Journal of International Development

J[ Int[ Dev[ 01\ 732Ð745 "1999#

FROM THE CULTURE OF POVERTY TO

INCLUSIVE CITIES] RE!FRAMING
URBAN POLICY AND POLITICS
JO BEALL
Department of Social Policy\ London School of Economics\ London\ UK

Abstract] During the early development decades the urban poor were seen as an aber!
ration or an underclass\ victims of their own apathy and modest expectations "Lewis\
0850#[ Today they are more likely to be seen as heroic "De Soto\ 0878# or as crucial
contributors to inclusive cities "UNCHS "Habitat#\ 0888#[ By looking _rst at urban!
ization trends and the rise in urban poverty\ this article reviews how urban social
disadvantage has been variously understood\ tracing shifts in analytical emphasis and
policy consequences over the last half century[ It explores the implications for urban
policy and politics of the increasing focus on social exclusion and inclusion\ in particular
whether a social exclusion perspective a}ords a better opportunity for addressing issues
of inequalities manifest at the level of the city[ Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\
Ltd[

0 INTRODUCTION

Prior to the era of development\ the Chicago School sociologist Louis Wirth "0827#
coined the term urbanism to describe a way of life associated with living in an urban
area[ He saw urbanism in terms of social dislocation and decline of community in the
context of industrial societies[ Within such urban spaces\ Oscar Lewis "0850# argued
that the socially disadvantaged were marginal because of a {culture of poverty| which
rendered them inherently unable to respond positively to the advantages associated
with urban living[ Other sociologists took issue with such negative portrayals of urban
social life[ Mayer "0852# demonstrated that traditional values\ family and kinship ties
and a high degree of social cohesion were all manifest in urban as well as rural areas[
It was also argued that the urban poor were not marginal but marginalized as a result
of their peripheral physical and social location in cities of the South "Perlman\ 0865#[
Marxists\ such as the geographer David Harvey "0862#\ said of urbanism that rather
than being a {thing in itself|\ a way of life associated with living in an urban area\

 Correspondence to] Dr Josephine Beall\ Department of Social Policy\ LSE\ Houghton Street\ London\
WC1A 1AC\ UK[ E!mail j[beallÝlse[ac[uk

Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\ Ltd[

733 J[ Beall

it was {relationally de_ned|[ Cities\ he said\ were spatial expressions or concrete

manifestations of social relations based on power\ particularly economic power[ What
the present article seeks to show is how such arguments have had a deep impact on
the academy and have informed to an extent the realm of urban politics[ However\
they have rarely and then only slightly impacted on urban development policy\ across
successive development policy frameworks and fashions[

1 URBAN TRENDS AND THE GROWTH OF URBAN POVERTY

Until relatively recently\ poverty in the South was seen predominately as a rural
phenomenon[ However\ the ranks of the urban poor have been growing apace and\
as a result\ addressing urban poverty has risen higher on the policy agenda[ What the
data illustrate is that massive changes are taking place in patterns of urbanization
and\ on a global scale\ unprecedented urbanization levels are being reached[ Table 0
shows that the global urban population is set to double from 1[5 billion in 0884 to
4[0 billion in 1929[ By that time\ three out of _ve people in the world will be living in
cities[ These _gures have prompted fear of urban implosion in some circles but it is
unlikely that the urban population will continue growing inde_nitely[ In fact\ global
urban growth rates have been declining and are expected to continue doing so
"UNCHS\ 0885#[ Table 1 shows the world|s urban population share as a proportion

Table 0[ Urban population*hundreds of thousands of people residing in urban areas

Actual Forecast

0844 0854 0864 0874 0884 1994 1904 1929

World 761 0074 0432 0886 1463 2116 2851 4006
More developed regions 490 514 622 797 766 816 861 0904
Less developed regions 260 459 798 0078 0586 1290 1880 3091
Africa 30 55 093 051 140 268 437 753
Asia 182 315 482 736 0081 0484 1932 1625
Latin American + Caribbean 75 022 085 160 249 315 388 488

Source] adapted from United Nations "0887#

Table 1[ The world|s total and urban population shares in percentage terms

Actual Forecast

0844 0854 0864 0874 0884 1994 1904 1929

More developed regions
Total 20[2 17[8 14[6 12[9 19[5 07[3 05[6 03[4
Urban 46[4 41[7 36[4 39[4 23[0 17[6 13[4 08[7
Less developed regions
Total 57[6 60[0 63[2 66[9 68[3 70[5 72[2 74[4
Urban 31[4 36[1 41[4 48[4 54[8 60[2 64[4 79[1

Source] adapted from United Nations "0887#

Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\ Ltd[ J[ Int[ Dev[ 01\ 732Ð745 "1999#
 Re!framin` Urban Policy and Politics 734

Table 2[ The world|s total and urban population shares in percentage terms

Actual Forecast

0844 0854 0864 0874 0884 1994 1904 1929

More developed regions
Total 20[2 17[8 14[6 12[9 19[5 07[3 05[6 03[4
Urban 46[4 41[7 36[4 39[4 23[0 17[6 13[4 08[7
Less developed regions
Total 57[6 60[0 63[2 66[9 68[3 70[5 72[2 74[4
Urban 31[4 36[1 41[4 48[4 54[8 60[2 64[4 79[1

