Urban Governance Through Personal Connections Kinshasa and Its Unlawful Constructions
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Researching livelihoods and services affected by conflict Urban governance through personal connections Kinshasa and its unlawful constructions Working paper 66 Kristof Titeca and Albert Malukisa Nkuku February 2019 Written by Kristof Titeca and Albert Malukisa Nkuku SLRC publications present information, analysis and key policy recommendations on issues relating to livelihoods, basic services and social protection in conflict affected situations. This and other SLRC publications are available from www.securelivelihoods.org. Funded by UK aid from the UK Government, Irish Aid and the EC. Disclaimer: The views presented in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the UK Government’s official policies or represent the views of Irish Aid, the EC, SLRC or our partners. ©SLRC 2019. Readers are encouraged to quote or reproduce material from SLRC for their own publications. As copyright holder SLRC requests due acknowledgement. Secure Livelihoods Research Consortium Overseas Development Institute (ODI) 203 Blackfriars Road London SE1 8NJ United Kingdom T +44 (0)20 3817 0031 F +44 (0)20 7922 0399 E [email protected] www.securelivelihoods.org @SLRCtweet Cover photo: Downtown Kinshasa. MONUSCO/ Myriam Asmani (CC BY-SA 2.0) B About us The Secure Livelihoods Research Consortium (SLRC) is a global research programme exploring basic services and social protection in fragile and conflict-affected situations. Funded by UK Aid from the UK Government (DFID), with complementary funding from Irish Aid and the European Commission (EC), SLRC was established in 2011 with the aim of strengthening the evidence base and informing policy and practice around livelihoods and services in conflict. The Overseas Development Institute (ODI) is the lead organisation. SLRC partners include: Centre for Poverty Analysis (CEPA), Feinstein International Center (FIC, Tufts University), Focus1000, Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit (AREU), Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI), Wageningen University (WUR), Nepal Centre for Contemporary Research (NCCR), Busara Center for Behavioral Economics, Nepal Institute for Social and Environmental Research (NISER), Narrate, Social Scientists’ Association of Sri Lanka (SSA), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Women and Rural Development Network (WORUDET), Claremont Graduate University (CGU), Institute of Development Policy (IOB, University of Antwerp) and the International Institute of Social Studies (ISS, Erasmus University of Rotterdam). SLRC’s research can be separated into two phases. Our first phase of research (2011–2017) was based on three research questions, developed over the course of an intensive one-year inception phase: ■ State legitimacy: experiences, perceptions and expectations of the state and local governance in conflict-affected situations ■ State capacity: building effective states that deliver services and social protection in conflict-affected situations ■ Livelihood trajectories and economic activity under conflict Guided by our original research questions on state legitimacy, state capacity, and livelihoods, the second phase of SLRC research (2017–2019) delves into questions that still remain, organised into three themes of research. In addition to these themes, SLRC II also has a programme component exploring power and everyday politics in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). For more information on our work, visit: www.securelivelihoods.org/what-we-do i Acknowledgements Research for this paper was made possible by the Secure Judith Mbudi, Etienne Kamba, Daniel Kitambala and Livelihoods Research Consortium (SLRC), based at the Dieudonné Eanga. We also would like to thank Patrick Overseas Development Institute (ODI), and through Edmond and George Richards for their help in finalising funding provided by the United Kingdom’s Department the paper. The paper also benefitted from discussions for International Development (DFID). The authors are at the Development Policies and Practices conference in grateful for assistance in the field by Jean de Dieu Saye Kinshasa (November 2018). The views presented in this and Eric Matombe; and would also like to think the paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the UK assistance of the Université Catholique du Congo, in Government’s official policies or represent the views of particular Philemon Muamba and Jean-Pierre Mbwebwa, SLRC or other partner organisations. ii Acronyms and glossary DG Director General ‘Big men’ Powerful men, nodes in personal networks who can exert powerful DGRAD Direction Générale Des Recettes political and economic leverage Administratives (General Directorate of Administrative Taxes