Seminario: ¿Para qué sirve un alcalde de izquierdas? Los casos de París y São Paulo

Ponente: Patrick Le Galès, Investigador del Centro de estudios europeos y de política comparada en Sciences Po (Francia).

Coordinan: J.A. Boudreau, V. Crossa y V. Ugalde

Producción: Coordinación de Servicios de Cómputo / Departamento de Servicios Tecnológicos Digitales

PA r [Music] comos Mar [Music] patri is Professor soci [Music] in to [Music] r fall of the sociology of local cities review of sociology Handbook of global comparative studies generous introduction and apologies for not speaking in Spanish but I could take the questions in Spanish s it’s my limitations um I come from Britany the west of France the Celtic Part the Irish part on the seaside so we speak too quickly so I try to speak slowly but it’s like the Irish will speak too much I try to count down um so what I want to present tonight is work in progress It’s not it’s a paper in the making okay so it’s early days and preliminary results it’s coming from a research project that we started about 10 years ago called wig what is governed and not governed in large Metropolis where we decided to compare s Paulo and Mexico Paris and London so for the last seven eight years we have worked in Mexico with bente and the group at Seda and I’ve been doing some work with the colleagues in s Paulo Eduardo Marquez is writing the paper with me with professor in s Paulo and director of the center for Metropolitan studies and with a group in London at UCL with my C and there’s a small group also in Milan I will explain in a minute but basically I will not explain the all program of research we’ve been doing it’s a research program influenced by um a political sociology of governance so we are critical of a more rational public policy people it’s coming from the political economy from Italy and it’s inspired by Max vber Mich fuku and all so we look for a conceptualization of governance which is very sociological is nonlinear which emphasize the ups and down the failes what is legal and illegal and trying to make sense of the transformation of cities by looking at those element but by contrast to some of literature in planning or in geography we take governance seriously and we take explain that so we look at the role of political regulations and policies we take policies seriously but we are not classic political scientists speaking like you know governments government yeah so what students study my students don’t study on Friday night so you know governments govern more or less some neighborhoods more or less it all depends so it’s an empirical questions okay so that’s the logic and we try to compare those those four cities so what I will present tonight will be part of that these are the four groups uh can I emphasize it’s a sort of Jazzy long-term research project Jazzy means it’s not like you have a bit of money you work for three years you write a book and it’s over it’s the opposite we develop a research program a bit ambitious and we accumulate money more or less and we do comparison between the four cities and we the program is changing over time and we have had PhD students we’ve had postdocs so there’s a whole group of about 50 people who have been involved and doing accumulating work with this original research program and until now we have done these books my colleagues have done two books on S Paulo uh we’ve done two books in Paris and to do one book now in English is one book on London one on Milan and we did the book the first book with bente on Mexico and we are now working on the second book with vente on on Mexico that might be in English Okay so it’s a big long-term research program and we are now at the stage where we are developing comparative and comparative work between elements of this program between two three or the four cities okay that’s the logic of what we’re doing so it’s a comparative political economy um sociology of cities and we try to figure about different dimensions I will not develop too much tonight but the key point is trying to understand what is governed and not governed so the limits of political regulation and I will emphasize this element tonight um and of course we are using as a starting point the idea that um you know metropolitans big metropolit are increasing ly emerging as scales at which governance and policy responses to disord are being developed so often in conflict with a nation state but we see in different parts of the world forms of decentralization more expertise more money and Mayors doing things so some element and that’s my key point of political differentiation between what happens in the L metropolit and what happen at the national level of policy so that’s the sort of General framework within which this paper will be be using so the key element and the intellectual program I’m I’m trying to develop at the moment on the more conceptual side is to what extent can we try to think about Urban policy and politics as a differentiated World from the national world and I said differentiated not autonomous okay some of my colleague in urban study is they think about cities in a world of cities okay I don’t believe in that I think cities are part of a world of Cities state International organizations NOS informal organizations but among all those those Metropolis some of them are gaining more resources and more agency okay so theidea is from a conceptual point of view maybe some of the concept we use in political science to think about policies and politics we should refine them and they may be you know what takes place in Mexico and London and and Hong Kong and Tokyo there may be some similar element which creates a sort of world of urban policies and politics differentiated from the world at a national level so it’s an hypothesis it’s both a conceptual research program that means you need to think conceptually about different forms of policy and politics I’m using the work and I I I work with Warren Magnuson in Canada who is one of the key scholar to think along those lines but I think the characteristics of this program and that’s what we do with vente is to emphasize on policies okay public policies and we extend to which B with that capacity for Collective action I understand public policy as forms of collective action but will make a difference for inhabitants and explain a bit what is going on in the trans formation of cities so I’m not saying capitalism doesn’t matter I’m not saying neoliberalism doesn’t matter not NE liberalism matters very much but that’s a paper on that if you want I’m not saying that informal regulations don’t matter I’m just saying let’s try to push the hypothesis that we see forms of policies and political regulation governance but are able to explain some of the transformation of cities more or less maybe or maybe not some sectors some neighborhoods okay so in this attempt to conceptualize a world of urban policy and politics which is always part of this world of states and Nos and large firms and all that we see some policy issues in all the large cities of the world you have issues about housing housing crisis is everywhere we have questions of use of land of course what my colleague stop and Scot called the Urban Land Nexxus there are questions of planning planning failures in many places we have questions of infrastructure networks we have questions of tax we have questions of climate crisis water air pollution food in most of those cities in the world there are always issues with security and policing with poverty with education Social Services Health inequalities migration regulation of Airbnb um now Big Data rights whatever you want migration conflict with Central State issues of political participation so there are a number of issues that what wherever you work in benarus in Legos in Africa in in Tokyo in Jakarta in Paris you are facing those issues but are more or less completely integrated at the national level or more or less autonomization and you see different forms of I would say governance conflict solving mechanism ways of doing policies and capacity to bring some change for the life of inhabitants okay so that’s the logic of this project and what we have seen in the past few years and we know historically is that historically BL has tried to bring some change in both cities so in the recent time we have seen a new current of research on new municipalism I’m not so impressed but it’s interesting to discuss and in Europe for instance we are all fan of adak the former mayor of Barcelona and in Barcelona we have really trying to innovate on a number of issues with lots of failures but also lots of success so the idea of this paper I’m presenting tonight is to raise the imaginaries and to try to think much more systematically about what would leftwing Mayors achieved in both cities what are they what is the space of imagination I use of course italino because you know how can you do open research without starting BYO but the idea is let’s try to think about how can we document the extent to which urban governments and leftwing Mayors have managed to bring some change in some cities and to try to measure that and to compare that and to see whether it’s contributing to the making of This Urban policy political world maybe we conclude by saying doesn’t make sense it’s very small but maybe we’ll say something else so it’s both a conceptual project theoretical project and an empirical project lot of those questions are empirical okay so that’s what we have been trying to do so the presentation will be in three classic sections number one trying to ask whether this question of leftwing urban governance makes sense or not is it a vintage question a sort of 1970s question like some of my colleagues say in the urban studies so I would disc of my robustly my excellent colleague in urban research second say a few things about the comparison between s Pao in Paris and you understand that everything about s Paulo I’ve been there like eight times but the research is done by the group of Edo Marquez they have done fantastic work in s Pao and then start to do some comparison between Paris and S Paulo and start to elaborate a few things again this is not a finished paper I want you to present a finished paper but is enough no no no no produce work in progress so but I thought it was we thought it was an interesting way because doing something similar with vente and thinking about left R Mayors in in Mexico so it might ask question about left and what do we achieve in Mexico City so it’s also something that we will do and and we plan to do a special issue of a journal at some point with what do left maych in London Paris Mexico maybe a couple of other on okay so it’s a part of this this project so um to start with you know leftwing Urban governance is it a very relevant can I remind you that for a large body of urban studies and I’m not saying it’s right or wrong okay I just think there are different ways to think about that but for large bodies of urban research Urban studies this question is irrelevant okay this question just does not make any sense more or less for most of the people I will criticize now are good friends okay so there’s nothing like my view is better and there is bad it’s not the point we’re doing different things okay so you know probably the work of Neil brener who all this work on planetary oranization you have all the liter of neoliberalism again for those who want to be use that there’s a special issue of a general territory politics and governance explaining that or arguing that neoliberalism is a completely overstretch concept you should be rigorous in the way you use it okay that’s my view um so as you know a lot of neoo post po po Marxist Urban research which is still very very powerful and interesting today you know the end of the day I was a student of David Harvey is you know leftwing public policy public policies don’t matter cities don’t have any agency and what is important is urbanization process so my question doesn’t make any sense okay from a point of view of the more Marxist views of those things and a lot of NE post post post Marxist are my friends they are part of this idea you know you think about global cities about planetary urbanization about