Institutionalization and Depoliticization of the Right to the City: Changing Scenarios for Radical Social Movements

Abstract

The right to the city, a concept previously associated with radical social movements, has been accepted by several governments and has inspired new public policies. However, some authors see this process of institutionalization as involving a loss of a significant part of the radical origins of the concept. This article approaches this process and the new opportunities and limitations it may entail for social movement organizations with a more radical perspective on the right to the city. We explore the paradigmatic case of Brazil and the action of a particular organization, the Movimento dos Sem Teto da Bahia (MSTB, or Homeless Movement of Bahia) in the city of Salvador. We draw on the discussion of the politics of the right to the city and on an original combination of social movement theories and critical discourse analysis in order to analyse political‐institutional and discursive changes in urban reform in Brazil and Salvador. We then analyse how the MSTB moves within this new context, navigating its tensions and contradictions while advancing a radical project of transformation of urban reality within a reformist context. We also reflect on the relevance of Lefebvrian ideas for understanding and inspiring contemporary struggles for the right to the city.

Resisting the 'Long‐Arm' of the State? Spheres of Capture and Opportunities for Autonomy in Community Governance

“…For instance, participants can become active citizens through the adoption of resources, alliances, power realignments and institutional provisions for participation (Taylor, ). With time, these challenges can themselves transform institutional practices creating governance spaces through which new opportunities can be exploited (Belda‐Miquel et al ., ). A recent strand of work has proposed the respective virtues of agonism or ‘agnostic debate’ in highlighting the role of contention in potential counter‐hegemonic politics (Ploger, ; McClymont, ; Mitchell et al ., ).…”

When social movements collaborate with the state towards the right to the city: Unveiling compromises and conflicts

“…In the "city of capital", resources and decisions are confined to a political and economic elite who design the city in accordance with their desires, transforming space and quality of life into commodities. The right to the city radically challenges the social relations structured, reproduced and controlled by the homogenizing capitalist order (Belda-Miquel et al, 2016;Dikec¸, 2001).…”

“…Instead of providing a "step-by-step" on how to achieve the right to the city, Lefebvre inspired the radical thinking towards the "right to a very different life in the context of a very different, just society" (de Souza, 2010: 318). In such a society, a city would respond to the social needs of its users, those who inhabit it, rather than those who are its owners (Belda-Miquel et al, 2016;Lefebvre, 2008;Purcell, 2003Purcell, , 2006. Defined as "people managing collective decisions themselves rather than surrendering those decisions to a cadre of state officials" (Purcell, 2014: 147), self-management (autogestion) is paramount to cementing the right to the city.…”

“…Some authors stress that the practice-claiming connotation, while serving as a common frame or slogan that unites several actors, also poses as a threat to de-radicalizing the construct, diluting the transformational horizon proposed by Lefebvre into blueprints that should be followed to achieve "improved" cities (Mayer, 2009;de Souza, 2010). The discussion of de-radicalization reaches urban social movements with respect to how these movements opt to follow the social struggle and their capacity not to be co-opted by governments as service providers (Belda-Miquel et al, 2016;Domaradzka, 2018;Pruijt, 2019). The literature on the dilemmas faced by urban social movements when partnering with the State is relatively advanced (Abers and Bu¨low, 2011;Lavalle et al, 2018;Pruijt, 2019;Pruijt and Roggeband, 2014;Sites, 2012).…”

Energy democracy as the right to the city: Urban energy struggles in Berlin and London

“…Against these many fields of application, some scholars criticise the vagueness and radical openness of the concept, which is even said to risk potentially reactionary approaches (Purcell, 2014). Indeed, a current strand of research on RTC focuses on the question of how processes of institutionalisation, for example, through national government programmes, might lead to ‘a loss of the originally radical content of the right to the city’ (Belda-Miquel et al., 2016: 321).…”