Source] adapted from United Nations "0887#

of the total[ Many factors have combined to bring about these changes\ but one is
particularly signi_cant[ Table 2 shows how the South|s share of the world|s urban
population has risen roughly in line with its total population share[ In other words\
the South|s share of city dwellers has increased mainly because the South|s share of
the world|s total population has increased*from 57 per cent in 0844 to 68 per cent
and rising in 0884[ This suggests that natural increase is the single most important
factor in urban growth\ despite the fact that fertility rates are generally lower in urban
than in rural areas[ Nevertheless\ the in~uence of ruralÐurban migration should not
be underestimated[ Moreover\ migrants to cities are predominantly young and this
inevitably contributes to high rates of natural increase in urban centres[ Youthful
populations in cities are coterminous with high levels of unemployment\ a major
contributory factor to urban poverty[ However\ urban poverty is equally associated
with poor living conditions[ David Satterthwaite "0886# for example\ has estimated
that in 0889 at least 599 million people in the urban areas of Latin America\ Africa
and Asia alone lived in housing of such poor quality that it constituted a threat to
their health and lives[
Despite its growing priority status it is important to recognize that understanding
urban poverty as a discrete phenomenon does pose problems[ First the de_nition of
what constitutes an urban area remains somewhat arbitrary[ Second urban poverty
is not only prevalent in mega!cities but exists\ sometimes to an even greater extent\ in
small towns and medium sized cities[ Third\ it ignores the great heterogeneity that
exists in both rural and urban areas and the social and economic linkages between
them[ Analysing urban poverty as a separate category makes for separating its symp!
toms from its causes\ which can lie as much at the national\ regional or even inter!
national level as at the local level[ Furthermore\ a dualistic spatial classi_cation can
run the risk of focusing on the city level and of ignoring wider structural issues
"Wratten\ 0884#[
However\ an exclusive focus on aggregate or wider structural issues may result in
generalized pro!poor policies\ which ignore the speci_cities of the urban poverty
experience[ Poverty does manifest itself in di}erent ways in urban and rural areas\
even when it is caused by similar factors\ such as external shocks like war or famine\
international economic relationships requiring debt repayments or macroeconomic
austerity\ or low social spending by national governments[ Poverty in cities has
particular characteristics that merit special attention[ For example\ urban livelihood

Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\ Ltd[ J[ Int[ Dev[ 01\ 732Ð745 "1999#
735 J[ Beall

systems are very di}erent from those pursued in the countryside and the position of
the poor within urban labour markets constitutes an important determinant of poverty
in urban areas[ The urban poor also experience vulnerability for di}erent reasons\
closely linked to the fact that they live in an almost entirely monetized economy[ The
operation of the urban land market is a particular feature of urban areas\ particularly
at the ruralÐurban interface[ This adversely a}ects the poor who are squeezed o}
valuable land and forced into high!density settlements or marginal locations[ In some
cities insecurity of tenure is compounded by unhealthy and insecure living conditions\
such as appalling overcrowding\ contaminated water\ poor or absent sanitation\ lack
of services and the constant threat of ~oods\ landslides\ industrial pollution or urban
violence[ All this means that the urban poor are exposed to severe environmental
health risks[
The inevitable growth in urban poverty and social disadvantage is occurring in
contexts where {decentralization fever| "Tendler\ 0886# prevails and where urban
institutions are often ill prepared for the enormous and increasing demands being
placed upon them[ They are ill equipped to generate su.cient employment or to
provide or even maintain existing infrastructure necessary for local economic devel!
opment[ It is also occurring under circumstances where cities are exhibiting increased
di}erentiation and extremes of wealth and poverty[ In these circumstances\ even
though the bene_ts for social well being and urban development are widely recognized\
commitment to social investment is sorely tested and contested[

2 URBAN DISADVANTAGE AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY

In the early decades of development\ comparatively little attention was paid in general
development studies to the contribution cities made to national economies\ nor to
poverty and social di}erentiation within urban centres[0 One reason for this relative
policy neglect stems from the fact that it was widely believed that urban poverty was
a temporary phenomenon that would disappear with modernization[ However\ it
soon became clear that the visible symptoms of urban social disadvantage such as
burgeoning informal economies and informal settlements were not disappearing and\
in many cities\ were actually expanding[
It is now commonly recognized that urban economies were not expanding at a
su.cient pace or in ways that provided full and formal employment for the growing
ranks of the urban poor[ For example\ industrialization strategies informed by import
substitution policies were capital rather than labour intensive and based on limited
local or regional markets[ This meant that urban dwellers increasingly had to pursue
livelihoods outside of formal employment[ Policy responses to the informal economy
were either based on benign neglect or alternatively were at best unhelpful and at
worst destructive[ The fault did not lie only with states and markets[ Local level trade
unions\ for example\ rarely found a workable formula to include informal workers in
their purview or advocacy agendas[ At an international level\ the social injustices
0
Until the 0889s\ the predominant focus was on rural development\ exempli_ed by Lipton|s "0866# {urban
bias| thesis\ which focused on inequalities between urban and rural areas\ arguing that cities consume a
disproportionate share of national investment and which paid little attention to social inequities within
cities[

Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\ Ltd[ J[ Int[ Dev[ 01\ 732Ð745 "1999#
 Re!framin` Urban Policy and Politics 736

experienced by informal workers were emphasized by the International Labour

Organisation "ILO# in the 0869s[ However\ rather than promoting or facilitating
informality\ the ILO argued for the progressive application of regulation and labour
legislation in a context where informal enterprises became gradually formalized[ The
aims of this approach were noble*to attack the structural causes of poverty\ not
least of all the unequal economic relations between North and South based on
di}erential labour standards*but they were not widely translated into concrete and
realizable policies[
Policy approaches to housing and to urban living environments were equally stym!
ied "Beall\ 1999#[ In the 0849s and 0859s\ the leaders of many newly independent
states began to construct large!scale public housing projects[ These were intended to
redress the injustices of colonialism and to function as a symbol of national pride[
Underlying them was a belief that the state should take responsibility for housing its
people[ However\ this approach was not sustainable and many governments ran out
of money after only a small number of units had been constructed[ By the 0869s it
was clear that this strategy was failing the urban poor\ the vast majority of whom
were building homes on their own account in slums and informal settlements[ This
led to burgeoning informal land and housing markets parallel to and unregulated by
the formal system[ Some governments responded by investing in rural areas\ the
intention being to remove the incentive for migration to cities[ Many introduced
more drastic disincentives\ such as forced removals and the bulldozing of informal
settlements and slums[ Neither strategy was successful over the longer!term[
During the 0879s there was a growing acceptance of the idea that urban populations
should be accommodated rather than displaced[ John Turner "0865# was one of the
_rst to suggest that the way of meeting the housing challenge was to follow the
example set by the poor themselves\ self!help housing[ This entailed government
supporting the e}orts of poor people to construct their own homes instead of evicting
them or attempting to produce high quality\ completed housing for all[ The ideas of
the appropriate or intermediate technology school complemented those of Turner\
arguing that cheaper\ locally produced materials should replace uniform standards
and designs in house building[ International agencies such as the World Bank
embraced the idea of reducing standards and costs as a viable means of ensuring
housing for a larger number of low!income people[
{Self!help| housing took one of two forms[ The _rst was sites and service schemes\
which usually involve governments in acquiring land\ marking out plots and con!
necting them to services[ The plots were then sold for people to construct their own
homes[1 The second approach was upgrading[ This entailed improving existing slums
or informal settlements\ rather than attempting to relocate all the inhabitants[
Improvements normally took the form of water\ sewerage or electricity connections[
A problem with the sites and services approach is that government funds are usually
only su.cient to pay for cheap land on the urban periphery and poor people working
in city centres cannot a}ord the time or money necessary to commute from the
outskirts[ A second problem is that even plots on cheap land are beyond the _nancial
reach of many poor people and end up in the hands of middle!income purchasers

1
The core housing approach was a variation of sites and services\ comprising the construction of a simple
structure built by the authorities on the serviced plot[ The purchaser was then able to add extensions to
the house when time and money allowed[

Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\ Ltd[ J[ Int[ Dev[ 01\ 732Ð745 "1999#
737 J[ Beall

who use them for occupation\ rental or long!term investment[ The main problem with
upgrading schemes is that the urban elite often resist them on the grounds that
upgrading legitimates and consolidates illegal settlements in their midst\ adversely
a}ecting the value of their own property[
Both for housing and the provision of urban services\ they were seen historically as
the responsibility of the state[ However\ this changed alongside the standardization
of economic policy along lines set by the {Washington Consensus| in the 0879s[
Against a background of growing demographic evidence on urbanization and urban
social disadvantage\ the World Bank and the United Nations placed the issue of
urban development _rmly on the development agenda in the 0889s[ Both organ!
izations opened the decade with policy papers signalling their intention to prioritize
urban poverty "World Bank\ 0880^ UNDP\ 0880#[ The UNDP "0880# placed strong
emphasis on housing and urban services and promoted acceptance of the idea that
informal urban dwellers and the informal economy should be accommodated rather
than displaced and a basic needs approach to the delivery of pro!poor urban devel!
opment persisted[
The World Bank "0880# signalled a move towards what it called an enabling
approach[ Drawing on the work of De Soto "0878# who argued that informal workers
are dynamic entrepreneurs and that the growth of their businesses is constantly
thwarted by excessive government regulation\ the World Bank encouraged govern!
ments to adopt a facilitating role vis!a!vis small business[ In respect of housing the
enabling approach focused on reducing the role of state provision and on advancing
a whole range of {inputs| needed to ensure the healthy functioning of housing markets[
On the supply side\ this might entail the rationalization of legal and regulatory
frameworks and measures to increase competition and reduce monopolies in the
construction industry[ On the demand side\ key initiatives involve e}orts at improving
access to private housing _nance[
Rather than focusing exclusively on the poorest groups\ the enabling approach
advocates integrated policies that provide housing and service options for low income
urban dwellers alongside provision for a range of di}erent income groups[2 This is
informed by an emphasis on demand responsiveness[3 The role of national govern!
ments is to provide an {enabling| environment for the provision and extension of
housing and urban services[ Due to the perceived failure of centralised state planning
to deliver housing and basic services\ partnerships with the private and community
sectors are now embraced[ They are seen to o}er the possibility of more e.cient
models of service provision with the state playing a co!ordinating role[ New providers
such as private companies and NGOs are intended to bring e}ectiveness and e.ciency