all this process of urbanization processes of urbanization and that very important to look at that but my own view is that opposing urbanization process against thinking in terms of metropolis and cities and Collective an agency doesn’t work you need to articulate some of that in some point so I’m not saying organization process not important that fundamental but you need also in some cases at different moment in time to think about various forms of collective action of public policy of Institutions uh and politics to explain what’s going on again more or less these are empirical questions let’s turn okay you also have a lot of literature emphasizing day-to-day experience emphasizing that the city is so important that there are so much relations so complex you know this city is complex very complex super complex and it is so complex but doesn’t make any sense to understand forms of order like forms of collective actions policy and then you have also literature in the sociology of Science and Technology looking at assemblage old tradition that is explaining super that questions are irrelevant okay so if you think these questions are stupid right lots of people think that that’s fine can do that you don’t need to think like me um there’s also a literature public policy explaining that thinking in terms left and right doesn’t matter very much and in some of the work I do about public policy at the national level and comparing policies in different countries quite often the leftwing dimension is not very relevant because the accumulation of public policy over time has led so with Allure public policy emphasizing that the more you have public policy the more inheritance of public policy you have you a sort of policy State and policies are they own autonomy and they are not changed very much by political uh government by left or right sometimes in some case but the majority of case not very much so very strong autonomy from policies from politics and I’ve got a lot of examples about that and the idea is that ex the implementation of policies that is creating new cleavages and new political differentiation so I don’t mention it too much tonight but over literature on accumulation of public policy policy State uh in is emphasizing that the Left Right Dimension is not very strong okay again empirical question and the more institutionalized B policy you have the less it is easy for a government to change a policy but it depends there are lots of cases where have major changes okay again it depends it depends and you have to explain the mechanism so maybe it’s not such a a very interesting question and of course my favorite the post politics literature so er is again very friend of mine we have disagreed for 30 years so we have no problem with that so part of literature which I would qualify like post post post post Marxist um is explaining that basically elections don’t matter democracy does not exist in cities and that what we call the existence of politics is an illusion okay so he has try to conceptualize what you called post politics meaning uh trying to document The Disappearance of a political order in a post-political Arrangement trying to so he’s using a lot of philosophy what happens in urban studies is that a lot of geographers are using a lot of philosophy so it’s very exciting intellectually a lot of very interesting work like Po politics but on the the bad part of yeah can don’t do everything is that the empirical work is very weak very weak very very we okay so it’s a problem of articulating VT but that sort of work is more stimulating is helping you to think in terms of imagination about what sort of political world should be okay so he’s using a number of philosophers I mention the name for those who are interested particularly jaier because you know that particularly critical geographer they like French dead philosopher they like them a lot they use a lot of French Dead Philosophers but FIA is not there so that’s an exception and they emphasize the limits of political regulations the threats to democracy and the impact of inequality so their point is very very strong they said it’s not a real political order and from a physical philosophical point of view it’s a very stimulating way to think so they write in a book and I quote uh but basically uh the real world of politics which includes conflict is colonized by politics and urban politics is technocratic mechanism conceptual procedures basically they argue there is no people anymore no Citizen and it’s everything is technocratic okay so post political we live in a world where there is no Urban politics and policies in cities okay which is I would argue empirically wrong wrong and wrong but philosophically and in terms of ideas very stimulating to understand you know to demonstrate some element of that because sometimes this is absolutely correct and to show how you can move and think about different conceptualization so I’m very impressed and I like this work to make you think about different ways about the future of urban politics and policies but I think it’s classic Neo Marxist this is the world is very bad we have to wait for a revolution and meanwhile policies don’t matter very much which I do not sure I’m not sure it works so well okay so that’s that’s the idea by contrast I have argued with lots of other people but in many countries you have by contrast an increasing importance of urban and local politics so I have a paper I mentioned here in the annual review science we try to show that um in the past few decades what you have seen in a number of countries and I’m not talking about Europe okay I’m going beyond that we have seen democratization of regime in a number of countries Mexico and when you have democratization you have politicization you have new conflict and territorial conflict and you have very much more urban politics than you had before and more capacity to get some forms of urban policy so the argument is by contrast to post-political we see in a number of countries and I can give you a lot of them increasing politicization of urban politics and policy okay point one second argument what we’ve seen is as you know globalized capitalism by the way you can analyze globalized capitalism it’s different from neoliberalism it’s all the same thing um and with the current Industrial Revolution you see increasing territorial inequalities between the urban and the rest and particularly between some of the major cities concentrating wealth resources expensive housing in those things and because of this increasing territorial inequalities you see increasing politicized conflict and more uran policy and politics in a number of countries and thirdly what we have seen in a large number of countries are more or less forms of decentralization that have given more money more resources more expertise for a number of urban governments so the urban government of Dakar in Sagal has far more resources is and 20 years ago and they have access to funds in different International organizations that’s also true of course in Mexico it’s true in most big Open Cities it’s true in Tokyo it’s true not everywhere it’s not a linear process but in many countries you see much more importance and resources and capacity therefore capacity for Collective action and policies it may fail it may not make any change but at least let’s examine whether can see some effect of that okay so the project is let’s take those policies seriously not just the discourses but what policies are implemented and whether it makes a difference for the life of inhabitants but again I am in this governance pattern I mentioned before I know that lot of policy fails I know that a lot of social relations and economic relations are not controlled by political regulations I know it’s shrinking in many countries so it’s not to say government’s govern and it’s important not at all it’s trying to measure to try to make sense at the extent to which there are some policies making difference for life of inhabitants and whether we see some capacity to transform a little bit the city instead of saying oh it’s old capitalism we can do nothing or urbanization process matter and it’s all neoliberalism so you can do nothing okay and maybe I’m wrong maybe we show ially that’s in a number of countries makes a difference but not a huge one okay it’s an open question so that’s what I want to do so looking at this agency capacity and again we understand that in all those Metropolis we have a lot of informality and I want to pay tribute to a wonderful paper by julan on the city of repair where she really characterized very well the fact that a lot of collective action is taking place outside govern but those Dynamics are also institutionalized in some ways so the logic is to articulate also some formal and informal regulations and to work on these gray areas where we see a lot of collective action taking place okay so to put things bluntly we are we are registered so I cannot say stupid things so it’s not like it’s not a rational policy American way okay that’s all that’s theal choice so the argument is as I say let’s I mean this Urban left in action What policies are done what is implemented and how can we measure some results and then we try to say something okay and we know there are some uncertainties about you know all this we discussed the Dark Side of governance in this project corruption glism but we don’t I don’t believe at all the post political thing I think it’s by Contra with more politicization and more politics and policies in many many countries we see differentiation polarization around identity migration uh political cleavage rivenes politics we see a lot of uncertainties about the progressive left I differentiate policy and politics and I want to concentrate as a method that come back to that on conflict the way to think about those things is to think about conflict and I keep my view when you think about governance you think about conflict solving mechanism okay and Collective action capacity to do things so look at coalitions and activities and implementation for those who have read Mion fuk there one lesson of method that you should always remember about f f always say well you know we don’t care about the state of this sort of framework look at activities what is being done okay so in my work I look at and dispositive look at how you do things and what is being done so my advice to you is whatever you study remember this methods look at activities what do people do and then we’ll think about the number of other okay so point two compar your problem of course what you say that how you do that okay and it’s of course difficult you don’t have super database that you can use easy way it’s never like that in uran studies okay so what I’m presenting is what we have started to do we are still working on that I think within one year we should have a pay more so that’s the sort of things that been doing number one of course when we do comparative research in uran studies we always have to look at the scale issue okay because it’s never the same thing from one country to the next so look at s Pao when you think about s Paulo you have two scales that will make sense number one is the city of s Pao which is very well structured as an organization so 12 million in ABS uh the city council has about 122 employees so you know they do something maybe it’s not very important maybe they fail but you know let’s look at what they do not saying it’s just politics it’s not enough um okay most of them are under trained and underpaid that’s my friend Eduardo is saying that and we have a budget of about 40 billion US okay 40 billion US for 12 million in alligence okay so you know $4 billion you can do things okay so it’s worth examining what difference could be done with some so we will concentrate tonight on the city of of course the other scale that we need to study is the greatest of which is about 39 municipalities uh 20 million one now uh inabit but for tonight we don’t we’ll do that afterwards and it’s never always we never had for ages anyway Paris when you look at Paris you have always three scales okay o we do here stale number one the urban region okay which is more or less the Regional Council and