Explore the vast range of titles available.

The urban studies literature has extensively analysed the modernist, developmental or neoliberal drivers of urban restructuring in the global South, but has largely overlooked the ways in which governments, particularly those with authoritarian characteristics, try to reinforce their legitimacy and assert their political authority through the creation of satellite cities and housing developments. From Ethiopia to Singapore, authoritarian regimes have recently provided housing to the middle class and the poor, not only to alleviate housing shortages, or bolster a burgeoning real estate market, but also to ‘order power’ and buy the loyalty of residents. To evaluate the extent to which authoritarian regimes realise their political objectives through housing provision, we survey nearly 300 poor and middle class respondents from three new housing projects in Luanda, Angola. Alongside increasing social and spatial differentiation brought about by state policies, we document unintended beneficiaries of state housing and uneven levels of citizen satisfaction. We explain that internal state contradictions, individual agency and market forces have acted together to re-shape the government’s efforts to order power. 城市研究文献广泛分析了南半球城市重构过程中的现代派、发展派或新自由派驱动力, 但在很大程度上忽略了政府、尤其是那些带威权特征的政府, 如何试图通过建造卫星城和住房开发来巩固其正当性, 并主张其政治权威。从埃塞俄比亚到新加坡, 威权政体近年来为中产阶层和贫困人口提供住房, 不仅是为了缓解住房短缺或促进方兴未艾的房地产市场, 也是为了“施展权力”, 并收买居民的忠诚度。为评估威权政体通过住房供应在多大程度上实现了其政治目的, 我们对安哥拉首都罗安达三个新建住房项目中近 300 位贫困居民和中产阶层居民做了问卷调查。除了通过政府政策增加社会和空间的分异外, 我们记录了政府住房的意外受惠者和市民的不均衡满意水平。我们的解释是, 政府内部的矛盾、个人的能动性和市场力量共同发挥作用, 重新塑造了政府施展权力的努力。

Although the sixtieth anniversary of the ASA’s founding offers an occasion to celebrate the association’s accomplishments, it also coincides with a historical moment of resurgent authoritarianism, growing intolerance, and renascent nativism. Democratic institutions in the United States and abroad are under attack; bigotry, injustice, and incivility have become re-energized. This article reflects on the discourses, spaces, and technologies employed by Africans to contest the multiple expressions of political exclusion on the continent over the last sixty years. It finds inspiration and lessons that might guide us as we develop our own forms of political advocacy in this illiberal age. Même si le soixantième anniversaire de la Fondation de l’ASA offre une occasion de célébrer les réalisations de l’association, elle coïncide également avec un moment historique ou l’autoritarisme et le nativisme ont resurgit accompagnés d’une intolérance croissante. Les institutions démocratiques aux États-Unis et à l’étranger sont attaquées ; la bigoterie, l’injustice et l’incivilité sont redynamisées. Cet article se penche sur les discours, les espaces et les technologies employées par les Africains pour contester les expressions multiples de l’exclusion politique sur le continent au cours des soixante dernières années. Cette étude offre inspiration et des leçons qui pourraient nous guider alors que nous développons nos propres formes d’action politique dans cette ère d’intolérance.

This article examines two opposing strategies – one used by government officials and businesses, the other expressed by urban workers – that have emerged in postsocialist Mozambique. On the one hand, government officials and businesses have pursued a deliberate strategy of what several writers in other contexts have called ‘organized forgetting', whereby they seek to airbrush the socialist past from history. They have revised the country's ideological orientation, built new coalitions of support among domestic and internal investors, and remade the ruling party's legitimacy following the abandonment of socialism and the transition to a free‐market democracy. On the other hand, some urban workers have revived and repackaged the language of socialism to protest against the effects of neo‐liberalism. Relying on collective and individual memories of socialism, they denounce ‘exploitation', ‘recolonization', ‘injustice’ and ‘inequality’ as they struggle to understand, resist or modify the impact of structural adjustment and privatization. I argue that, although the end of socialism has allowed a plurality of voices to surface in Mozambique, such discursive pluralism is characterized by increasing power inequities. The consolidation of capital and the ideological pronouncements that accompany it may ultimately silence the now dissident language of the socialist past. Cet article examine deux stratégies opposées, l'une utilisée par les fonctionnaires et les entreprises, l'autre exprimée par les travailleurs urbains, qui sont apparues dans le Mozambique postsocialiste. D'un côté, les fonctionnaires et les entreprises ont poursuit une stratégie délibérée de ce que plusieurs auteurs dans d'autres contextes ont appelé l'«oubli organisé», dans laquelle ils cherchent à effacer de l'histoire le passé socialiste. Ils ont révisé l'orientation idéologique du pays, formé de nouvelles coalitions de soutien parmi les investisseurs domestiques et internes, et refait la légitimité du parti au pouvoir après l'abandon du socialisme et la transition vers une démocratie de marché. De l'autre côté, certains travailleurs urbains ont relancé et mis à jour le langage du socialisme pour protester contre les effets du néolibéralisme. S'appuyant sur les mémoires collectives et individuelles du socialisme, ils dénoncent Sexploitation», la «recolonisation», l'«injustice» et l'«inégalité», alors qu'ils s'évertuent à comprendre ou à modifier l'impact de l'ajustement structurel et de la privatisation, ou à y résister. L'article soutient que, bien que la fin du socialisme ait permis l'émergence d'une pluralité de la parole au Mozambique, ce pluralisme discursif se caractérise par un accroissement des inégalités de pouvoir. La consolidation du capital et les déclarations idéologiques qui l'accompagnent risquent à terme de réduire au silence le langage aujourd'hui dissident du passé socialiste.