2
The key change in the focus of housing policy was increased emphasis on tenure security\ whatever form
shelter or housing might take and this in turn has led to greater attention being paid to rental housing
markets\ which formerly were neglected[
3
For example\ in relation to water supply and sanitation services\ the focus has increasingly shifted towards
implementation based on the e}ective demand of users\ assessed on the basis of willingness to pay[ If\ for
example\ a poor family chooses to allocate a disproportionate amount of household income on having an
indoor pour ~ush latrine rather than a much cheaper shared pit latrine\ that is seen as their rightful choice
and providers must be demand responsive[ Unfortunately\ the same logic is applied when poor urban
dwellers spend vast amounts on the purchase of water from private vendors in the absence of adequate
urban water supply[ Their willingness to pay for water is almost farcically confused with a}ordability\
without consideration being paid to the expenditure trade o}s households have to make because water is
essential to life itself[

Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\ Ltd[ J[ Int[ Dev[ 01\ 732Ð745 "1999#
 Re!framin` Urban Policy and Politics 738

to the provision of basic services\ as well as distancing service delivery from political
considerations[ It is to the latter that our attention now turns[

3 COLLECTIVE ACTION AND RESPONSES OF THE URBAN POOR

Pro!poor urban development and urban policy more generally cannot be understood
outside of a consideration of the responses of the urban poor themselves and the
conditions under which collective action shifts from isolated or self!contained self!
help activities to wider engagement in urban politics[ Con~ict between di}erent
interests in the city signals one of the limitations of any policy approach to urban
poverty reduction that focuses on poor areas alone\ without recognizing how they
link into the wider socio!politics of a city[ In the 0879s Castells "0872# argued that
community!based organizations engaging in the struggle for services had to negotiate
access to city!level goods\ services and decision!making arenas[ His thesis was that
when organizations reach beyond the community arena and threaten to provoke
structural change they have the potential to become urban social movements[ Like
unions advocating for workers beyond factory!~oor issues\ he argued that such
movements can aim for more radical goals and challenge formal political processes
as well as the social relations and the values embedded in the forms and functions of
cities[ Subsequent opinion has been divided regarding the precise de_nition of urban
social movements "Friedmann\ 0878^ Schuurmann and van Naevssen\ 0877# as well
as their e}ectiveness and sustainability in the longer term\ especially under conditions
of economic stress[ To the extent that mass organization and urban social movements
had been successful\ they were frequently replaced in the 0879s by collective action
geared simply towards economic survival and relief\ in the context of macroeconomic
cutbacks and often under authoritarian regimes[
It is incontrovertible that adjustment policies and the economic recession of the
0879s and early 0889s cut deep into urban per capita incomes\ which reverted to 0869
levels and in some countries to 0859s levels "World Bank\ 0880\ p[ 34#[ Many urban
dwellers were laid o} from public sector jobs and the shift in emphasis from non!
tradeables to tradeables saw the bulk of investment moving to rural areas at the
expense of employment opportunities for the urban poor "Moser\ 0885#[ Urban
dwellers are more integrated into cash economies so they su}ered more from the
policy initiatives accompanying neo!liberal economic reform\ such as the lifting of
subsidies or the introduction of user fees for education\ health\ food\ housing and
transport[ Reductions in real wages\ along with slow employment growth and
retrenchments in the public sector further swelled the ranks of the informal economy
in many cities of the South[
Micro!level studies conducted in Africa\ Asia and Latin America during the 0889s
showed how the poor responded[ At the level of households\ members adapted
to economic hardship by increasing productive activities\ through greater levels of
indebtedness and by reducing the quantity or quality of consumption "Beall\ 0884^
Chant\ 0880^ Kanji\ 0884^ Moser\ 0885#[ Under these circumstances\ collective action
became increasingly focused on coping and in some cases\ simply survival[ Women\ in
particular\ forged social networks and neighbourhood level organizations to provide
goods and services more cost e}ectively[ Collective action sometimes took on a more

Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\ Ltd[ J[ Int[ Dev[ 01\ 732Ð745 "1999#
749 J[ Beall