and Other Financial Branché To be well connected Receipts for Central Government) Constructions DGRK Direction Générale des Recettes de anarchiques Unlawful constructions Kinshasa (General Directorate of Revenues in Kinshasa) Chef de cellule Cell leader (communal level body) DRC Democratic Republic of the Congo Communes Communes PALU Unified Lumumbist Party Grosses moulures ‘Big shots’ Invisibles Informal revenue Mamans Women Rapportage Upward profit sharing Le réseau The network Retrocession Upward profit sharing iii Contents Executive summary v 1 Introduction 1 2 (Urban) governance beyond the state in the DRC 3 2.1 The disintegration of the state in sub-Saharan Africa and the DRC 3 2.2 Urban governance in the DRC and Kinshasa 5 3 Economic incentives beyond unlawful constructions 7 3.1 The difficulties in abolishing unlawful constructions 7 3.2 Conflicts between various state actors 8 3.3 The financial stakes of unlawful constructions 9 3.4 Retrocession 10 3.5 Protection from invisibles and rapportage 11 3.6 Involvement of higher-level actors 11 4 The political stakes of unlawful constructions 14 4.1 Indu market and its political protection 14 4.2 Things look rough at Mukonzo too 15 5 Unlawful constructions through ‘big men’ 17 5.1 The development of Buma quartier 17 6 Conclusion 20 iv Executive summary Kinshasa has been growing rapidly in the past few an important source of political capital for local decades, not only in terms of population, but also and national politicians. By protecting unlawful spatially, as it has expanded in a largely, unplanned constructions, politicians are able to collect votes and manner. This paper addresses how urban governance build constituencies takes place where the state is only weakly present. It ■ The way in which the city is governed, and the does so by focusing on constructions anarchiques, development of particular sites, therefore, depends or unlawful constructions, which are present all over on the connections one has and the leverage one the city. Although they are in breach of government is able to exercise through these relationships. The regulations (e.g. building in areas where they are not importance of ‘big men’ is also explored. ‘Big men’ act supposed to) and carry with them a range of negative as nodes in these personal networks: their leverage consequences (such as vulnerability to erosion or allows the installation and provision of public services. floods), they continue to take place and are often However, given the personalised nature of these protected against state measures. services and the instability of political functions, their services are fragile and unpredictable. The paper shows how urban governance is a multi-actor and multi-policy affair – the way in which the city is Three key lessons for policy-makers: governed, planned and regulated is not the monopoly of the state regulatory framework, but enacted, 1 Formal policies are often not adhered to. contested and protested through a variety of other We recommend looking beyond formal policy actors. Connections and interpersonal relations are measures, such as policies to destroy unlawful central to the way in which urban governance unfolds in constructions or other urban planning instruments. Kinshasa. This is seen within the urban administration, Our research show that formal policies are secondary and in the way in which state actors relate with the to existing power-relations and the economic and wider population. While this is the case worldwide, it is political incentives. particularly prominent in the Democratic Republic of 2 Economic and political incentives are crucial. the Congo (DRC) and its capital. Here, these personal We suggest looking at the economic and political connections have a profound effect on the expansion incentives in place both within the public of the city and the continued existence of unlawful administration, and in relation to the general constructions. population. Financial profit and electoral gain play central roles in the way in which urban governance This paper analyses the following economic and political takes place and continuing in unlawful constructions. incentives behind these personal connections and 3 Different scales are interconnected. urban governance dynamics: We recommend focusing on the ways in which the various levels and scales of government –actors ■ Economic incentives: various actors in the public and institutions – are interconnected, instead of administration are pressured to feed les invisibles focusing on one level in itself. For example, the (as informal revenue is called) up the hierarchy. behaviour of street-level bureaucrats – who are Les invisibles act as a major facilitator for unlawful largely focused on revenue extraction – in relation constructions and a general neglect of urban plans, to unlawful constructions can