Informality, Agency, and Neoliberalism
âAs Africans, we must be flexibleâ once told me a young boy pushing a pousse-pousse (wheelbarrow) in a sort of apology while getting past the severe gaze of a douanier (customs agent) at the frontier-site of NguĂ©li, in NâDjamena. Individual capability and collective resourcefulness determine the degree of success or, prosaically speaking, the amount of food available for the household at the end of the day. Possession of talents or specific features is scarcely productive if they donât match adequate social capital and the capacity to position oneself among the variety of (religious, linguistic, and community) identities of the cosmopolitan Lake Chad Basin. Flexibility and sociality go hand in hand for the 21st-century Sahelian youth who self-taught to fend for himself in the chaotic traffic of NâDjamenaâs frontier site, attesting for the importance of the precious yet fragmented kind of sociality generated by individuals and communities. NguĂ©li is the kind of place where, in the worst case, a jobless young man can hope to get at least a cup of chai (tea) and some criquets frits (fried crickets) to full the stomach. In many other instances, one can reasonably hope to run some errands for one of those well-seated in the local offices (les biens assis), such as the customs office employees or the transporters association members. Those who are slightly more skilful and organized come to NguĂ©li with a purpose: for example, someone may work as ramasseur des clientes (clients-pickers) for the banged-up and unbelievably resilient minivans that constitute the skeleton of public transportation in the city. Someone else, endowed with more social capital, may drive motorbikes packed with boxes and merchandises and scramble into not-so-hidden âillicitâ paths in order to deliver the carriage to the right person without paying the custom fees. NguĂ©li, in fact, is the sunburned corridor through which thousands of commodities of any kindâcrammed into containers or carried by motorbike or carâpass every day. In this corridor, it is possible to observe how the urbanârural exchange is at the heart of the trading and, in general, of the economic activities on the Lake Chad region. Here, the dissonance between economic truths and true economic practicesâmeant dans le vraiâmakes falter the presumed abyss between urban and rural environments.
Urban spaces of the Lake Chad region seem to have never really cut the cord from the food-producing rural environ: the rural blurs in the urban, and vice-versa. Being driven neither by industrialization nor by massive development plans, urban landscapes in the postcolonial central Sahel have grown with no master plan and, for an untrained eye, they can easily appear as those places of âpollution, excrement and decayâ that Mike Davis describes in Planet of Slums (Davis 2006: 19). To use an economic parlance, in sum, Sahel urbanities can appear as places where the dramatic growth of population is not matched in job provision, with all the social consequences this entails. For Sahelian states, the demise of the initial postcolonial state project of development in the late 1970s was followed by the advancement of neoliberal economic reforms sponsored by global financial institutions (the World Bank, the World Trade Organization). Multiple harsh structural adjustment plans and costs rationalization policies, in the 1980s, were responsible in this region for the public sectorâs withdrawal in key sectors such as sanitation, housing, health access, education, to say nothing about the pernicious effects on employment. Urban laborers in the area experienced the retreat of public investment in social security, a sector that was at its embryonic stage, while also witnessing the decrease of public job opportunities in an oversaturated market: the demise of the public sector coincided with the first cracks in the postcolonial developmental state dream.
Africa Between Structure and Agency
Such representations of economic reforms in Africa strongly underline the structural processes at the basis of the multiplication of shantytowns with poor formal job offer. The potentials for job opportunities and poverty eradication, following the rationalistic neoliberal script promoted by international financial institutions, are withdrawn from the state administrative responsibilities and progressively transferred to the NGO universe through social safety net programs. When coming to Africa (meant as sub-Saharan Africa), the kind of narratives and fantasies fueled by the âneo-liberal parlanceâ seem to be just another update in the discursive tropos about the presumed African exceptionalism. Such exceptionalism is not only the direct outcome of the structuring of economic and state power and Western dominance (Hobson & Seabrooke 2007) but also the result of a misconceived presumption about Africa that has been acutely captured by Achille Mbembe: â[a] bottomless abyss where everything is noise, yawning gaps and primordial chaosâ (2001: 3). The âAfrican exceptionalismâ is an integral part of the discourse on liberal integrative globalization that intends to represent the world as increasingly interconnected and converging (Hay & Marsh 1999). National, cultural, and economic differences are portrayed as ârigidities and vestigesâ (Bourdieu 1998) that cannot but succumb vis-Ă -vis the robustness of the new sociability spearheaded by neoliberal ideas. Such sociability is based on the manifold and laudable possibilities provided by the free market for the rationality of the Homo Economicus. Leaving aside the fact that such definition of rationality poorly exhausts the ontological nuances of the notion as it seems mainly centered around individualism, opportunism, and egoism (Manor 1991: 311), we are presented with a greater problem. The neoliberal representation of globalization as a natural process toward convergence leading to mutually beneficial interconnectedness fails to articulate appropriately the coercive and disruptive aspects inherently latent in the process. The neoliberal canonâs effort to portray a stable picture in which âchallengesâ and âissuesâ can be dealt with reform scheduling, structural adjustments, and redesign struggles to frame Africaâs (apparently) marginal role in the globalizing process: a corner of the world that risks to be left behind in the march toward global integration.
