The Myth of Formality in the Global North: Informality‐as‐Innovation in Dutch Governance

Bridging debates on urban sovereignty and urban informality, this paper argues that relationships between sovereignty and informality may not reside exclusively in the way the sovereign state decides to allow or forbid informality, but also in the way sovereignty is distributed among a range of state and non‐state actors. Drawing upon fieldwork on the early‐2010s management of displaced Romanian Romani families in two emergency camps in the city of Montreuil (France), the paper shows how the NGO responsible for managing one camp acted as sovereign power, allowing a number of informal activities to thrive within its confines. By contrast, inside the other camp, managed by another NGO that resolutely implemented state directives, only formal activities took place. Building on Dean's (2010) concept of ‘disaggregated sovereignty’, the paper mobilizes this disjuncture as a case for critically examining how the ‘state of exception’ takes shape beyond the state's grip. A subtext running throughout is the parallel between the very first camps for civilians in nineteenth‐century colonized territories and these twenty‐first‐century camps for Roma in Europe—both elicited a state of exception partially predicated on camp dwellers’ perceived ethnic/racial homogeneity.

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sovereignty Beyond the State: Exception and Informality in a Western European City

Picker¹

2019

“…In this urban global world of translations, the question is: when do specific interpretations ‘stick’ and stabilize? As Jaffe and Koster (, this forum) so magnificently illustrate in their contribution, informal regimes of governance crystallize over specific interpretations of rules and laws. I would similarly argue that specific interpretations of good governance, legitimacy, agency, sovereignty or legality coalesce to form stabilizing regimes.…”

Section: Translating Informalitymentioning

confidence: 97%

“…One of the most exciting and difficult tasks this forum sets out to do is to rethink state theory from an interdisciplinary perspective. Haid and Hilbrandt (, this forum) underscore the fact that the recently burgeoning literature on informality in the English‐speaking sphere shies away from thinking directly about the state. It does not engage in depth with state theory's long tradition of drawing upon disciplines such as political science or political sociology.…”

Section: Circulating From the English‐speaking ‘South’ To The ‘North’mentioning

confidence: 99%

Informalization of the State: Reflections from an Urban World of Translations

Boudreau¹

2019

The project of globalizing informality requires the circulation of concepts and theories from the ‘South’ to the ‘North’. It also relies on intertextuality and exchanges across languages and sites of academic production. This essay is a reaction to the collection of papers presented in this forum. It argues for more academic conversations between languages and cities in order to contribute to a general state theory.

“…In their contribution, Jaffe and Koster (, this forum) further develop this idea through an account of governance that seeks to unearth the ‘myth of formality’ in cities of the global North. Their research on governance processes in two Dutch cases highlights the key role that informality plays in the implementation of relevant policy mechanisms: their cases not only point to the opacity and non‐application of the law in processes of governance, but also highlight the ways in which processes of participation are undergirded by informal practices, ties and networks.…”

Section: Geographical Translations and Conceptual Alliances: Governanmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban Informality and the State: Geographical Translations and Conceptual Alliances

Haid¹,

Hilbrandt²

2019

Understandings of informality commonly derive from research undertaken in states perceived as lacking the capacity to regulate the practices of their populations. This Interventions forum aims to expand the geographical parameters of empirical research on urban informality. A more global approach, we argue, also necessitates questioning assumptions that undergird this concept—in particular the underlying conception of the state. In this vein, this collection of papers aims to rethink theories of the state through the lens of informality, and vice versa, to inform and refine the concept of informality through a more thorough understanding of states. In so doing, the contributions engage with concepts that have been central both to theories of the state and to the study of informality, namely governance, agency, legitimacy, sovereignty and legality. Following this introduction setting out our theoretical approach, the Interventions forum unites five empirical studies that discuss the nexus of informality and states in contexts that have been researched less extensively from this perspective, each tackling one of the above‐mentioned concepts. Based on these different entry points, the papers provide novel angles on a state‐theoretical understanding of informality. A concluding essay brings these approaches together, reflecting on the possibilities of translating concepts to different sites.