that’s 12 million so in a way you can compare the urban areas of Paris with the city of s Paulo in terms of science but the Reginal Council doesn’t have a huge amount of budget it’s 5 billion EUR so they say $5.5 and 2050 uh employees not a huge capacity but they have said I would not address that tonight but they had a leftwing president for 18 years so it’s part of our program to study that okay the second scale is what is called metop so that’s the urban government M the local Authority for the urban core of the urban region it was created recently to 2016 uh it is a sort of consensus weak uh rightwing politics and it is weak in terms of Institutions it’s a new thing okay so again it will be part of our program but I will not discuss that too much tonight but that’s part of we will for paper we discuss different scale and the classic thing is the city of Paris Paris city council which has only 2.2 million inhabitants okay but it has a very very powerful uh Administration and and money okay so they have a budget about 10 billion US do for 2 million habitants comparing with s so very very rich okay huge amount of money okay together with 55,000 employees so half s only has twice as much so of course the difference is this huge amount of resources a huge amount of of employees okay and it’s been led by so just to keep in mind in the city of s Paulo I will talk about left wing Mayors uh basically the majority of Mayors have been rightwing in s Paulo except three times and the modate are three years for Mayors in s Paulo you have uh Lisa 8992 mat 20203 and F had 2013 and 2016 with never Ministry of Finance of so we look at that and particularly uh the mate of had which I will mention tonight the case of Paris we had a long longterm rightwing urban government and the city council has a leftwing government since 2001 we now have dooi and analo and so it’s that 23 years of left wi government in Paris city council and the region 12 million scale we had a leftwing president for from 98 to 2015 so we get some we can do some work okay there there’s enough resources and example of leftwing to be able to say something and to do some comparison just to be remember that if we want to go further in this research we have to give a precise on what does the left mean in in those countries and I understand that discussing moras left party it’s an interesting subject but not me you the job uh it’s somehow always pretty straightforward the left is the BT the ruler about it very clear says a very clear leftwing party that’s precise you can really study that in a very clear way in Paris it’s also relatively simple socialist meeting Central left together with a strong green party the greens are real left Green Party the green here that’s my understanding if I say things wrong it’s should take BL okay and and then we have a small Communist party which still still there still play a role and there’s a new L which is a m Group which is probably closer to in some ways but it plays no role in the local government of har syic okay so I would not explain tonight the sort of black ideas they have their project but they are relatively easy to compare in understand what are the main Dynamics in the two cities so we can do that in in the in the paper the other thing I want to emphasize is that in the paper we will sort of distinguish between the politics and the policies and see how they are connected okay so the idea is that we don’t look at them as completely integrated we’ll differentiate the the discourses politics the actors and the policies being implemented and we’ll see how they connect on that so we not do too much tonight but we would say something about that and we emphasize the conflict and a come back in in a minut method is of course difficult comparison is always difficult that’s the reason to do that okay in the handbook of comparative Urban studies you mentioned which my introduction is called welcome to the world of imperfect comparison okay this is what happens in uran studies today take some risk try things and that’s the way we can do say something to just wait the perfect database and the perfect variables you nowhere or if you go to old style of topology my case is exceptional because it is exceptional you go very far either okay so be imaginative try to think about all sorts of ways to do elements of comparison so we do classic P we do a lot of interviews Bud analysis documents policy and conflict analysis we have accumulated a lot of work over over so to finish a few results or a few elements I want to bring before but again these are preliminary result I told Marquez uh I was going to present this Pap tonight thank you V and uh he said you’re crazy we Freddy said well I know I know Freddy it’s also why we do seminars for it’s to get ideas and to try things and you know so thanks again for your input after that so number one the left in some power um basically but PT Soo we have represented after the democratization process they have emphasized at the very early days the questions of participation was of course the core of what the has been arguing in a number of cities and thinking about NE liberalism was was very strong there’s a very strong emphasis on this idea of participation which exist also in Paris but not at all at the same scale so participation if you look at documents and and political uh presentations this courses you feel like participation is very strong in Paris and in s Paulo oh yeah in Paris a lot of this courses but you it’s maximizing small participation and we are not at all at the same level so that’s a very strong thing second what was very strong in the left in s Pao was the question of transparency and to open the decision making process particularly in in social policy so the questions of participation was really not just to your little neighborhood and your little budget but you really transform existing education and health policy so is a ve Life by this guy laal who has done some excellent work on on those issues to really try to open the decision process that was never a big question in the case of the French land so in the case of s Paulo Edo has written a fantastic book which I recommend called Progressive incrementalism where where he explains how public policy have changed slowly progressively and the difference that left wi Mayors have done and he emphasized several points number one he emphasize this idea of progressive Innovation the PT was not about Revolution it was not about arriving s and change everything okay it was not about radical change it was about small change in a systematic way in many policies and make progress progressively so in a way you can see that some policies were starting by the first leftwing mayor ER and then by mat and then back but it was not completely abundant in between it was like you know less a priority and then pushed again so you cannot understand like a big program big change and then big no it’s more long-term Progressive change over time and that’s a very important element second he emphasizes left in s Pao is is coming from the Trade union and the social movement and particularly the housing needs and the all uh policies of of the Le Mayors are about negotiating with social movements and housing movements in particular regular regular realization of course of land in the FAS and poty as Clara knows very well um so the dialogue with social movements is absolutely massive and still today is a key issue for any any mayor in in s sometimes it’s difficult okay and the mayor is thinking it’s great to be supported by social movements to be elected when you have to implement policies you know it’s different stor thirdly and and more than in other places the pity in s power was always concerned with redistribution and fiscal reform one of my questions is why don’t see more fiscal reform Mexico that’s a different question but in the case of a Pity in s paalo it was the big fight was to emphasize a different types of tax and and tax on the land tax on housing to try to do some physical reform some success and then to transform urban planning and in a way one of an interesting result from from uh markets because of this you have three Mayors at different moment in time he’s to emphasize what he says he calls hard distribution versus easy redistribution and you say well you know redistributions policy to extend welfare to the poort uh or infrastructure it’s not too difficult to do you can do that but hard distribution when you really are taxing when you are doing uh fiscal redistribution that’s a hard thing to do so we are can see different type of left policies making some difference so the main policies that have been implemented in s Pao things you probably know very well a very important one was SL upgrading not just regularization but investment in in the slum there you notice there’s nothing about policy so I know would be disappointed but he knows it better than me but of course the males is not in charge of police so they have no control whatsoever on the police and that’s a big weakness of the mayor of s Paulo and government of s Paulo is that the police is largely autonom but I speak under control so SL upgrading very second to build a lot of social housing I think that’s something that I always say even if you don’t believe in a good government even if you it’s all small well a question of whether you build affordable and social housing or not because that makes a big difference for people living there so the PT has had a very strong policy to build social housing in s and they have done a lot along those lines okay third innovation in transport but we see most in the world in terms of bus million bus of you know one card for for the old viritual system so just Innovation transport controlling the Microbus not not thiser what we have seen in in Mexico of course land regularization but with land regularization a lot of work to redistributive to redistribute land rights in the very voluntary way with very strong social movement ments so a lot of land regularization going on and one of my students is finishing PhD on the bureaucratic politics of land regularization in s Mexico we see the importance of public policy there we’ve done a lot of work on waste collection Services also very strong policy there um they have with big fight that impose development regulations to private developers so very very tough negotiations with private developers to tr imposed sometimes it works sometimes it didn’t work we have really done a lot of that in that sense so all in all they L quite a lot and in terms of coalitions that we try to characterize you see that those people supporting um the P was P of course housing movements V movements cultural groups minorities perer Society organizations but what I’m interested in and I should finish in five minutes soal ear up uh is but it’s interesting to understand who is against who is your enemy and who is mobilizing against you and in the case of s it was a very very strong conf so you have taxi drivers and U the former mayor of SOS who had long inter he used to tell me you know all you Europeans you come to study s Paulo you look at social housing movement but that’s about 30,000 people in s taxi drivers 35,000 people taxi taxi drivers and their family 125,000 people taxi drivers are three times more important than C housing movement in terms of organizations in power nobody sees that second car drivers of course creating cycle Lane bus you know car owners that was the most important uh opposition group for Hadad was car drivers cers okay huge mobilization of course real estate construction and he has emphasized also criminal organizations and media oligopoly so the media oopo are very powerful in Brazil they were systematic youron to so some ideas about s Paulo briefly on Paris uh very strong so again with massive resources okay so we have the scale of level of tax you know France is as the highest level of tax in the world for good about that creates a huge amount of very goods okay so the Paris city ccil has created a lot of so what change with your arrival of the leftwing um coalitions number one you say fres I say in Spanish for yeah Z to three years old children so Paris had the lowest level in France and