formal character and led to the establishment of community!based organizations

mobilizing common resources[ However\ their e.cacy and reach remains a matter of
debate[ For example\ opinion is divided as to whether the celebrated communal
kitchen movement in Lima\ Peru remains geared towards meeting immediate needs
or bringing about more fundamental transformations[ Barrig "0885# argues that it is
a needs!based movement because the various kitchens compete for scarce resources
while failing to make strategic connections between their own struggle and those of
other kitchens and movements\ thereby ensuring that they fail to in~uence broader
institutions in meaningful ways[ Lind and Farmelo "0885# on the other hand dis!
tinguish between those kitchens organized in a top!down fashion by the state and the
more autonomous grassroots kitchens whose members participate in political
decision!making[
What is abundantly clear is that by the 0879s urban policy makers came to see such
organizations as a resource[ Just as De Soto "0878# recognized the entrepreneurs of
the urban informal economy as {heroic|\ so women|s involvement in securing better
living conditions and services in low income urban settlements came to be seen as
a vital factor in e.cient and e}ective urban development[ It is pleasing that an
understanding developed as to how the micro!politics of everyday life in cities fed
into collective action and policy[ However\ the danger exists that social networks and
community!based organizations\ whatever their form\ are seen as a panacea or an
alternative for broader!based social investment[ By the same token\ NGOs have been
heralded as important urban partners\ reaching where governments and international
agencies cannot reach and e}ectively addressing urban poverty and representing the
urban poor "UNDP\ 0880#[ Nevertheless\ it is highly questionable whether on their
own\ NGOs have the potential to bring about fundamental transformation or to
assault the structural causes of poverty[
The fundamental question for urban policy and politics concerns the transformative
potential of such forms of collective action among the urban poor[ Nancy Scheper!
Hughes "0881\ pp[ 361Ð362# has said of the people in the Brazilian town she studied
over many years that]
Their daily lives are circumscribed by an immensely powerful state and by local
economic and political interests that are openly hostile to them [ [ [ It is too much
to expect the people of the Alto to organize collectively when chronic scarcity
makes individually negotiated relations of dependency on myriad political and
personal bosses in a town a necessary survival tactic [ [ [ Staying alive in the
shantytown demands a certain {sel_shness| that pits individuals against each
other and that rewards those who take advantage of those even weaker[
This perspective runs the risk of reinforcing the notions of passivity\ fatalism and
hopelessness associated with a {culture of poverty| perspective[ The idea of the urban
poor engaged in relentless survival strategies at the expense of others and at fruitless
cost to themselves\ however real\ runs the risk of perpetuating an image of the
urban poor simply as victims[ John Friedmann "0887\ p[11# might argue that such a
pessimistic view derives from an Enlightenment view of civil society\ which in essence
centres it in the abstract\ self!interested individual human being[ His own position on
civil society takes o} from an acknowledgement of the individual person|s social
nature and a primary concern with social relations[
It is this latter position that informs Bayat|s "0882# study of poor people|s move!

Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\ Ltd[ J[ Int[ Dev[ 01\ 732Ð745 "1999#
 Re!framin` Urban Policy and Politics 740

ments in urban Iran[ His work echoes James Scott|s "0874# {everyday forms of peasant
resistance| but goes beyond Scott|s preoccupation with defensive resistance to describe
and explain the o}ensive struggles of disenfranchised urban groups[ The picture he
paints is not of a banner waving urban social movement formed for all!time and
carved forever in oppositional stone[4 Rather\ it is a more recognizable and perhaps
more compelling form of politics\ which he portrays as {a silent\ patient\ protracted\
and pervasive advancement of ordinary people on the propertied and powerful in
order to survive hardships and better their lives| "Bayat\ 0882\ p[ 6#[
Much of the research on the responses of the urban poor coming out of a devel!
opment studies perspective\ including the currently much celebrated livelihoods per!
spective emphasises their heroic e}orts at survival\ maintenance or improvement in
the face of economic hardship "Grown and Sebstad\ 0878^ Moser\ 0887#[ Important
though this perspective is\ it largely ignores the political and policy potential of
collective action "Beall and Kanji\ 0888#[ Schneider|s "0880# study of radical politics
and popular protest in the Santiago of Pinochet|s Chile serves to demonstrate the
important contribution made by the everyday actions of men and women in cities
towards challenging structural factors and power relations ostensibly beyond their
control[ The question that remains is how the energy evident in Schneider|s study of
popular protest and Bayat|s exposition of street politics*the energy not just to survive
but to defer and resist*is acknowledged\ sustained and harnessed[ For Schneider
"0880\ p[ 001# hope lies at the level of local political engagement^ if {the decentralization
of political power and the redemocratization of local and municipal governments
guarantee a political space for popular participation\ the new democracy may be
forti_ed by its grass!roots support|[ In the following and concluding section\ attention
is paid to what potentials exist within current attempts to frame decentralized
approaches and local level policy and politics in terms of {inclusive cities|[

4 INCLUSIVE CITIES] RE!FRAMING URBAN POVERTY AND POLICY

Analysis thus far suggests that to the extent that social disadvantage has been
addressed by urban policy in the twentieth century\ the focus has been on urban
poverty\ invariably operationalized in terms of area!based approaches to poverty
reduction and understood outside of a concern with wider social structures[ The late
0889s saw the beginnings of a shift away from area!based approaches to urban
development*that is strategies targeted at low!income areas in relative isolation from
what was going on at the level of the city or beyond*to a concern with city!wide
strategies[ This coincided with a shift from {meeting the basic needs of the urban poor|
to a social exclusion perspective and the adoption by the United Nations Centre for
Human Settlement "UNCHS "Habitat## of its new Global Campaign on Urban
Governance\ dubbed {The Inclusive City Campaign|[ The question that arises is

4
Do they resemble social movements< Bayat acknowledges that they share a number of similarities with
Castell|s urban social movements but argues that they are less long!lasting\ less structured and less
organized\ carrying features of spontaneity\ individualism and competition[ There is certainly more hope
and agency in Bayat|s picture of surreptitious struggle by stealth\ which he describes as the {quiet encroach!
ment of the ordinary|[

Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\ Ltd[ J[ Int[ Dev[ 01\ 732Ð745 "1999#
741 J[ Beall

whether this focus on social exclusion holds the potential for advancing more redis!
tributive policies and promises a deepening of democracy[
As originally conceived\ the concept of social exclusion derives from concern with
the relationship between members of a society and the nation state and therefore is
closely bound up with the notion of citizenship[ However\ the range of exclusions
that are now discussed and addressed both analytically and in policy terms is growing
exponentially[5 As such\ social exclusion is a {portmanteau| concept\ a term {rapidly
becoming a cliche to cover almost any kind of social ill| "Kleinman\ 0887\ p[ 6#[ As
Levitas "0887\ p[ 067# has pointed out\ this makes it potentially dangerous] {At an
individual level it mobilises personal fears of being excluded or left out [ [ [ At a political
level it has a broad appeal\ both to those who value increased participation and those
who seek greater social control[|
Nevertheless\ it is possible to identify at least three broadly distinct approaches to
social exclusion[ First it can be approached from a neoliberal perspective as an
unfortunate but inevitable side e}ect of global economic realignment\ in which some
cities and their citizens are the winners or adapt themselves\ while others do not[ This
perspective on social exclusion equates with treatises on the moral and cultural causes
of poverty and the urban {underclass| debate "Lewis\ 0850^ Murray\ 0889#[ As such it
is a {sterile and stigmatising discourse| "Kleinman\ 0887\ p[03# and is largely
discredited[ A second position argues that social exclusion represents little more than
an unhelpful re!labelling of poverty or more radically\ acts to distract attention from
inequality "Bessis\ 0884#[ A third perspective and one which is subscribed to here\ sees
social exclusion as a process rather than an outcome and one which is distinct from
both material poverty and economic inequality although it often accompanies them
"Atkinson\ 0887#[
Increasingly the concept of social exclusion is informing urban social analysis\
partly because there is a spatial dimension to social exclusion "Sibley\ 0884# and partly
because the perspective is rapidly gaining currency within the context of international
development co!operation[ Actively promoted by the ILO "Rodgers et al[\ 0884# and
more recently taken up and adapted by other international agencies\ increasingly
concern is with social integration or social inclusion "Wolfensohn\ 0886#[ The per!
spective has _rmly informed UNCHS "Habitat#|s new Global Campaign on Urban
Governance\ although it is not clear what this implies in policy terms[ Writing on the
Campaign the Acting Head of the Urban Development Branch at Habitat discusses
social exclusion as follows]

Exclusion as a result of either physical\ social or economic deprivation or dis!

crimination does not allow certain groups of people to participate in city life and
activities[ Some groups\ such as squatters\ are not even legally recognized as
residents of the city in which they live[ The failure of cities to integrate excluded
groups in their decision!making is also a function of inertia and bureaucratic and
unresponsive forms of government[ Exclusion and marginalization creates and

5
For example\ the concept has been used to embrace exclusion from social institutions such as education\
as well as exclusion from access to social infrastructure and services such as housing and health care[ It
has looked at exclusion as denial of rights and the term has also been applied more generally to the way in
which individuals or groups are excluded from full participation in society "Rodgers et al[\ 0884#[

Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\ Ltd[ J[ Int[ Dev[ 01\ 732Ð745 "1999#
 Re!framin` Urban Policy and Politics 742

reinforces poverty in urban society [ [ [ The excluded in most cities are groups
which su}er discrimination based on their income!level\ ethnicity\ gender and:or
religion[ Another category includes those who are self!excluded by reason of
breakdown of trust in government and politics[ Exclusion means that groups are
denied access to services that will enable them to engage fully in the economy
and in society "Taylor\ 0888\ p[ 4#[

There is clearly a huge e}ort here not to leave anything out; Social exclusion is de_ned
in such a way that it is presented as synonymous with poverty\ discrimination\
participation de_cit and lack of citizenship\ social integration and government legit!
imacy[ The analysis could be implying that social exclusion is inevitable\ the de_nition
could stand accused of unhelpful re!labelling of on!going phenomena such as poverty
and could stand outside any concern with deprivation[ It side steps the issue of
inequality but if anything\ the approach implies equality of opportunity rather than
outcome[ Most noteworthy is that this elaboration of Habitat|s social exclusion
perspective exhibits an e.ciency bias\ envisaging citizen participation in the context
of consensus politics in harmonious cities rather than accommodating discord and
challenge in a contested political process[
Nevertheless\ Habitat|s Inclusive City Campaign does address politics\ which con!
stitutes a real shift from the anti!state and hermetically sealed urban policy of the
Washington Consensus[ Unlike the prevailing view in the 0879s\ acknowledgement
that city governance involves a broader number of institutional actors such as the
private and community sectors does not necessarily imply removing local govern!
ment|s capacity to shape policy outcomes in favour of the urban poor[ However\ it is
based on the argument that local democracy and decentralization are two interrelated
norms\ with inclusiveness as the {red thread| that runs through all the normative goals
of good urban governance[ It leaves open the question as to how much faith should
be placed in local governance as key site for deepening democracy as suggested by
Schneider "0880#[
An advantage of devolved powers of governance is that they can add a political
dimension to the process of urban governance and bring policy formulation and
decision!making closer to citizens themselves[ For example\ Brazilian experiments in
{participatory budgeting| have attempted to combine representative democracy with
the control by citizens of public policy "Abers\ 0887# as have the development forums
in post!apartheid South Africa "Abbot\ 0885#[ When successful\ such initiatives can
reduce corruption\ include the priorities of excluded groups in decision!making arenas
and increase the overall responsiveness of city government[ However\ decentralization
does not on its own automatically lead to such outcomes[ In India the 63th Con!
stitution Amendment Act of 0881 provided for the devolution of powers to urban
local governments to prepare and implement plans for economic development and
social justice\ an initiative nominated by UNCHS "Habitat# as a {good practice|
"Dahiya\ 0888#[ But implementation has been patchy and in India as anywhere\ there
are as many examples of {bad urban government| as a result of decentralization as
there are of {good urban governance|[
The advantages for urban policy of decentralization and devolution\ even when it
includes a _scal function\ are more ambiguous and there are a number of important
downsides[ One problem is that the distributive potential implied by city!wide
approaches and the related notion of {inclusive cities| is often negated when e}orts at

Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\ Ltd[ J[ Int[ Dev[ 01\ 732Ð745 "1999#
743 J[ Beall

city!wide cross!subsidisation are contested[6 Another problem is that when local

resources are relied upon exclusively\ the risk pool for urban social investment
contracts[ Problems are compounded by the tendency of central governments to hand
down unfunded mandates to the local level[ This can be illustrated with reference to
Johannesburg where current e}orts to redress housing and service inequalities
inherited from the apartheid era are being hampered by the increasing burden of
delivery being placed by the centre on cash strapped metropolitan governments "Beall
et al[\ 1999#[
Unfunded mandates can equally beset cities as a result of policy orientations
determined at the international level[ For example\ if it could be ascertained for sure
that recent ~oods in Bangladesh and Mozambique were linked to global warming\ it
could be argued that cities like Dhaka and Maputo\ capitals of what are among the
world|s poorest countries\ are picking up the cheque for irresponsible consumption
patterns elsewhere[ Similarly\ local economic development can be advanced by initiat!
ives and investments designed to attract foreign investment[ But they can be under!
mined in an instant by foreign investors threatening relocation if conditions no longer
suit\ leaving local governments to pick up the pieces[
What this suggests is that important though it is to understand and deconstruct
intra!city social relations\ the terms on which exclusion and inclusion are negotiated
at city level depend crucially on how cities themselves are integrated into national
and global economic\ political and social processes[ While macroeconomic trends
have pushed towards a diminished role for the state over recent decades\ more recent
e}orts at rehabilitating the state are increasingly focused on the local level[ This has
thrust city government into the limelight as never before but it has happened in a
context where the power of local governments to shape outcomes in favour of the
poor is easily undermined by the in~uence of forces beyond their control[ Inclusive
cities are all very well so long as responsibility for urban poverty and urban social
investment is not seen to lie solely with them[

REFERENCES

Abbot J[ 0885[ Sharin` the City[ Earthscan] London[

Abers R[ 0887[ Learning democratic practice] distributing government resources through popu!
lar participation in Porto Alegre\ Brazil[ In Cities for Citizens\ Plannin` and the Rise of Civil
Society in a Global A`e\ Douglass M\ Friedmann J "eds#[ John Wiley] New York and
Chichester[
Atkinson AB[ 0887[ Social exclusion\ poverty and unemployment[ In Exclusion\ Employment
and Opportunity\ Atkinson AB\ Hills J "eds#[ CASE paper 3\ Centre for Analysis of Social
Exclusion\ London School of Economics\ London[
Barrig M[ 0885[ Women\ collective kitchens and the crisis of the state in Peru[ In Emer`encies\
6
A case in point has been the recent restructuring of city government in Johannesburg[ On one side were
those opting for a number of municipal sub!structures within which limited local revenue raising and
redistribution could take place[ On the other were those advocating a uni!city approach in which a single
metropolitan structure would be responsible for raising and distributing resources across the whole of
greater Johannesburg[ Opposing the uni!city position were the wealthy and those poorer residents in close
proximity to better o} areas[ Favouring the uni!city position were the majority of Johannesburg|s low!
income black population\ residing in areas located far from the sites of greatest economic concentration in
the city and their advocates\ their slogan being {one city\ one tax base| "Beall et al[\ 1999#[

Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\ Ltd[ J[ Int[ Dev[ 01\ 732Ð745 "1999#
 Re!framin` Urban Policy and Politics 744

