Of political entrepreneurs: Assembling community and social capital in Hyderabad’s informal settlements

Abstract

This paper theorises the political entrepreneurship of local political actors variously described as brokers, fixers or leaders, by examining their consistent and flexible labour towards gaining and maintaining political influence in informal settlements. Through close attention to how two exemplary individuals work and network with a combination of political parties, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and local associations, I reveal the crucial role of political entrepreneurs in organising or representing local populations as legible ‘communities’, and thus, in mediating relations between communities and external agencies such as the state, political parties, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and also academic researchers. Observing informal settlements in this relational framework sheds light on how political entrepreneurs compete to become obligatory intermediaries between various institutions. This approach destabilises conceptions about the social infrastructure and social capital of a locality which underlie many community development programmes. Further, I argue that in the long-term, the careers of political entrepreneurs are punctuated by structural constraints in the form of limits to political party patronage, volatile NGO funding and the transient presence of academic researchers. The work of reproducing the social capital of the neighbourhood becomes a persistent and anxious striving with few actual opportunities for mobility.

Leadership repertoire and political engagement in a divided city: The case of East Jerusalem

“…Their study showed the vital role of Israeli Arabs who migrate to Jerusalem and act as middlemen -teaching Hebrew, administrating schools or community councils and acting as lawyers or accountants against the Israeli authorities. It also reflects the concept of 'political entrepreneurs in the global south' (Aspinall and Berenschot, 2019;Jonnalagadda, 2022;McFarlane, 2012). Studies of the Global South cover hyper-urbanisation problems accompanied by urban inequality, informality, social instability and lack of resources.…”

“…We regard community leaders as middlemen who bridge the gap between members of the in-group and outgroup members (Jonnalagadda, 2022; Oliver-Lumerman et al, 2013; Sullivan et al, 2006). Middlemen are essential in conflict situations to transfer ideas between groups and traverse structural holes (Burt, 2004), especially when leaders are expected to be at the forefront of negotiations and confront the other side regarding future solutions (Lehrs, 2019).…”

“…Previous studies have tackled the issue of political engagement, seeking to unpack the conditions and mechanisms underlying efforts to enhance compromise and cooperation between rival groups in general (e.g., Halperin, 2014;Horowitz, 1985;Schneckener, 2016;Wilson, 2015). Others have examined the topic of political engagement in contested urban settings in the Global North (Bollens, 1999(Bollens, , 2012Shlay and Rosen, 2010) and the Global South (Auerbach, 2017;Jonnalagadda, 2022). In this kind of setting, political engagement is a form of intergroup relations.…”

“…Political engagement includes the residents' political actions and attitudes visa`-vis other groups or the authorities (e.g., voting in the municipal elections, public participation processes, protests or legal struggles). Using explanations from our interviews, we examine the problem of political engagement through the prism of community leadership as mediating leadership (Be´nit-Gbaffou and Katsaura, 2014;Jonnalagadda, 2022) and present the concept of leadership repertoire. We argue for their influence over the residents' attitudes following their role as middlemen.…”

Urban studies in India across the millennial turn: Histories and futures

“…Most recently, the work of Auerbach (2019) and Auerbach and Thachil (2018) has shed much-needed light on the specific channels of clientelist, associational and electoral politics that allow unplanned and often unauthorised settlements to ‘demand development’ and claim public services. In this issue, Jonnalagadda (2021) and Pierce (2020) approach the problematic of claim-making in Hyderabad from different directions. Pierce systematically organises and categorises the strategies through which marginalised urban residents secure basic services, analysing them in terms of the different levels of pressure they apply on the official governance system to respond to citizens’ needs.…”