now it has the highest level more less in Europe of uh again young children and of course Paris has a very high level of women in the labor market so that has was a major transformation on the as a public good second massive investment in housing in social housing Paris had 5% of social housing now it’s 25% of socializing soon 30% it was a massive effort bring in because the risk of more justifications but it was a massive effort massive effort in transport uh safe cycle very strict regulations and parking nowadays only 33% of people living again we talk about Paris Council then I will do the analysis at the urban level only 34% of people in Paris own a car okay so and majority are not young meaning the normal Paris is that you don’t have a car if you have a car you strange okay and that’s now starting to take place in cities in in suburbs around Paris and so a massive investment so parking is very expensive everything is done bicycles everywhere all that so massive fight against cars in order to limit air pollution that was very very high okay massive transformation um very very strong social policies with health centers including for migrants strong investment in in culture and and spatters very strong on issues of sexual recognitions and minority they did a lot of centers for drug addict huge fights with neighborhood groups can imagine um very strong Health policy very strong public space they a lot L program on on on the clate crisis so they are rich and they do a lot okay that’s what I would say they are rich not a huge amount of poverty in Paris some but not a huge amount and they spend a lot of money to transform the city in that sense so and also an corruption that was quite large in the previous mity so let me emphasize I will not develop now because time is up and I have to conclude but one story is the parasitic ccil over 23 years of power they have done a huge amount of transformation of the city okay and the leftwing impact has been massive that’s true at the level of the city council but if you think about the level of grar the 7 million there have been like 10 attempts to share the tax to share the wealth to develop programs at this scale and who was the main opponent blocking any redistribution the city council of Paris so the city council of Paris has been formidably Progressive at the level of a city council but incredibly rightwing at the level of urban okay so that’s these contradictions that I will also develop in in the and that an example would be games on the summer it was an alliance between the leftwing northeast of Paris and Paris to create a sort of left wing City Games I’ll write a book about that another day I’ll tell you about that coalitions in Paris I don’t the last point I want to emphasize is that in terms of method what we want to do and what we are doing is a database of all the conflict in the city so we we we have created database of all the main conflict in the urban area over the last 20 years and what comes out are what are the main conflict between left and right basically and we have three points I want toise and about my conclusion number one a lot of conflict around transport and housing and Health Services so let’s say Public Services classic Le left wants to have more services more Public Service more privatized if you want more trains more Metro more social housing more Health Centers and the right says it’s too expensive and we want to privatize okay classic thing and we’ve seen a lot of that and that’s true both in Paris and in s Pao at different level second type of conflict is conflict about urban development project we have seen a lot of them in Paris some of them around some various development project I don’t want to onesize and we have seen some conflict about development project in s Paulo like the downtown the noval project uh and around some housing projects as well so classic like say housing mobilization that we have seen in both cities what is interesting and one of a growing conflict going on in Paris and I hope to reflect on Mexico is a conflict between the green and the sort of classic Socialist Communist Party the classic Socialist Communist party they want to create more infrastructure more dens City more social housing and the green are saying no we want more we need to limit we don’t want to develop the city we don’t want to do the city more dense we have to more biodivers City more Parks more public space and we should not social housing should be built outside Paris and elsewhere we should limit the concentration and what is going on in Paris at the moment is that the conflict between the green and the Socialist which choose to be strong Reliance on transport and all that is becoming very strong conflict and that may actually be a very important role for the next election so this conflict green Socialist Communist is very strong and it goes with conflict about security when the Socialist companies say you know strict policing more videos more all these things and the green are more libertarian they say no we don’t want all these surveillance operators so you have a double conflict there which is becoming very strong but we don’t see that much in s power so here we stop there D politics matters we will elaborate about that and I’ll try to bring some element from this compartive Anis to the questions we ask thank you very much Eng so thank you patri for the presentation I I I will introduce Maris Romero who’s going to share with some comments Maris Romero is with postoral resarch at the center for studies and Inter disciplinary research resigns Humanities at UNAM she’s a sociologist uh specialized in environment and um he has a PHD in Ur Environmental Studies I like to marel Romero a remarkable work on orb parks in Mexico City and she she joined the research group Leed by Patrick and actually she participate the meetings of what is government project uh among her Publications I will mention of the papers uh the possibilities of agure Mexico City R aook urbanist Mar also thank you Patrick for sharing this inent work which I found very interesting and relevant H to think Urban politics and urban studies particularly in the cext of this political con many cities are going to right now and so I think I will do a very brief comment and I think it would be better maybe to to construct this dialogue collectively with all the research topics that you the table but anyway H to begin with I would like to draw uh this very general discussion by highlighting a subject from your work that I think is key for us as students and researchers to approach cities which is the politics of Pol the politics of policies so I think that one of the things that you work brings to table is that politics matter when analyzing Urban policies and I think this has many theoretical and methodological underpinnings that I think are worth to discuss and I think it’s important to maybe elaborate H one I think is related with the understanding of politics and what is political right so you already mentioned in your introduction that in contrast with this post-political turn now that has a very normative and strict way to understand politics I found very useful to approach politics in in this multiple senses of and Roads and fors and trajectories which can manifest both like inside and outside policy making but affect policy making so I think in this sense a contribution of this theorical position is build Bridges between this Orthodox policy analysis right and that focus more like in institutional issues and a breach with this Urban studies that sometimes overlooks the relevance of institutional and governmental actors so that be one thing um a second under underpinning that derives from this uh wider understanding of politics for urban policy analysis I think it’s the possibilities of explanation that this perspective offers so rather than trying to like standardize the analysis of how an urban policy gets in the agenda and gets institutionalized I think this comparative and empirical perspective that you and the researchers of the week seminar have been developed developing uh offers uh this the possibilities to make multical explanation but also flal explanations that is to say that I think what this perspective brings to the table is that it’s important to consider both the success failure of an urban policy had multiple causes but also despite this different configuration of causes one might find similar results right so I think that’s an important thing to to highlight H and I think it’s a key feature because it help us to understand the trajectories of policies Way Beyond administrative periods but also allowed to make relevant comparisons between cities that can help us my theory like in mid level range as you and your colleagues are doing and this leads me to a third underpinning which is the methodological paths so I think this perspective offers us to study Urban policy and politics and I think you here have open uh several ways to undertake research such as looking at at specific topics H but also I think uh by looking as you said practices following actors following conflict genealogies I think that’s um that’s important and well I have I had a question about that because I’ve been around uh I’ve been working closely with the policy Mobility literature so I was wondering uh what is your position on this policy Mobility literature and how it gets articulated or discussed with your Jal perspective so we one question now uh going to more to a more specific discussions and I think drawing on Eduardo Marquez work I would always also like to bring to the table the notion of incremental progressivism regressive ISM so I found this concept quite useful to approach the ideological issues in the cities that impact uran policy success and institutionalization uh because it allows us to go beyond these discursive claims of the left or the ideology term to actually understand how exactly does a left policy looks like and how it gets produced implemented maintained or even contested within city government H but also within Civil Society Academy NGS so I think I think that’s interesting and also I think uh through scales as you mentioned the city has a scale or uh to study its complex because it’s also um like traversed by different also International policies for example no so I think I think that’s an interesting point to touch and in this sense I think a key question that you are proposing in your work that resonates with Mexico City context is how Civil Society participates in the consolidation or contestation of rent policy so and I want to and I want to bring this more specific topic because I think it’s it’s one that is familiar to me but it’s I’m not saying that it’s the only thing that is happening but uh I think in one side here we have key actors that come back and forward from NGS advocacy groups social movements Academia to local governments and this gives a space for urban policies to thrive when these people are in the local governments and to resist changes uh when they change role and and there’s a shift in the left right government um I think uh right now in Mexico City there are several current uh research which is which is approaching this by looking precisely at the actors uh that are promoting this Progressive Urban policies within Mexico City Government I put an example that is not here but Veronica CA aleandra they did an etnographic work in the mobility secret Secretariat here in Mexico City H also there’s analyst Richard who works ethnographic accounts of experts that promotes instruments like environmental impact assessments that become relevant for urban conflicts and yeah what I think H one of the main discussions that are emerging from this research is an apparently ideological tension coming from the national project or political project which manifest as an opposition between neoliberal and post neoliberal policies but that is actually root not not in ideology per se but in in in a technical political divide that is in politic in the policies so what some of these researchers have found is that the division of Technical and political seems to be an important divide within the progressive policies in Mexico City as if the technical was not