- Browse/Search Program
Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Session Type
- Navigation and Settings Menu
Personal Schedule
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
- Participant Resources
Deadlines
Policies
Accessible Presentation
FAQs
- Social Media
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Evict or Invest: Local Distinction and Variations of Urban Informality Governance in Jakarta, Indonesia
Mon, August 10, 2:30 to 4:10pm PDT (2:30 to 4:10pm PDT), Parc55, Floor: Level 4, StocktonAbstract
Why do some informal neighborhoods get evicted, and others get improved? This paper takes as its starting point the empirical observation of the uneven execution of pro-poor and inclusive policies towards informal neighborhoods (kampungs) by the municipal government in Jakarta, Indonesia. While some kampungs are well-served and have undergone on-site improvements and redevelopments, other kampungs experienced forced evictions even when they have a similar connection to urban poor movement and were the supporters of the incumbent leaders. Dominant explanations in urban sociology have difficulties in elucidating within-city variations because they tend to focus on the unifying impact of global capitalism and neoliberal state on increased inequality. Studies in comparative urban politics have highlighted the uneven public goods distribution among slums through extensive patron-client relationships. Still, they are not entirely sufficient to explain why city leaders evicted their constituents.
This study utilizes a comparative analysis of diverse kampungs in Jakarta based on interviews with community leaders and government officials, observation in kampungs, and study of government archives. The preliminary findings suggest that variations of urban informality governance depend on local distinction with a combination of 1) the relational dimension—the personal connection of community leaders with politicians and cohesion among community leaders, and 2) the ideational factor—the capacity of the community to provide mutually beneficial development alternatives for the government. Overall, this study highlights the importance of considering local power dynamics, community cohesion, and ideational capacity in explaining patterns of relationship between the state and citizen in urban informal space.