ABSTRACT
As the previous chapters in this volume demonstrate, in the field of housing, transnational networks of urban poor have emerged over the last decades. They engage with formal agencies and have created new structures as a response to failing and unwilling states (as illustrated in Chapters 1 and 3) and also challenged more conventional approaches and understandings of participation vis-à-vis the state and bilateral development cooperation (see for example Chapters 4, 6, 7, and 8). Informal settlements are recognized as locations for development and the survival space of individuals and groups within civil society is expanded through everyday politics (Bradlow, 2011; Bayat, 2004 and Chapter 6 in this volume). Consequently, grassroots are increasingly gaining voice on contemporary debates on cities. Despite the tangible acknowledgment that more than just the house and sewerage is needed, housing has long been addressed as a technical problem. Only through the engagement of transnational networks in the past decade has it become clear and generally accepted that housing is inextricably connected with the distribution of power and resources and that an adequate representation of the key actors in negotiation processes is essential. The presence of strong and mandated partners in those negotiation processes is a prerequisite for more responsive solutions. This is a lesson that leads beyond the ‘classical’ idea of having the poor participate in a process that is initiated and led by government institutions.