political and using the technical as a way to legitimate their policies so a question I would like to ask and with it I finish is if this divide has been also relevant or not within the urban policies in South B and Paris no and I’m thinking not in terms of ideology but for example here um what Alejandra and Veronica with zov is that they found there were these new um officials that were pushing a very technical agenda let’s say because they want to do governance through data but they they found this conflict with hold bureaucracy that is based more like in political negotiation informal negotiations so it’s it’s something that I see that is H that is being researched here but of course I’m it’s a very Niche research so but but there’s a thing that that I would like to also ask you because I I think could be relevant and that will be it and thank you for giving me the opportunity for being here today and I hope somebody else brings other Urban mexic City topics to discuss inar well thank you Mar see well the benefit that Maris has got from coming to Paris so just alliz that uh P students are very welcome to travel and to to comp part work and to visit us and Cane you don’t need to speak French to come to Paris work in English and French anyway so you don’t need friendch to be so than for um and get so the first question really is so I agree on everything you said on policy Mobility I have not to use it there uh so two points on policy mobility and I’m not completely clear to answer you point one I think it’s great lot of very good work it has helped to figure out a number of issues um and it’s an important part for instance on a number of policies think about the Millennium The BLT we have a huge of emphasizing those elements my little Nos and against to debate with colleagues with our old friends and Theodor is it’s probably it’s probably of an old man you know it’s just you say old seen that before but they develop the concept of policy mobility in order to criticize the concept of policy transfer okay so number one in public policy analysis looking at the mobility of policies is not very new okay something we have done for a long long time okay so the policy transfer analysis is not always very sophisticated but for me the policy Mobility is a small addition to the policy transfer n okay which is important to small Edition okay for them it’s a massive transformation for me it’s a small Edition okay what I think is very interesting in what we’re bring is to emphasize that uh when they P fast policies that thanks to consultant and international organizations what is new is that some policies R very quickly so that’s I think the real strength of their work uh that has been a major addition to what we in public policy analysis have been doing I think the weakness of their work is they do not take enough one key element of public policy public policy is not about decision public policy is about implementation implementation and implementation and therefore when they see that policies are mobile very quick they move from one place to the next yes but very often it just not implemented and they don’t look at that and if you look at the implementation then you have to look at institutions interest groups ways of doing things and therefore the sort of uh relatively structured you know fragmented Urban governance and they don’t look at that so my criticism to them is great idea it brings something we all agree that it’s becoming more important and be great analysis of that I don’t think it’s a huge progress from Urban transfer it’s a progress and I don’t think that if it don’t look precisely at the implementation so limit to what we’re looking okay so I’m very supporting their work and we’re using a lot of thing don’t think it’s a major major move forward but that’s my it’s a debate we have to together okay they say no no no they want the paper explaining that policy transfer is completely old fashioned and policy Mobility is all new and very important okay so it’s a that’s a limit we have but it’s a debate it’s not something that’s important um you are very right on the question of stale and and international politic that sense and actually if I push a little bit I would say that sometimes in public policy we like we look too much at actors and in fact a lot of transformation is imitation or a little bit more no institutionalist like you know if you study as one of my student I studied brt the Millennium in Legos in Africa or in kown you can say it’s all the actors with that and all that and it’s important to understand the implementation but basically you know it’s the same thing been done in many places so you have a lot of logic of imitation okay so Neo institutionalism is important there and the actors play a very minor role so again empirical question sometimes you really need to concentrate on the actors but sometimes the explanation is more institutional and the actors are not so important so I am sometimes not always in agreement with my colleague sociologist to say actors actor actors of course we have to look at that but sometimes it’s the explanation uh you know it’s not so important that’s where my little postp Marxist thing come back or or neist constuct you you’re absolutely right and and I think what you said about Civil Society participation in contestation is important it’s the most important difference between Paris and and S Paulo but in s Paulo it’s you know it’s one of the most important interest groups social the housing groups so they’re always putting pressure always doing proposals and it’s a very important part if I put things a little bit bluntly I would say that over the last two decades social movements were important in Paris to get the left elected but after that a lot of fre became part of the system so s movements have been very important at a very local state okay for one part for one thing but in Paris except at the Paris Urban region some three or four important cases but over 255 years they play a very very Min so it’s explained by the fact that in the case of Paris politics is much more institutionalized that you have a huge number of policies huge budgets so you super institutionalized policy Urban political world there are Cycles where social movements are important and long Cycles where they are not we are ring the cycle when they are at the moment even the Olympic Games when we are the Olympic Games uh so I started to work at the origin and I will work three years and after 10 years I write a book and you know you had a huge literature and and all leftwing intellectuals gains are bad be use social movements you know we are like Berlin we will BL and then there was one big demonstration they did like 20 demonstration one case there were 200 people 200 200 200 and the rest of the time 25 okay so we are organizations that social and they have never managed to mobilize any it’s a very very stady group okay so why Myster I mean uh it’s something I still do not understand very well why so and then um very interesting what you said about Technical and political I have not spell it s Pao so I will not answer s Pao because I only did some interviews and in Paris this tension is also very um and a bit light in Mexico I suppose what we have seen with the arrival of um council is that what happens was so it’s all French history but in 2001 we thought that Mr J socialist prime minister would easily become the the president and he lost so we had Ral government so all the super big technocrats from the left who used to work for the prime minister they went to work for the City of Paris so we had a generation of super qualified super competent leftwing technocrats that took over Administration so it was a different explaines also the capacity to implement very strong diversity because those people were really super smot group of at think very good and I mention Nichols knows very well is doing some work precisely on Progressive technocrats within local administrations American cities of refugees so that very thank you take questions in Spanish as well Italian even better but French and understand thank you patri we will take maybe Patrick thank you for your presentation it was very interesting I’m caros by the way I’m I studying here the my masters in urban studies and I have always found uh social housing a very interesting to and I wanted to ask you since you know a lot about um leftwing yeah leftwing movements in these cities um a couple days ago I saw this television report from CNBC and they were talking about social social housing in California and they were saying that some a lot of richer Democrats in California they they are in favor of social housing yeah however some of them they are not in favor of social housing being built nearby their houses because because it’s it it diminishes the value of their property and um I was wondering now that you were talking about social movements especially in sou Pao how what what’s the what are the constraints of the opposition from leftwing supporters for social house to be built and I mean in richer or middle class income middle income neighborhoods um you you were also mentioning about the Olympics in Paris the Olympic Village is going to be built in it’s built in s which is a low Liv been historically a low very poor neighborhood so I mean it in my opinion could it could be a good policy but it’s still I mean this every for example I I know in Paris these ashm are constructed in I mean in the outskirts they’re still in the outskirts and some of them very far away and does this is I think this reproduces this segregation as well uh but my my initial question is what what’s what the constraint of left wi sports for social housing to be to be built in these cities in the of one question s questions two one more question see in for [Music] one more com don’t a question because um I was thinking um you said first you you’re supposing that you have a left you have a right of and I was think all the time when you were presenting the cases about the case of Mexico for example and maybe when you analyze Mexico and you analyze what is self defined as left in Mexico that maybe we could find that it’s a right wing party Gover for example this C especially when you analyze the way that they are um maybe they institutionalizing the the some of the process of meic because um and most of the actions Poli there ad for example if you compare with other cities and with other really left um Progressive policies in other parts of the world maybe here is a very conservative and a very approach in the scale even in the in the scale of the of the government and the people who is taking the decision [Music] okay I would answer briefly talk my third one and then I will first one is more difficult um yeah I think one will be interesting sub idea about this project is also to think about whether we could think about Ur left and Ur right whe it makes sense Beyond each case or not and clearly the case of Mexico is interesting so Mr ugal will have his job which do not us to help us to Define some of it and the idea of comparing is also precisely not I can give you another example beyond the four main Metropolis I mentioned we also add a group in Milano in Italy who did this the same project parallel to us oh we like your project and we do it and in Milano you have a c left mayor but whether it’s left or right there a lot of things most politics makes sense to some extent it’s very close to what very would say with one exception we don’t know what is left in me we know what is the right when the right is in power you see huge difference okay so the point we would like to do with this this project is also to think about what is and what is not in a way okay uh and and and in Milan I would be very would be very difficult for me to decide whether the mayor of Milan is left or not so uh and the second thing you right to emphasize is that there’s no General agreement about what left today okay some people think if you’re not green left some of them are more social Democrats them say Social Democrat is not the left anymore because they were liberal so we needed some point to this literature on that we will would like to contribute to this literature on what is left