Over the last two decades a rich and diverse body of literature has emerged which uses the ‘double movement’ to analyse social, political and economic change in the global South. The main aims of this article are to expand the boundaries of this scholarship and improve our understanding of how to use the concept to analyse capitalist development in the region. It seeks to achieve this by explaining and extending the original formulation of the double movement, creating a dialogue between scholars who follow alternative readings of the concept, and proposing a revised formulation which builds on the existing literature while moving in new directions. The article concludes by signposting potentially fruitful areas of Polanyian analysis.

Interest in coproduction has continued to grow since Elinor Ostrom introduced the concept to the development scholarship two decades ago. The idea that multiple actors often interact to coproduce public goods and services helped shift development thinking away from one-size-fits-all policy prescriptions based on free market principles to a more nuanced position that recognizes organizational and institutional diversity.However, while Ostrom's concept of coproduction provides a useful starting point to think about how states and societies interact to deliver public goods and services, it fails to capture the complexity and significance of the process. The diverse scholarship that has extended and critiqued her work has provided a fuller picture. Yet, important gaps remain. The principal aim of this article is to fill some of these gaps and expand the boundaries of coproduction research and analysis. Drawing on qualitative research on water services and management in Ecuador, it focuses on two interrelated issues that are overlooked or underdeveloped in the existing literature. The first relates to the history of coproduction. The article shows that coproduction is more deeply rooted in capitalist development than commonly believed, and historical events have a significant bearing on contemporary politics. The second concerns autonomy. The essay shows that coproduction simultaneously promotes engagement with and autonomy from the state, and that this tension generates political struggle and change. More broadly, the article casts fresh light on the politics of public goods and services in the Global South, especially on the political impact of collective social participation in the process.

Land reform was one of the most important policies introduced in Latin America in the twentieth century and remains high on the political agenda due to sustained pressure from rural social movements. Improving our understanding of the issue therefore remains a pressing concern. This paper responds to this need by proposing a new theoretical framework to explore land reform and providing a fresh analysis of historical and contemporary land struggles in Ecuador. Drawing on the pioneering work of Karl Polanyi, the paper characterizes these struggles as the attempt to increase the social and political control of land in the face of mounting commodification. The movement started in the 1960s and remains evident in Ecuador today. Exploring land reform in Ecuador from this theoretical perspective provides new insight into land struggles in the country and contributes to debates over land reforms of the past and present elsewhere in the Global South.

No abstract