This study investigates the effects of formal bureaucratic independence under varying democratic conditions. Conventional accounts predict that greater formal independence of technocratic agencies facilitates policy implementation, but those claims rest on observations of industrialised, high-income countries that are also established democracies. On the basis of research in developing countries, we argue that the effects of agency independence depend on the political context in which the agency operates. Our empirical subjects are privatisation agencies and their efforts to privatise state-owned enterprises in Africa. We predict that greater independence leads to more thorough privatisation under authoritarian regimes, but that the effect of independence declines as a country becomes more democratic. Using an original data set, we examine the relationship between formal agency independence and privatisation in Africa from 1990 to 2007. Our results modify the conventional wisdom on bureaucratic independence and culminate in a more nuanced theory of “contingent technocracy”.

Why have labor movements in Mozambique, Zambia, and South Africa increasingly been marginalized from the economic debates that are taking place in their countries, even though they have supported ruling parties? Policy reforms such as trade liberalization, privatization, and revisions to labor legislation in all three countries partially account for the loss of power by organized labor as many scholars have claimed. Yet, these policy \"adjustments\" have also interacted with long-run, structural changes in production, distribution, and trade of goods as well as with processes of democratization to undermine the position of trade unions across much of southern Africa. The article explores this puzzle by first examining the different historical trajectories of organized labor in Mozambique, Zambia, and South Africa. It then analyzes how policy reforms, global restructuring, and democracy had similar consequences across all three cases; collectively, they produced declines in trade-union membership and weakened the influence of organized labor. Although trade unions face a number of daunting challenges, the conclusion traces emerging opportunities for labor to recover from its current malaise.

Unable to respond to the challenges from within and without to their attempted monopolization of economic and political power, socialist regimes succumbed to processes of structural adjustment, economic liberalization and political pluralism.

Many of the economic transformations in Africa have been as dramatic as those in Eastern Europe. Yet much of the comparative literature on transitions has overlooked African countries. This 2002 study of Mozambique's shift from a command to a market economy draws on a wealth of empirical material, including archival sources, interviews, political posters and corporate advertisements, to reveal that the state is a central actor in the reform process, despite the claims of neo-liberals and their critics. Alongside the state, social forces - from World Bank officials to rural smallholders - have also accelerated, thwarted or shaped change in Mozambique. M. Anne Pitcher offers an intriguing analysis of the dynamic interaction between previous and emerging agents, ideas and institutions, to explain the erosion of socialism and the politics of privatization in a developing country. She demonstrates that Mozambique's political economy is a heterogenous blend of ideological and institutional continuities and ruptures.

Since independence, three processes have shaped the lives of rural Mozambicans: the implementation of socialist policies, a protracted and low intensity civil war, and the more recent commitment to privatise state assets. This article examines their impact on agrarian economic relations and institutions of local political power in Nampula, northern Mozambique from 1975 to 1995. It describes and compares the ways that rural people constructed their livelihoods to cope with the effects of these processes. The article finds that socialism, war, and privatisation disrupted rather than transformed agrarian relations in Nampula. They reshaped rather than replaced local political authority and certain customary patterns, and they have unsettled rather than reconfigured the ways in which rural people make a living. Three reasons explain why disruption without transformation occurred. First, the outcomes of socialist policies and the war were inconclusive, and it appears that the effect of privatisation will be indeterminate. Second, pre-existing political and economic structures have influenced and undermined efforts to transform agrarian relations. Third, rural people themselves have acted to shape the impact of policies and other external factors in unpredictable ways. These findings may help us to understand recent developments in Mozambique's countryside.