and right from the point of view of the politics of the large cities so that’s one thing we would like to contribute okay I’ve been last satic I went to I went to and you know 2 to notify which is the left and the right huge Ral and then there’s big thing you don’t know so it’s a very important question and you need to you either say you’re super constructive and depend in h City or you say well you know we can see some element and it doesn’t cover everything we able to conceptualize some element there are some elements for me that clear like redistribution or the use of public space around or regulation estate and development regulation pollution there are number of things that make sense but on some other issues it’s part from obvious security is the obvious thing where you have lot of not so easy element or uh or on some health issues you also have very different views on this so this is exactly the debate we would like to work on uh with our for cities and to develop and forward to read what will be said about Mexico maybe we should seminar here way what is the left and the right in inant politics in Mexico please invite me um on your on your point about this autonomy from centralization and decentralization the urban um thank you you’re right I would too simple and again we need to be more precise in what we understand decentralization and to measure forms of autonomy to be able to contribute to the question you have so I think I try to present some element of what we see and with Direction but there’s more work to be done and some people work precisely on the centralization centralization and one interesting thing is precisely to look at and say what type of elite are Dent is are part of that so uh I was not very good in presenting that in the seminar it’s it’s still work in progress but I think it’s a very interesting question you ask that should be we developed I’m not very good to answer that still not in comparative terms but I think it’s a very interesting venue to to pursue so I really I would put a question to you and I think you should do I’m enable to answer and I think it’s a I would follow you I think is the right right direction and on on on social housing uh and and why we so number one why does the left don’t want housing okay another one because of course in the left we have some people are work class we have now a lot of of course low class and middle class so if you build more social housing depends which type of social housing but what you know is that there will be more tax it’s expensive okay so some people you know they don’t want to pay all tax whatever it is then when you try to do social mix element uh when you create lot of social housings for Paris and not for some Havey in Paris you know what to create social housing now they have managed to avoid a lot of cism so who are the people who are the priority people to get access to social housing there are migrants lot of single women with children uh so there are really poor people with difficult conditions then they go to the schools and then from the point of class where meritocracy and social ability by school is absolutely satal if your school is full of people from migration regime they feel and sometimes rightly sometimes wrongly but it’s not stupid but their children have less chance to be competitive in the school system okay so you have issues of schools you have issues of interactions you know in countries like France young migrants if they are illegal or just legal because they don’t have access to the good labor market some of them will have access to some Market some of them will be unemployed and of course some of them will become will be part of some forms of criminal organizations or small delinquency so the conditions of life for those families will be destabilized okay so there are some rational reason of a self-interest to not want a lot of social housing around you okay I’m not saying they right or wrong just explaining why so it’s a classic pain you may know the classic work of Thomas shelling in Chicago explaining you know some people accept like 10% of migrants are happy the 20% they live but if they live you you are 30% of migrants and those who accept 20% but not 30% are living and then so those mechanism are very very strong still today that works last thing is it’s that it’s a labor market it’s just a housing market issue it’s less the case in Paris but based from in the US you know in the US it has been shown millions of time more uh African-American population you neighborhood with the lower power price of your house so if you depend on your asset you don’t have a welf state system then you have rational reason not to want that okay which is based so there are lots of reasons for that but also lots of people once in fact we did some research on that and in the case of Paris lots of people including with cl on the left they accept social mobility and what we have shown in the case of Paris so it’s a group with Dono or upper middle class in Europe cities is that most middle class they play the role but we we call the game of uh distance and proximity so for instance we have identified that a lot of middle class in Paris let’s say left wing oriented a bit they don’t mind a mix area okay they don’t mind at all why because they have been there for a long time and the family was them so they know how to play the game they’re in a very mixed area where they know which school to the children so the children might be a very mixed area but after school they would play cello okay so they play the game of they choose where they want to be mix but they know the area so they know extremely well how to protect themselves and their children okay by contrast who are the middle class who are less favorable to the city have the newcomers they don’t know the city they’re afraid so they go in super exclusive neighborhood because they don’t know how to play the game of this and proximity so it’s a very sociological deep deep thing that you could you could opiz and on the OIC games it’s a long story um question I ask a question I will explain so just one minute sand is a very poor area was Communist for a long long time the politics of sand was Communist Party doing huge amount of social housing and have your clent HS that will vot for you forever okay that is the logic if has Remain the poorest city in France okay, for a long long time low social Mobility okay so bit of because it’s close to Paris some justification of more and now this is sh commun is green next the new mayor is saying not is still doing social housing 25% of new housing is social housing but in C average was %. so his argument as a socialist part member meaning Central left in France is we need social mix in order to get a bit of social Mobility be less poor City attract firms Get Better Tax and better services so the games is part of that okay the new Village which was decided by the mayor not just by the um inheritance there will be a new population with 25% so in a way you could say 25% of social housing in European standards very in suddenly standards it’s very low okay of course he creating a new population that will vote for him and the Communist class he will never come back to Power forever so it’s a mix of political control and good reasons of course what it doesn’t say is that there such a demand for social housing that those people would never have access to S anymore when would they go further away in the north so you have a mix of reasons you can understand that would create a number of positive Dynamics in some ways but also some negative dynamics of the poorest and for the low groups and which balance do you want to have it’s not an easy question a lot will depend on the capacity to create some Urban fabric it’s a real sociological question and to get some Dynamics between the different groups existing there so that’s where the role of Mayor and the is huge in trying to get mix in schools MI in housing create some EV and and create an urban fabric with different social plants it may be the case that in 20 years a lot of four people have left s it may be the case that those who stay will be in more not ghettos but at least B isolated areas and there will be no socials I don’t know but that’s the risk is taking and he’s taking that because it that too many migrants at the end of the day it’s it’s bad for the development of the city and and lot of people will suffer from that so he has his own clientel different from the Communist Party centel okay but I have to say I don’t have much nostalgy of the urban planning of part iny but for some years I’ve done okay it was not completely wonderful either probably good up Mobility so I like the idea of Mobility some and we’ll see greates change so it’s an open question but while I will work on the games for the next vales then we see which population is there what other consequences so of course my friend notification rication rication they would be they are always social change and where they are located they will change anyway um whether there would be some benefit ofation andal questions to be studied precisely but I don’t know yeah thank you uh I wanted to raise the uh subject of uh participatory budgeting I don’t know uh it’s like have a great keep going okay well um well from the beginning I think that it is like a a left wi policy if it is if it’s like yeah okay to to label it like that uh and then yes like I think we can make a comparative between those two CI also Mexico and other cities in Mexico um but then yes like like another level of analysis like another category uh because it is a policy yes but I think like it opens like another dimension of public action uh which raises like or I don’t know you you can and the side within a huge um set of policies like public housing so uh I don’t know if if it’s under your interest with this project uh I don’t know what’s your opinion about it terms well thank you very much I just have three comments and question the first one is that I mean what how are you going to Define what is to be a left go okay and I have to comments on that I mean I’m sure that B can I mean average is great but I’m going to be more pedestrial more simpler I mean who gets what with a left wi go yeah exactly and with this you go you can go to distributive policies to several other issues that’s the point I mean does the leftwing government really benefits the people that are supposedly supporting and he’s claiming that is it’s constituency and I have some good examples between sou and Mexico for that okay and from that you can go into participatory politics and several other isses with housing Transportation environmental health etc etc etc so who gets is does the Le really makes a difference from other governments which is a second point I mean you can be better off with a leftwing government but if you get better health better Social Services better uran Services etc etc with other government so what’s the difference no uh okay and and this goes also to a point that I mean that that can be divided in two points this second point that you are looking at it’s a a very long temporary frame where there are several I mean Mexico City government has been and me city has been government for 25 years with the same left wi government but it’s not the same thing it’s very different potions with very different policies that you can you can see that they have even change in between administrations you just look at just look at remember cardas and then remember the first period of AR and then the last period of AR was very important and then came and then man and now and then Cloud now and now you know where it’s going I where the beef okay so the point in here is that this trans I mean this moving in time means policy changes and policy means and with this I’m going to one discussion we were having before about the gar the garbage kind of model you know it’s okay that you can Implement things but the problem is that policy definition changes goals changes and then also the implementation produces a lot of inconsequent results for same depend so what happens to the left with this thing comparing to other is this second issue so but it’s interesting to see this through the time