Women|s Stru``les for Livelihood in Latin America\ Friedmann J et al[ "eds#[ UCLA Latin
American Studies Centre] Los Angeles[
Bayat A[ 0882[ Street Politics\ Poor People|s Movements in Iran[ Columbia University Press]
New York[
Beall J[ 0884[ Social security and social networks among the urban poor in Pakistan[ Habitat
International 08"3#] 316Ð334[
Beall J[ 1999[ Life in the cities[ In Poverty and Development into the 10st Century\ Allen T\
Thomas A "eds#[ Oxford University Press] Oxford[
Beall J\ Crankshaw O\ Parnell S[ 1999[ Local government\ poverty reduction and inequality in
Johannesburg[ Environment and Urbanization 01"0#] 096Ð011[
Beall J\ Kanji N[ 0888[ Households\ livelihoods and urban poverty[ Urban Governance\ Part!
nership and Poverty Workin` Paper Three[ International Development Department\ Uni!
versity of Birmingham\ Birmingham[
Bessis S[ 0884[ From social exclusion to social cohesion] towards a policy agenda[ Mana`ement
of Social Transformations "MOST#!UNESCO\ Policy Paper No[ 1[ UNESCO] Paris[
Castells M[ 0872[ The City and Grassroots] A Cross!cultural Theory of Urban Social Movements[
Matthew Arnold] London[
Chant S[ 0880[ Women and Survival in Mexican Cities] Perspectives on Gender\ Labour Markets
and Low!income Households[ Manchester University Press] Manchester[
Dahiya B[ 0888[ The impact of decentralization policies in India[ Habitat Debate 4"3#] 14[
De Soto H[ 0878[ The Other Path] The Invisible Revolution in the Third World[ I[B[ Taurus]
London[
Friedmann J[ 0878[ The Latin American Barrio Movement as a social movement] contribution
to a debate[ International Journal of Urban and Re`ional Research 02"2#] 490Ð409[
Friedmann J[ 0887[ The new political economy of planning] the rise of civil society[ In Cities
for Citizens\ Douglass M\ Friedmann J "eds#[ John Wiley] Chichester[
Grown CA\ Sebstad J[ 0878[ Introduction] toward a wider perspective on women employment[
World Development 06"6#] 826Ð841[
Harvey D[ 0862[ Social Justice and the City[ Blackwell] Oxford[
Kanji N[ 0884[ Gender\ poverty and economic adjustment in Harare\ Zimbabwe[ Environment
and Urbanization 6"0#] 26Ð45[
Kleinman M[ 0887[ Include me out< The new politics of place and poverty[ CASE paper 00^
Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion\ London School of Economics\ London[
Levitas R[ 0887[ The Inclusive Society< Social Exclusion and New Labour[ Macmillan] London[
Lewis O[ 0850[ The Children of Sanchez[ Random House] New York[
Lind A\ Farmelo M[ 0885[ Gender and urban social movements] women|s community responses
to restructuring and urban poverty[ UNRISD Discussion Paper 65[ United Nations Research
Institute for Social Development\ Geneva[
Lipton M[ 0866[ Why Poor People Stay Poor] Urban Bias in World Development[ Maurice
Temple Smith] London[
Mayer P[ 0852[ Townsmen or Tribesmen\ Urbanization in Divided Society[ Oxford University
Press] Cape Town[
Moser C[ 0885[ Confrontin` Crisis] A Comparative Study of Household Responses to Poverty
and Vulnerability in Four Urban Communities[ Environmentally Sustainable Development
Studies and Monographs Series No[ 7[ The World Bank] Washington\ DC[
Moser C[ 0887[ The asset vulnerability framework] reassessing urban poverty reduction stra!
tegies[ World Development 15"0#[
Murray C[ 0889[ The Emer`in` British Underclass[ Institute of Economic A}airs] London[

Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\ Ltd[ J[ Int[ Dev[ 01\ 732Ð745 "1999#
745 J[ Beall

Perlman J[ 0865[ The Myth of Mar`inality[ University of California Press] Berkeley[

Rodgers G\ Gore C\ Figueiredo J[ 0884[ Social Exclusion] Rhetoric\ Reality\ Responses[ Inter!
national Institute for Labour Studies] Geneva[
Satterthwaite D[ 0886[ Urban poverty\ reconsidering its scale and nature[ IDS Bulletin\ 17"1#]
8Ð12[
Scheper!Hughes N[ 0881[ Death without Weepin`] The Violence of Everyday Life in Brazil[
University of California Press] Berkeley[
Schneider C[ 0880[ Radical opposition parties and squatters movements in Pinochet|s Chile[
Latin American Perspectives 07"57#] 81Ð001[
Schuurmann F\ van Naevssen T[ 0878[ Urban Social Movements in the Third World[ Croom
Helm] London[
Scott J[ 0874[ Weapons of the Weak] Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance[ Yale University
Press] London and New Haven[
Sibley D[ 0884[ Geo`raphies of Exclusion[ Society and Difference in the West[ Routledge]
London[
Taylor P[ 0888[ Democratizing cities\ Habitat|s global campaign on urban governance[ Habitat
Debate 4"3#] 0Ð4[
Tendler J[ 0886[ Good Government in the Tropics[ The John Hopkins University Press] Baltimore
and London[
Turner J[ 0865[ Housin` by People] Towards Autonomy in Buildin` Environments[ Marion
Boyars] London[
UNDP[ 0880[ Cities\ people and poverty\ urban development co!operation for the 0889s[
UNDP Strate`y Paper^ UNDP\ New York[
UNDP[ 0887[ Human Development Report[ UNDP] New York[
UNCHS "Habitat#[ 0885[ An Urbanizin` World] Global Report on Human Settlements 0885[
Oxford University Press for UNCHS "Habitat#] Oxford[
UNCHS "Habitat#[ 0888[ Global campaign on urban governance[ http]::www[unchs[
org:govern[
Wirth L[ 0827[ Urbanism as a way of life[ American Journal of Sociolo`y 33] 0Ð13[
Wolfensohn JD[ 0886[ The Challenge of Inclusion\ President|s address to the World Bank[
IMF Annual Meeting in Hong!Kong\ China\ 12rd September[
World Bank[ 0880[ Urban Policy and Economic Development] An Agenda for the 0889s[
World Bank Policy Paper[ World Bank] Washington\ DC[
World Bank[ 0882[ Housin`] Enablin` Markets to Work[ World Bank] Washington\ DC[
World Bank[ 0886[ World Development Report 0886[ Oxford University Press] Oxford[
Wratten E[ 0884[ Conceptualising urban poverty[ Environment and Urbanization 6"0#] 00Ð25[

Copyright Þ 1999 John Wiley + Sons\ Ltd[ J[ Int[ Dev[ 01\ 732Ð745 "1999#