecting waste in black townships, I discuss the full cost recovery principles of the municipal government and the ways in which local governments, like private sector firms, further the casualization of labor. That is, the consequence of recovering costs in part by promoting short-term contracts for labor paid at minimum wage under precarious conditions.The article focuses on the 1997±2001 period and demonstrates how government in its post-apartheid moment mobilized patriarchal gender ideologies as well as the rhetoric of voluntarism and skill acquisition to justify the cheap or unpaid labor of women as casual laborers or volunteers in waste collection. Such a conjuncture of privatization and patriarchy serves the interests of capitalism through forms of domination exploiting race and gender.The article relies on secondary information as well as on the field information gathered in Cape Town in the summers of 2001 and 2002 1 and updated by correspondence in 2003. First-hand information includes a series of open-ended and semi-structured interviews with the City officials at the unicity, with the private company operators and individuals contracted for waste removal in the informal sector townships, and with community members involved in the various waste collection schemes described here.The organization of this article is as follows. The first section provides a brief outline of the legacies of apartheid with respect to labor casualization and the stratification of the anonymous reviewers of IJURR for their valuable comments on earlier drafts of this article. The article's shortcomings remain the author's responsibility.1 The interviews for this project were conducted in the summer of 2001 by the author and were followed up by her student assistant, Nicole Lamers, in the summer of 2002.2 Black men who were hired as migrant laborers were required to leave their wives and children behind in homelands and be shacked with other men in overcrowded, single-room occupancies called hostels (Mamphela, 1993). Consequently, black women who were unable to earn a living in the impoverished homelands and came to the cities, sometimes with all or part of their families, to be with their husbands or to look for a source of income, were illegal and vulnerable to arrest and expulsion. Most black women found informal employment as domestic workers and, deprived of their own families, were housed with whites to care for their households. But others set up their makeshift shacks in areas adjacent to hostels and black townships and made their labor available cheaply and flexibly as a massive urban reserve la...

No abstract

To achieve a world-class city capable of attracting business in a competitive global market, the municipal government of Cape Town, South Africa, like many cities of the global North, has adopted a model of urban revitalization popularized by New York City: business or city improvement districts (BIDs or CIDs). By examining CIDs in city center Cape Town, the paper casts light on the socio-spatial relationship facilitating the neoliberal post-apartheid regime and its governance. Analyzing discursive and spatial practices of Cape Town Partnership, the managing body of downtown CIDs, from 2000 to 2006, the paper reveals its difficulties in stabilizing the socio-spatial relations of a transnationalizing urban revitalization strategy and rejects the view of CIDS as simply a global roll-out of neoliberal urban policies. It highlights how CIDs are challenged from both within and outside of their managing structures by contentious local issues, and in particular by vast social inequalities and citizens' historical struggle for inclusive citizenship and the right to the city. Whether and how CIDs' inherent limitations can be overcome to address socio-spatial inequalities is an open question.

No abstract