frame no is not the same amlo was very clear and very strong I mean socialist oriented at the beginning card but at the end it’s not so clear that he was completely because he built up on the one hand he set up this big policy for housing and land regulation which is vandalos and what are the consequences of vandalos then he set up a new I mean a new transportation system he worked on Mobility he didn’t work in h another St but he work in infrastructure tool he did some important work but who benefited from that and then you can go on into I mean the case of the Metro is one interesting examp and the new the new Transportation policies in the last four years of of cloud Administration is very interesting to really see what is the impact and who gets what the third topic is just about the last issue of the comparison between so power I’m going to go with a little I mean I’ve been looking at some of these topics and the first one is conflicts one of the things I got really interested into Sao at the beginning it was this huge confrontation between an organized crime organization and the government and this I mean this some sort of rebellion and confrontation at the St level with against police but against the government against State and I was trying to understand explain this issu so this is an issue that you cannot avoid in cities you cannot avoid it in in in the metropolitan area of Paris just remember what’s happening with I mean two I mean you mentioned in other papers the the rebellions in the the suppers no the way that police and communities not only jum kids Etc ETA even communities reel against the government so this is an interesting that has to be taken into consideration when comparing C particularly Pablo Mexico I think this important just to point out on this and then from this I’m just gonna go to one that you mention but still you’re right not but one of the major issues is also the topic of security unfortunately you’re going to have to address that if you just look and this is one of my big uh challenges understanding and going beond CA you know what is the I mean what is the root and the basis of CA is the perception of insecurity that runs through the city and converts the city into this worldall so we cannot uh we cannot avoid this topic security is important and then there is a lot of games between politicians different type of levels of politicians State see Municipal because for instance there is a new game in Soo with this Metropolitan G metropolitana which is different from the state police and from the military police and this is a new game between Mayors the state policies etc etc and from that you can go on into a lot of issues of social movements and conflicts in the city that also move the population strongly just as comment an appro Julia thank you um as always very inspiring to listen to you and I I mean it’s been years that you’re working on with that definition of policy as a form of collective action and actually looking at what’s actually being um implemented um in in the cities and I think this is very inspiring I have two comments slash questions the first one is I like how you look at you distin you differentiate politics and policy and how you look at how politics influences policy and vice versa but then your definition of politics and well at least in your presentation is very based on on actors right and and on conflicts between different actors um in the city it seems to me that the ideological question of that politics side of your uh analytical framework is not there and there were lots of question about what is the left and that’s the ideological question right so how does that play out and and for instance to give just um two examples um Eduardo’s uh argument about a progressive incrementalism is based exactly on that what is being implemented um but not so much about the ideological part of it whereas in places like here especially the last Administration they implemented a lot of things but the core of the moena administration was all about rapid transformation this is like what the the discourse is not about incrementalism it’s about a radical change and a radical rupture and that discourse has a lot of weight even though we may um we may uh counterbalance it with what what was actually implemented so that ideological part of the analysis how do you incorporate it and and this comes to my second question how does the fact that Paris is the capital city influence in there not not only in terms of decentralization and what you mentioned about the fact that the Mayors are often afterwards president but also the capital city brings about a concentration of talent and of resources so to have talent and qualified policy makers it helps to be in the capital city right um and Sou Pao is not the capital city but you know you have also a concentration there of of talent but also the fact that it’s the capital city brings symbolic capital and going back to the question of ideology it’s not it’s not it’s not a how do you say it’s it’s a special City because it’s the capital city it’s not any other big city right so is this something that’s important in your comparison [Laughter] wonderful thank you um participatory budgeting um number one the special isz okay has reviewed all literature America and he has very strong view his view is it has been a massive ideology and it has played a very role in policy making and he has very strong result our so it’s very important in terms of ideology but not very important in terms of of policy making okay so yes we we may not we may look at it completely clear yet uh clearly in both cases you have some element of discussing the budget and doing something and some interesting initiative that’s been done at a very local level so there something in both cases which is probably relevant for 2% of a budget between two and 5% 2% with lots of interesting initiatives so very interesting Innovation for small initiatives at local neighborhood F but not more than that okay so it’s a very interesting subject we can compare in knows more than I do I know about Paris that’s what they do and it has been very interesting to open for so many interesting Innovations so very interesting small Innovation with some relevant result okay but 10 times less relevant that what you do with tax okay the real issue is tax is the fiscal policy so my point is sometimes we see the literature an over stretching enthusiasm to study partic budget participation which is very exciting new and interesting but missing sometimes a point that the real issue in terms of redistribution Innovation is the tax or the inent sense okay so that’s all I’m saying it’s just that put it in its don’t stretch a good idea too far is one of my favorite things to say and uh that will be the case so excellent point and I I I really follow you completely on everything you said so that’s precisely maybe was not clear but I think one characteristics of these projects but some of us are both sociologist and PR policy people so we want to look at the implementation of policy see who gets what so our idea to define the left as you say you absolutely right is number one to look at the discourse second to look at the substance of the policy and to look at the result so that’s one thing I learned from the my Max schar always think about who gets what okay and that’s the beginning of great policy that’s well in the US was gets and looking at who gets what the three element the ideology substan policy result for guess what with a three dimension we would like to contribute by seeing some figured out the left I intended consequences and and consequences and you’re absolutely right the Metro System in is very interesting thing to explain you have to disconnect with Dimensions there’s no clearance and PR and I like the idea that you are saying and I should have Ed that give me ideas to push more is that you know does let make a difference and and maybe sometimes the way some government do policies are much more beneficial for some groups and for others so I think you’re absolutely right and I was not precise enough I think we’re going to include that more systematically also I follow you on the on the temporary frame so we look at the of last 25 years which is not much but that’s a way to think exactly of what you say meaning both some continuity that maybe visible or invisible but also some change and some change of Coalition so sorry I was not clear on that but that’s exactly what we what we have in mind we we agree very much on you my little Nuance on you is on the garbage gun so um to is pushing me because we just did this paper in this book on organize ad includes the idea of garbage can public policy analysis my view to Pro to answer by your provocation is that the garbage can to explain policy is a fantastic idea that has been so fruitful but again it’s over stretch because when you look more precisely what Mar and Olen have been doing and it’s the result of what we do also in in Paris and what I’ve done in London is that garage can Remains the exception so I’m less constructive this value I don’t think that everything changes all the time I think that we are some groups are are very institutionalized so I give you an example very often uh my colleagues are more constructivist like people coming from L they say things change over time you know so it’s all changing you I’m not saying that I’m taking a better example and I say yes but you know land property has been remark this table over the last few Century or uh the a number of Institutions are extremely strong to explain what we’re going on so I think we should not exaggerate but some policies are very fragile and and I like the idea of nonlinear understanding but by contrast in some policies you have remarkable stability if you think about agricultural policy in France it’s remarkably stable for 120 years with the same ways of doing things the same interest groups the same you know some things are just very stable so I think it’s question and that’s what is interesting in this project is precisely to assess what has changed for which results but also what has become quite institutionalized and pretty stable over time so that’s I think you’re absolutely right we have to be much more precise on this temporal Dimension and um that’s where I’m more new is is I think we really to understand that at some points some issues are the stabilization of a problem is is is is there at some point ways of doing things are precise Norms are there ways to engage with some groups are stabilized so I really like the institutionalization process to understand and to show when it doesn’t work and and sometimes it’s garbage down so we go nowhere um so that’s exactly what we have to do I think you you’re right this is really something that we need to Dev more more systematically and of course right and security so my my little point is to argue about in the urban governance literature we were more as the only one to say you have to take security seriously so we have been influenced by your work and some other work and we’re trying to bring that end so you are absolutely right not in the paper on the left but the overall project uh so I’m the next book I’m doing on Paris because I’m doing a series of hard and pral works will be the Dark Side of governance par and so we look at uh organized crime squatters uh at corruption at all those elements and now we have accumulated enough to say something about about about poers and policy we have now a lot of research you may so we have a number of people doing that but you’re right we are not yet completely besides conceptually and empirically to articulate well those issues and security and governments so by contrast to many people we say yes we have to do it you know book of Mexico there was two exent chapters of that but I don’t think we’re are yet good enough to do that so we will we’ll keep working and you’re right also that my colleag in s Pao you have two types you have the ones who are obsessed by that and the ones who don’t want to know about that so I think your pois is very very well taken uh for reasons when you go to cing and to development inside theop you got to really see this mix of legal and illegal not