State-Movement Partnership in Uganda: Co-Producing an Enabling Environment for Urban Poverty Reduction?

King, Sophie; Kasaija, Peter

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3141339

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A second camp of scholars favors an approach to co-production that has alternatively been termed social movement-initiated (SMIC), radical, or bottom-up (Mitlin 2008;Watson 2014;King and Kasaija 2018). These scholars focus on cases in which low-income residents organize into social movements, which use co-production to organize new members, mobilize resources, and build alliances.…”

Section: The Antinomies Of Co-productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The aim of such processes is not merely to improve service delivery for poor residents but to transform the power relations that undergird inequitable investments in public services. These scholars do not question the wisdom of Ostrom’s policy recommendations from a technical standpoint but argue that they are unlikely to produce their intended outcomes without a shift in underlying power relations (King and Kasaija 2018). Thus, Watson warns that Ostrom’s lack of power analysis leads her to speciously assume that all community members and households would gain equal access to these services, that exclusion on the grounds of income, gender, ethnicity, for example, would not play a role, and that the relationship between state and citizens would be fair, consensual, and not corrupt or politicized.…”

Section: The Antinomies Of Co-productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dilemmas of Co-production: How Street Waste Pickers Became Excluded from Inclusive Recycling in São Paulo

Rosaldo¹

2022

Lat Am Polit Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Under what conditions do collaborations between informal workers and the state in public service provision lead to socially beneficial synergies, and when might they intensify inequalities? This article, based on 14 months of ethnographic research, addresses this question through a comparative case study of two attempts to co-produce recycling services in São Paulo. The first, a grassroots organizing effort in the 1980s and 1990s, improved the incomes and conditions of hundreds of waste pickers and inspired a national upsurge of waste picker organizing. The second, an ambitious overhaul of waste management in the early 2000s, generated about 1,500 jobs but functionally excluded the very population of street waste pickers it was designed to benefit. The findings suggest that co-production is most likely to lead to pro-poor outcomes if concerted efforts are made to level inequalities between poor constituents and more powerful stakeholders during processes of policy design and implementation.

show abstract

Section: The Antinomies Of Co-productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Antinomies Of Co-productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dilemmas of Co-production: How Street Waste Pickers Became Excluded from Inclusive Recycling in São Paulo

Rosaldo¹

2022

Lat Am Polit Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An initial draft of the paper was shared with city-based and UK researchers and refined, following their inputs. The discussion has also been informed by my involvement in two earlier studies of shelter outcomes and government urban poverty programming in urban India and Uganda, supported by the DFID-funded research centre on Effective States and Inclusive Development (Burra et al 2018;King and Kasaija 2018). The research has had a city focus, with limited interviewing of national government officials and politicians.…”

Section: : Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Politics of Shelter: Understanding Outcomes in Three African Cities

Mitlin

2020

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyses the politics of shelter provision in three African cities, focusing on the needs of and provision for the low-and middle-income residents. Housing is a priority for low-and middle-income households. Governments influence multiple facets of land and shelter and affect the shelter options realisable for urban residents. The significance of housing to citizen wellbeing means that housing policy and programming is attractive to politicians seeking popular support.The framework of political settlements is used to structure the analysis. In all three cities, national political elites seek to influence housing outcomes. In the two capital cities, elites use clientelism (backed up by violence) to advantage themselves and secure rents for influential local groups (or factions). Territorial controls are used by elites to influence electoral outcomes, while approaches to housing help to gain legitimacy through strengthening paradigmatic ideas that encapsulate a vision for development.To date, the framework has primarily been applied to the national level. Hence, this application is both novel and a test of the framework's relevance at this spatial scale and with this sectoral focus.

show abstract

“…These measures seem to be aligned to actualise the programme for results. In addition, King and Kasaija (2018) document changes in procurement processes in Kampala and Uganda in general because of co-production initiatives. In both TSUPU and USMID programmes, the threshold was raised under which a community contracting arrangement can be used for basic services and infrastructure developments to enable the municipal councils to put learning from the TSUPU into practice.…”

Section: Governance Transformationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-production and the issue of urban up-scaling and governance change in the global south: The case of Uganda

Siame

Watson

2022

Planning Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Co-production has emerged as a prominent strategy for producing urban spaces, delivering urban services and improving governance in poor but rapidly growing cities of the South. In the field of planning, it has been put forward as a more appropriate approach to what has generally been termed ‘public participation’: a term with its roots in the concept of collaborative planning emerging largely from experience in advanced economies of the West. Co-production has been used in several specific cases to build state-society alliances for community change and socio-spatial transformation. This paper argues that the transformative potential of the co-production approach lies in its ability to drive change at local, city-wide and trans-local scales. We argue that the capacity and ability to institutionalise and scale-up co-production activities depend on the ability of state and society locating and securing their ‘locus standi’ through political alignment, conflict resolution, political negotiations and collaboration. The paper contributes to literature in co-production and planning by analysing how the state and society use multiple tactics to achieve both collaboration and resistance as means of creating and sustaining a governance middle ground.

show abstract

State-Movement Partnership in Uganda: Co-Producing an Enabling Environment for Urban Poverty Reduction?

Abstract: State-movement partnership in Uganda: Co-producing an enabling environment for urban poverty reduction?

Cited by 7 publications

References 18 publications

Dilemmas of Co-production: How Street Waste Pickers Became Excluded from Inclusive Recycling in São Paulo

Dilemmas of Co-production: How Street Waste Pickers Became Excluded from Inclusive Recycling in São Paulo

The Politics of Shelter: Understanding Outcomes in Three African Cities

Co-production and the issue of urban up-scaling and governance change in the global south: The case of Uganda

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About