At a closer observation, though, Africa instead appears at the forefront of any discourse on globalization, and as a continent that has undergone a protracted and extensive social engineering (Kozul-Wright & Rayment 2007: 177), it rather appears as an advantaged point to look at and get instructed on the contradictions, practices, and processes of the current economic landscape. In this sense, scholarship needs contributions that allow readers to take a glimpse in the structural inequalities and the acute contradictions provoked by neoliberalism through its âmaximisation of entrepreneurial freedoms within an institutional framework characterised by private property rights, individual liberty, unencumbered markets, and free tradeâ (Harvey 2007: 22). Nonetheless, this kind of representations has a creepy tendency toward sensationalism while, most importantly, tend to focus in a limited way on the importance of the historical agency that poor and dispossessed people might exercise in their life-worlds, coping, surviving, and reordering them (Locatelli & Nugent 2009).
Conversely, literature about the âcomplex agency and determinacyâ (Pieterse 2008: 100) of the poor from the Global South specifically aims to overcome materialist explanations of urban realities that see them mostly as the result of economic policies gone wrong. Scholars like Pieterse (2008) or Simone (2004a, 2004b, 2005) have engaged in an effort to dismiss the views about urbanities of the Global South conveyed by a critical (but often defeatist) political economy, insisting instead on âcapacityâ and âresourcefulnessâ as key concepts. The first implication of such reasoning is the commendable will to put African urban realities back on the map that is an attempt to develop a sort of postcolonial urban theory that concretely takes the African city out of the âheart of darknessâ. A secondâpoliticalâimplication lies in the will to frame everyday labor practices developed in the South as the cornerstone of new and radical imaginations, and therefore interventions: claiming that African cities are built upon âpeople as infrastructureâ (2004b) implies a turn also in policy formulations that can therefore be built upon such a view. Recuperating the âgenerative powers of the ordinaryâ (Pieterse 2008: 10), though, does not tell us much about how the challenging conditions of the Global South are generated. Any radical imagining and intervention to improve living conditions in the Global South, indeed, cannot happen without addressing the root or structural causes of poverty and inequality. While surely right when arguing against any defeatist and implicitly teleological narrative about African realities, invitations to consider the âgenerative powers of the ordinaryâ or âpeople as infrastructureâ seem necessarily vague. They might instead appear as notions better suiting to politically settled and developed contexts such as those that finance and promote this type of visions in the first place: such efforts seem the natural by-product of a Western research environment whose audience naturally belongs to a North.
The vagueness of such formulations is inscribed by some authors to the inherent âprovisionalityâ and elusiveness of the African terrain, especially the urban one (Nuttall & Mbembe 2005: 200), which make hard for observers to clearly understand the workings of arrangements made in these contexts. While this claim might appear as just a matter of methodological preferenceâand therefore based on the researcherâs choices and not a matter of factâit implies a sort of updated version about African exceptionalism: a continent populated by cities of noise, chaos, and indecipherable arrangements. Therefore, again, we are presented with a narrative that struggles to avoid those same traps of romanticization, which indeed it aims to stigmatize. When Simone writes about the âprovisional intersections of residentsâ (2004a: 407) in Southern slums, he advances the open-ended as modus operandi. However, Simone seems still to wear on Orientalist glasses when he argues that the âastute capabilityâ of postcolonial urban residents âpreclude any definitive judgment of efficacy or impossibilityâ (2004a: 428). Such consideration considers only limitedly the reality of African contexts where individuals are likely to experience a âsocial or political deathâ. We, as researchers and observers, cannot but draw attention on how ânecropoliticalâ regimes in Africa dispose of citizens in arbitrary, authoritarian, and illiberal ways, in line with a precolonial and colonial ruling tradition that ultimately interrogates us about the physical weight of constraints for individual agency in postcolonial settings.1 Moreover, in its effort to look for human agency in front of the âneoliberal grandslamâ (Watts 2005: 184), a renewed vision of African cities as âexceptionalâ obscures the most interesting implication lying in concepts like âpeople as infrastructureâ or the âgenerative power of the ordinaryâ, i.e., the invitation to reflect on the immaterial life of things and on its performative power...