only for organized crime organized business groups as National Business groups so it’s becoming very complex to really look at this policies even for a progressive City I me how you going to deal with these new developments in the city I agree I agree with you this is but it’s very difficult and we don’t know what to do that so we will explore but I I I agree with your agenda I think that’s the one of the most important element and to give you an example um I always like to mock the Americans it’s easy but it’s so pleasant being French you right one why not and uh I was in people in New York last year and uh I was amazed people were K on the politics of New York and all that you know just nobody writes about corruption in in in in in New York it’s massive corruption developers and and the police oh no no we just look at police as a Russian like it’s amazing Nobody Does that American Science it’s just incredible so and I really agree that there’s a real something not well done in social science to deal with that and uh we will try to with your help we will try to push forward some of those element I’m very good at work with but of course Mexico is another one I was like you struck by the fact that it has not well done in s Paulo it’s not well done I think so we look for your compartive work and julan um a little not of NOS I didn’t give you my definition of politics no okay because it’s a lot of actors I mention the actors but reor is precisely I’m working on that I’ve got some definitions and we are so it’s not it’s not yet yet completely done um in my understanding I always emphasize conflict that’s why I think post politics that makes sense it’s because the origins of thinking about politics is M for good say yeah it’s all about conflict and so don’t don’t tell me about what politics well uh that’s where I don’t I don’t agree with that so um um yes also I agree with you on the actors we should not only look at the actors it’s only one time so I I agree with you even if we emphasize that when we look at the policies you need to at some point look at it the question is whether it’s important or not so my point is you always have to study the actors sometimes they’re not very important so that would be more in that sense but you have to look at it so you ask def you’re right I’m not very good in the langage you’re abely right um and historically in my work I have t to say that this diens is not so important agree as you know I was critical of the when NE liberalism has been newed because don’t want to explain here about but the paper explaining why you know policies they over stretch NE liberalism because they don’t differentiate liberalism so don’t um so that’s exactly the idea of this stap in a way is to bring back this Dimension and to see how far you go with it whether it explains symbolically a number of issues whether it explains some of the policies being implemented whether it explains who gets what at the end and and so that’s the direction we’re taking not very well so far so we are we are more public policy so we like to say oh that was ideological at the end okay and and very often um being a public policy person often you know what do we see in public policy we see that a lot of research explaining public policy by the ideology of the leftwing rightwing thing just failed miserably because the big result of public policy analysis of the last three decades is to argue about very very often nowadays when people do a policy they say there are lots of goals because policy makers they know that it’s difficult to implement policy so the trend that we have measured Christopher Hood in England a living scholar is to show that in lots of policies you have you okay any new policy in France you start by say the policy will help social cion the policy will help publicate crisis the policy will help Economic Development the policy will be good for the people and then you have like 10 more goals so the logic of a number of policies is to have lots of goals then you implement and you have new actors new redefinition of priority same things are changing and then at the end people say oh we’ve done that the policy is a success but the goals come at the end when things are being done and that’s the logic for lots of policies so if you accept that then the ideology of a decision making process is most of the time time not very important but sometimes it’s very important so that’s I’m not talking about the ideology as an expl as an explanation Factor okay I’m talking about the ideology as an empirical question in a very populist government yeah okay ideology is is not explaining policy it’s an empirical Factor okay that has carries a lot of weight that’s that’s what I mean okay because in in this case this is very is very important in Mexico right now this question of the and and so I’m not talking about the policy goals and the decision making process but more as a factor in in the who gets what and the impact of the policy yes we have not done that so you have you have a good point we are a weaken that so we need to think about that and on the on the symbolic Dimension sometimes I’m a bit conservative on some things like everybody else so in France we have so much about B you in C politics that uh I often tell my students oh yeah C power the state yes it’s important but you know for lots of things B has tried to develop that but it doesn’t play sometimes it play Big very often it doesn’t so come back to Ma you know what’s the budget okay so that’s my weakness you’re right this is something that we should be doing and we have not been doing on Paris um what is interesting our research is like we have three capital cities and one which is not so on all those issues I would say that one of my surpris is that the fact that number one for Paris the fact that is a capital city is far less important today than it was 20 or 30 or 50 years ago okay one element was at the state was governing Paris and now it has a very strong autonomy and more more from the state okay so what is important is it’s a superstar City winning on everything and getting all these people resources like some power and surprisingly the capital element in what we study is less important that it used to be okay it’s still there you’re right it’s the El there and symbolic element in particular but less that it used to be and in a way we all point about the origin in the city is to be more and more tonomous from the state so city is less less and less governed by the St still it is still there and uh we plans to do something about that in the supp um but the key point it’s one of the Superstar City lots of don’t like the word talent very much because it’s too much Florida like which I think is pretty crap in terms of Sociology but small thing uh but attracting lots of people with degrees and different competence and all that concentration which is the success of some the big things that’s that’s of course lot of we close very s okay okay well yeah I was thinking about the ideology in questions and well I I thought uh in examples of conflicts here in Mexico City that have been um how would say like traversed by this kind kind of ideology I don’t know so one would be for example the which was the intent of making an actualization of the territorial plan for the city which had not been updated for several decades and the it it it didn’t happen because there was a huge popular sector opposition saying that it would change land uses right so they use the the like the the land use as AOS for the I don’t know if I my point but like they they’re using the language policies to oppose policies and it’s a progressive policy supposedly because they wanted to merge the Territorial and environmental uh governance in this instrument and at the end it failed and it was in in in left so that’s one thing I see and the other thing was the old conflict of Lanas I don’t know how you say it in English so they were they wanted value right so they wanted to propose here and it was also stopped because there was this idea that we will become Cuba or Venezuela or something like that so this instrument was opposed to that so what I I found interesting in these conflicts in Mexico City conflicts is that they’re using they they are fighting an instrument and they using the the tools of instruments or the language of instruments to oppose those instruments so I was wondering if you had found something like that in s Pao and Paris okay um on ideology I think I take your points on all those things uh in a way uh sometimes I think with post politics people are right in some way some element of technocracy sometimes not so WR so and in Paris it was not it was okay spot for some time for London as well um and reason also to be cautious by techology that I’ve seen so many bad papers about NE liberalism bad I just had a bit of analogy at some point uh but but you’re right clearly the case of Mexico it’s very important part what you say about the conflict works very well and I would argue that um in the case of of Europe and particular case of Paris uh the green and the ideology of the greens is becoming extremely strong that’s one of the Dynamics including Pally as you mentioned that is is playing an important role for and against so in a way part of reshaping of the ideology of of a rightwing um that was not very ideal is one thing is is migration but the second is against the Green so there’s clearly very strong reinforcement of the ideology of rightwing parties in Europe which is backlash against climate change so that would grow and contrast some attempt to change planning system to bring in environment together with with development soy that goes exactly around around so in a way um I like what you’re saying about this let capture value instr uh and one way to organize your interest is to present your enemy in ideological terms so it’s a classic strategy and I your point is well taken and I and I and I like that uh and I like that very much play it’s very clear on that so obviously um it’s a moment where we have to take this ideology more seriously this less relevant to it the case of Mexico is very strong also strong in the case ofo and it’s clearly getting in in a number of domain um just one note is that we need to be very precise on what we understand by ideology because U you know we have a lot of Confusion by people looking at ideology if you are a neist the idea is that David Harve NE liberalism neoliberalism doesn’t matter very much because it anyway the ideology of the day to Def B okay so you can think your ideology as the instruments of your interest groups for class that’s one thing I class people taking ideas seriously and ideology seriously will emphasize um the prob symbolic power and the performative dimensions of all this and that’s what is being very interesting in what we’re discussing and that’s what you mentioned earlier on and that’s what we we have to to to discuss and whether you have and it’s policy if I just finish on that there was a very important debate on policy instruments that you that you mentioned because in a way people working on policy instruments used to be very instrumental like Economist you look like fist um and then you had the idea of people just looking at the ideology what was interesting but Ma laber fuk way of doing dealing with Poli instruments that we have used was precisely to combine the ideology and the technical Dimension I like this combination of the two that was I think the strength of what was doing but probably by doing that we have undermined a little bit the ideology and what I hear from this Dev right we have to take this more seriously and and really work on that in a much more precise way um beyond the question of this courses we to look at the coherence of this ideology and and and the perative effect has Mexico a good case of that be less striking London or Paris or interest groups would more important with some ideology with the exception being the green part again I think the green ideology is becoming much more important not just because of the greens and movements for the greens but because of the anti- green ideology which is becoming really serious very serious thank you presentation yeah I’m working understand