Abstract
AbstractInformality in the global south thought to matter because it is a threat, or a stage on the road, to (or embedded in) formality; or because it is a permanent condition acceptable on its own terms and has the potential to keep formal bureaucratic organizations running and in touch with citizens. These understandings of informality also share an assertion: that the quality of informality is different – almost genetically so – from formality. The purpose of my remarks here is to point this discussion in another direction. I argue that the difference between informality and formality is only conceptual. The supposition that there exists in fact an informal-formal dichotomy, dualism or dialectic, and its use as an analytical lens, produces apparent features which it cannot easily account for. I illustrate these features and then go on to sketch out another approach and its implications.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.